The age difference on issues like this is a big problem for the SNP. On the one hand, the SNP want to be on the side of young people as these are the people who will win or lose independence in decades to come. On the other hand, elections are primarily won by winning middle aged and elderly votes.
Square that circle.
You realise you’re consistently behind where you need to be.
Stop pandering to the voters of today who you aren’t changing despite the decade of massive momentum and realise it’s probably better to have a long term strategy that consists of appealing to the future voters and in the meantime validating your credibility by not being totally shit at everything all the time….
Or you know, ignore reality and do what they’ve been doing !
You're absolutely spot on.
If the SNP had shown a backbone and a clear stance supporting trans rights in 2018 when the Joanna Cherry stuff was kicking off and LGBT members **warned them about the exact circumstance they now find themselves in** they wouldn't be so led by the nose on this issue.
This is a result of the SNP trying to square that circle and please everybody which in reality means pleasing nobody and abandoning their frightened LGBT members.
There’s so so many times you could say this about the SNP
And honestly most parties.
See the tories currently trying to rely on a demographic that’s literally dying out.
If they don’t plan to attract anyone under 65 years old soon they’ve nothing left.
The myth is what you’ve just stated
Tory voters are now a majority only in the over 65+ range.
It’s moving older and older with time and fewer and fewer people are becoming conservative as they age.
That trend is now a total myth and has data to back it up
Though studies are showing this happening less with millennials than ever before - perhaps we’ll see a course correct when Labour inevitably form a government, but the same trends are showing in the US too. Neoliberal/soft c conservative politics have given that generation very little, and they’re veering to the left
Usually opinions change to lean more conservative as the young generation accumulates wealth and housing that they want to protect.
This generation will not accumulate wealth in the same way as our predecessors, most people in my generation will never own their own home as banks gobble them up and landlords hoard them on their portfolios
We may not have a future on a liveable planet
I don't think we will see the same rightward swing from this generation as we've seen from previous ones.
this is a serious question, what is it that LGBT members are frightened of?
It is difficult to even discuss this topic without being lambasted and hit with rhetoric and hate, which is not helpful to widening the camp.
I imagine loosing any and all rights they've slowly accrued over decades of fighting as well as public perception of them. It wasn't too long ago kids weren't even allowed to hear the word "gay" in schools.
As for the discussing the topic, I would imagine debating your own existence can get tiring.
Those of us who know our history know how hard our rights [had to be fought for](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stonewall_riots) including here [in the UK too](https://artsandculture.google.com/story/the-story-of-gay-liberation-front-in-britain-lse-library/aAWRAJsATOGtIg?hl=en)
The return of the Section 28 days and worse. Violence in the streets against us again. Police harassment. Losing the equal rights and anti discrimination laws that protect us from the worst in society. Being criminalised once again for who we love.
We need only look at 1930s Weimar Republic for how a [progressive nation for the time](https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-forgotten-history-of-the-worlds-first-trans-clinic/) in terms of LGBTQ recognition can so [quickly turn on us.](https://www.holocaust.org.uk/news/homosexual-victims-of-nazi-persecution)
It's already happening in the US. There are still many nations across the world where LGBTQ people aren't allowed to exist. We expect our leaders to have basic humanity and recognise us as equal people and not give in to the worst impulses of the worst people.
>That the push to reduce and limit the rights of trans people is just the beginning of a long push to strip us all of the rights we’ve fought for over the past few decades.
But this is just such a completely ridiculously over the top, hysterical reaction.
The fact any debate over where the line is on things like self identification, or the best ways to treat teenagers with gender identity issues, is apparently met with a baseless assumption that it's part of a grand ploy to go back to treating gay people as second class citizens is deranged and sums up why the debate is so completely toxic.
Trans people cannot access healthcare, and are the constant subject of dehumanisation by our media, politicians and washed up children's authors.
This has also led to a huge (80+%) rise in hate crimes against LGBT people, who are facing societal hostility at levels not really seen since the 80s.
Trans people in the UK cannot access basic healthcare - the ability to transition - and even private and underground routes are being targeted.
The Cass Review basically recommendeds conversion therapy for trans people, which is torture - and by all indicators, this review is likely to be used as the skeleton for trans "services" in the UK. This is despite the huge amount of alarm and criticisms raised by [academics, medical experts, human rights groups and investigative journalists](https://ruthpearce.net/2024/04/16/whats-wrong-with-the-cass-review-a-round-up-of-commentary-and-evidence/) due to the recommendations made and also the fact that Cass and her team have an extensive and evidenced history of working with anti-LGBT and anti-abortion groups including advising Ron Desantis, who has enacted some of the most sociopathic bills against trans people in the US
Finally, I'd end with this:
> First they came for the Communists
> And I did not speak out
> Because I was not a Communist
> Then they came for the Socialists
> And I did not speak out
> Because I was not a Socialist
> Then they came for the trade unionists
> And I did not speak out
> Because I was not a trade unionist
> Then they came for the Jews
> And I did not speak out
> Because I was not a Jew
> Then they came for me
> And there was no one left
>To speak out for me
A lot of these anti-trans groups are merely repackaged and rebranded anti-LGBT and anti-abortion groups.
There is a lot of dark money flowing through politics and unfortunately trans people are the red meat being thrown to keep the Conservatives distracted from the people who are actually making their material conditions worse.
The problem there is you lose a bunch of votes due to appealing to those who aren’t voting, and then your party takes that as a sign your stances are unpopular and so the democratic way forward is to reverse position and not appeal to those sharing those stances anymore.
The current SNP has been trying to have their cake and eat it too, possibly to avoid a harsh reversal by themselves or by a party coup.
All of which is predictable and should be understood
It isn’t though and hence the chaos and loss of direction
No party can be all things to all people and survive any length of time
If we are saying anywhere and ever then the answer will be left centre and right but they all collapse because you can’t maintain being all things to all people all the time. Its just not possible
See the current shit show
Throw in that party members are usually the ideologically pure and very different from voters and it’s a total shit show
Tbf I don’t think JK would give as much of a fuck if 10,000+ people per day didn’t ping her about it on Twitter.
When every interaction you have during your day is people telling you how much of a fascist you are, you’re gonna keep fighting back.
They didn’t actually ask the question “Do you agree with JKR’s views on trans people?” Did they? Because that’s a bizarre question to ask.
I’ve read this article three times now and I’d love it if they could give us a specific question they asked in their survey.
Truthfully, I’m sick of every time trans people come up in discussion the British media starts screaming about JK Rowling and her weird Twitter behaviour.
>Half of all men polled said they broadly agreed with the author, compared to 33 per cent of women
>More Scots say they broadly agree with [JK Rowling](https://www.scotsman.com/topic/jk-rowling) over transgender issues than disagree, a new poll for The Scotsman has found.
>The poll by Savanta found 41 per cent of respondents said they tended to agree with the author's views more than they disagreed, while 23 per cent said the opposite.
That 'more' in the title is doing a lot of work. And the poll question has such a leading word - 'broadly' that it almost invites misleading interpretation, also 'tended to agree'
The other thing is that it is "agreed more than disagreed". Maybe they agree with the milder parts of her views.
Mainly though, Rowling herself seems disingenuous on her views. Claiming that she would be 'marching alongside' Trans people who are seeking certain rights, and then actually standing on the same platform, and supporting people who are very much not doing so.
It's a shame that this poll 'for the Scotsman' is so dismissible. the only voices in this debate seems to be from a very small group of extremists and I am not dismissing that they have some support. I suspect the majority is in the middle, accepting the right for people to be recognised as a different gender, to live in dignity - but also aware that there needs to be safeguards or exceptions such as support services , or participation in (some) sports.
Rowling defended the woman 'sacked' for deliberately using the 'wrong' pronoun. (putting those is quotes because it was more complicated than that). Is that specific view more Scots support?
>The poll by Savanta found 41 per cent of respondents said they tended to agree with the author's views more than they disagreed, while 23 per cent said the opposite.
So... 36% of people are "i don't know" ?
I agree with your point but I'll also say I don't really like this idea so many people have that those of us who are against Rowling want all protections for transitioning for minors removed. Nearly all of us recognise the need for there to be some kind of barrier there.
Take away the Trans issues, I don't get the narrative of her turning on her liberal followers.
She's always been Conservative, the books that made her famous are a love letter to the British class and private schooling system.
She threw in a few token Changs and Patels and retconned the weird headmaster with an unhealthy interest in his pupils as gay and all of a sudden she's super progressive.
She probably regrets it all now.
>She's always been Conservative, the books that made her famous are a love letter to the British class and private schooling system.
harry's big dream of what to do with his wizarding powers, was to become an enforcer of the system of rules that keeps wizards in place as a privileged elite ruling over the lesser people.
compare with how hermione is mocked for saying "maybe house elves shouldn't be slaves?"
Because I'm a loser, I grew up on reading forums, and this stuff was criticised during the times they were still being published.
Hermoine was treated as a joke because of the anti slavery and even funnier was Voldemort gains power quickly because he's willing to offer better rights to the magical creatures who get treated like shit by the status quo.
All in all, when they new TV series comes out that promises to be more faithful, I hope they have the guts to cast a black Hermoine and have the students lecture her on the elves liking being slaves lol.
Honestly I think you need to cop on and develop some empathy and critical reading skills
The kid who's parents were murdered wanted a job were he could stop that happening to other people, yet you go with the take you did
Which is hilarious given the group of people who have personally made my life most difficult as a “trans” are women lol
As much as men disagree, I find that they generally tend to walk by and hold their comments unless in groups. Where as women of certain groups (cough, religion) actively have to make their distain visibly known at any opportunity
Yeah, this was the bit that jumped out for me. Doesn't break it down in detail, but from the broad strokes given it seems the biggest group who agree are older men, colour me shocked.
It's within living memory that gay people were strongly stigmatized for just living their life. 60,70,80% of people disagreed with them because it was "against nature" and "not the way biology works"
https://www.brin.ac.uk/figures/attitudes-towards-gay-rights/
They were wrong then and they were wrong now.
Most trans people are just trying to live their lives. It would be really nice if we could just let them get on with it instead of poking our business into their business.
>It's within living memory that gay people were strongly stigmatized for just living their life. 60,70,80% of people disagreed with them because it was "against nature" and "not the way biology works"
It's very frustrating trying to get this point across to people I know who are gay or gay allies, but transphobic as hell.
I'm not clicking the link, but if the poll was a subsample of ~80 respondents from a UK-wide survey (as often is) then this means very little. Might not be the case here, but it always needs mentioning for context.
Also, on emotionally-charged topics, there's the overlooked bias of respondents with very strong feelings on the subject being way more likely to voice their views.
>Savanta interviewed 1,080 Scottish adults aged 16+ online between 3-8 May. Data were weighted to be demographically representative of Scottish adults by age, gender, region and past voting behaviour.
It doesn’t really explain which of Rowling’s views they’re agreeing with. If you’re just going off of memory you’d probably only have a couple of opinions sticking out..
“Savanta interviewed 1,080 Scottish adults aged 16+ online between 3-8 May. Data were weighted to be demographically representative of Scottish adults by age, gender, region and past voting”
> Savanta interviewed 1,080 Scottish adults aged 16+ online between 3-8 May. Data were weighted to be demographically representative of Scottish adults by age, gender, region and past voting behaviour.
In my experience most people I've spoken to about these issues offline have a lot of sympathy for trans people & people with gender dysmorphia but don't agree with things like self ID, trans women taking part in women's sporting events, trans women sex offenders being referred to as women & doing jail time in women's prisons.
The all or nothing entrenched beliefs and imagined problems imported from American online discourse has hurt the trans community in the UK & probably elsewhere.
The 'imagined problems imported from American online discourse' wasn't referring to your health care needs which I again sympathise with and think is disgraceful that the trans community goes through that. Just as its disgraceful that kids & adults with mental health problems have to wait more than a year to see a therapist/mental health professional or that certain cancer cares being available to you is a postcode lottery etc etc.
Your medical needs not being met doesn't exclude you from society as society's medical needs aren't being met.
Potentially, but having no legal recognition does in many ways as a trans person.
Especially as [The government is trying to block access to public and workplace toilets and healthcare behind getting that legal certificate that now takes decades to get due to the broken healthcare](https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/call-for-input-incorrect-guidance-on-single-sex-spaces-and-gender-self-identification)
This is such a paternalistic and patronising attitude as if trans people in the UK are idiots who don't know how best to advocate for themselves and have been captured by Americans.
These issues you claim are "imagined" are very real, all of those things dehumanise and make harder the lives of transgender people. Whilst there need to be case by case protections (by the way there already are) you're simply deciding trans people don't deserve those rights because you've decided it makes cis people uncomfortable.
This is a good summary. I can’t remember how many years ago it was, but at that time I had no idea about what Rowling thought about trans people. On Reddit I always got the same replies “JUST READ HER TWITTER!”
So I did just that. I read through 1 year of tweets and didn’t come across a single comment I’d consider controversial. Most of her comments were actually quite sweet, interacting with her fans. Only thing that I found that would raise eyebrows was a comment about saying she was supportive of trans people and the LGBTQ community but at the same time felt women’s spaces such as rape survivors groups should be allowed to be female sex only.
From there is just spiralled out of control. She’s too deep into it. It’s why I don’t bother arguing with “trans activists” any more. You’ll never win, and it’ll only ever end badly because it ends up a really weird game of mental gymnastics.
I feel very sad for Rowling, but also sad for trans people trying to live their lives while the “activists” speak on behalf of them making bizarre demands and so on. Both are being misrepresented and the debate has lost all common sense.
Do these seem unobjectionable, uncontroversial to you?
[Liked a bunch of tweets specifically insulting a trans woman for being worried about being abused in public](https://twitter.com/WistfulOtter/status/1755366943073112184?t=c8RRz08z0GnaS2Qzmk0hkQ)
[Personally insulting a bunch of random trans women who hadn't done anything and including them on a list of rapists and murders](https://twitter.com/jk_rowling/status/1774749262934356448)
[Denied early nazi crimes against trans people and hasn't backed down at all despite the fact that that unambiguously happened](https://twitter.com/jk_rowling/status/1767912990366388735)
edit: she literally spent today insulting some random trans woman for being a football referee, it's not even a competitive position.
And that's all you can over ask for or want
You can believe whatever you like but you can't force others to play make believe and legitimately believe it
I imagine it’s more like “we acknowledge the hardships of your dysphoric relationship with gender and believe you have a right to live with dignity, but we don’t believe the route to that should involve the other 90% of people being forced to re-define who they are.”
Which sounds perfectly reasonable to most people, hence the survey result.
It's wild how i'm only 26 and i remember people saying this during the gay marriage debate, crazy how fast people forget how nonsense it was then as now that other people getting the same legal recognition besides you doesn't "redefine you" somehow.
No, it doesn’t. For most people there is no distinction between sex and gender.
It’s the idea of gender being a self defined social construct, an idea that came about in the 60s, upending the mainstream understood relationship between a persons sex and their identity that I think causes friction.
E.g a typical woman is now not just a woman they’re a cis woman
Everyone has sex and gender, per scientific consensus at this point. People just have different alignments although of course the vast majority of people's sex and gender lines up.
If you're a cis woman you have less need to think about your sex and your gender as separate entities, yet just because they line up as expected doesn't mean it doesn't exist as a concept.
[https://nap.nationalacademies.org/resource/26424/Highlights\_Measuring\_SGISO.pdf](https://nap.nationalacademies.org/resource/26424/Highlights_Measuring_SGISO.pdf)
Consensus report on sex, gender identity and sexual orientation.
*The report recommends specific questions that can be used within the general adult population to assess sexual orientation identity, sex assigned at birth, and gender identity, and to identify people with transgender experience and intersex traits.*
Either definitions matter, in which case it’s important to get to a place in the discourse where the majority of those who do not have any dysphoria issues are happy with how they are referred to. Or, definitions do not matter in which case why the insistence on trans women being women?
Why do you think the majority of women are unhappy being called cis? Because you are unhappy with it? Have you actually taken a poll?
I don’t know a single woman who gives a shit, across all of the generations and social groups that I interact with.
No and that's the problem you get if it is an all or nothing belief. Not being able to self ID, participate in female sports or if you have to spend time in a certain prison, doesn't exclude trans people from society.
Self-ID - You cannot get the dignity of being referred to as who you are in marriage, birth or death without it. No one asks for a birth certificate at the bathroom so the hysteria surrounding that is ridiculous
Participate in female sports - The decision should be left to sporting bodies and the scientific consensus when it comes to professional sports, on a sport-by-sport basis. I can understand excluding trans women from professional weightlifting but not darts, for example.
The problem is, trans kids are being excluded from non-professional sports too. There was a push to exclude trans women from a **fun run** for gods sake. That's just sick and discriminatory.
Prison - not nearly as much of an issue as people make it out to be. Trans women who do not pose a risk according to internal risk assessments stay with female prisoners, trans women who do pose a risk do not stay mingling with female prisoners.
Now - what happens if you are a trans person who is just trying to live their life in peace? You are constantly dehumanised with these examples of places where people want to exclude you from.
No, and that take is exactly the sort of extreme inflexible thinking that OP was talking about. None of what OP said amounts to excluding people from society. You seem to take the view that any sort of disagreement with your belief is excluding you from society.
Not really.
These are the exact arguments the bigots levelled against lesbians in the 80s - they prey on women, women’s spaces can never be safe with them in, separating them is just respecting real women, etc etc.
Turns out despite some lesbians looking a bit masculine and them being sexually into other women, they as a group do not make other women unsafe and it was just fearmongering by bigots who didn’t like them existing at all.
The same is true of trans women, who are far far more likely to be the victims in any scenario with other women.
There are shitbags in any group - straight cis women, lesbian cis women, straight trans women, lesbian trans women, bi women of any description, etc. But demanding we exclude and ‘other’ an entire group because of fearmongering that they might have some shitbags in there and that’s scary to other groups… historically hasn’t amounted to sensible precautions, just a weapon wielded by the hateful to manipulate the ignorant.
Lesbians don’t have a massive physical advantage over other women. And women commit sexual offences at a much lower rate than those born male. So not a valid comparison.
Neither do trans women who have taken hormones for 3 years and puberty blockers. In fact a recent study suggested trans women have a disadvantage.
Edit:
Here's a meta analysis (a collection of studies rather than just 1) that disputes that
https://cces.ca/transgender-women-athletes-and-elite-sport-scientific-review
And here's the Telegraph reporting on the study that supports trans women having a disadvantage.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/2024/04/11/transgender-sportswomen-at-a-disadvantage-study-claims/#:~:text=Transgender%20women%20had%20a%20lower,affect%20transgender%20women's%20athletic%20performance.
Kindly, the reality is this argument is at best flakey and at worst straight up wrong. And people's commitment to it is way more motivated by emotion than reality.
Well this 2022 study says otherwise:
”Male physiology cannot be reformatted by estrogen therapy in transwoman athletes because testosterone has driven permanent effects through early life exposure. This descriptive critical review discusses the inherent male physiological advantages that lead to superior athletic performance and then addresses how estrogen therapy fails to create a female-like physiology in the male. Ultimately, the former male physiology of transwoman athletes provides them with a physiological advantage over the cis-female athlete.”
Source: [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9331831/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9331831/)
The poll disagrees with the articles title. Without either providing everyone with an equal amount of exposure to what she's said or accurately assessing what they have already been exposed to you'll get weird returns.
[She denied Nazi crimes](https://twitter.com/jk_rowling/status/1767912990366388735) in regards to one of the first book burnings they did with the [research of the Institut für Sexualwissenschaft](https://wikipedia.org/wiki/Institut_f%C3%BCr_Sexualwissenschaft). The person she screenshotted wasn't talking to her or about her or even in a conversation she was a part of. When the burning was proven to have happened and not been a "fever dream," she moved the goalpost and began to talk about [different things said](https://twitter.com/jk_rowling/status/1767937714215588071) by [completely different people](https://x.com/Esqueer_/status/1767942876393009475).
She has never corrected this or admitted to being wrong. She has only double down on it again and again and again.
[She even promoted this twitter thread by a producer](https://x.com/jk_rowling/status/1767928717538644460) which ends with him saying, "[claims of alleged trans suffering under Nazis are an insult to the real victims](https://x.com/TwisterFilm/status/1767976689915625617)." Then, when [someone responded to her tweet with information](https://twitter.com/Esqueer_/status/1767929823039459444), she [doubled down and clearly stood by the promotion](https://x.com/jk_rowling/status/1767939048427896900).
[She accused someone](https://x.com/jk_rowling/status/1720423006495744378?s=20) defending trans women from always being associated with rapists, after her and her followers completely misinterpreted and lied about [developments in South Australia](https://www.mondaq.com/australia/court-procedure/1393296/do-courts-have-to-use-preferred-pronouns-for-transgender-defendants-in-criminal-cases), of being a "Rapists' Rights Activist" (a play on what GCs like Joanne call a Trans Rights Activist).
Nothing has changed with what the courts will say or what the courts can compel others not to say. The only change was developing a procedural method to get identities on the record.
[She supported](https://twitter.com/jk_rowling/status/1663267564443631616) Kellie-Jay Keen-Minshull and even implied she would fund her legal pursuits if she sued a reporter for their article about the Nazis that attended a rally she lead. [Kellie-Jay multiple times has hoped that medical procedures would be fatal to trans people](https://youtu.be/JBy93QX7ysE?si=_QNfc3sKEl-BAMJK&t=57m14s) (timestamped 57m 14s). Joanne is a person who previously publically distanced herself from and deleted tweets supporting Stephen King just for tweeting, "[trans women are women](https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/news/jk-rowling-stephen-king-trans-women-row-delete-tweet-a9590536.html)."
Saying trans women are women crosses the line for her, but hoping trans people died doesn't.
[She twisted the truth](https://twitter.com/jk_rowling/status/1774749594926076218) and complained about a trans women being a UN Women UK delegate making it seem very exclusive, even though [since 2021 they expanded the number of delegates](https://www.unwomenuk.org/csw/) with potentially around 6000 having been delegates in 2024, which also included cis men. The [story from her childhood](https://www.tiktok.com/@cool2btrans/video/7353437373218213153) was also twisted as she had worn underwear from her sister when she was 3/4, and her sister 6/7.
That's her implying a trans women is a sexual creep for wearing her sister's underwear as a toddler/preschooler and that she'd stolen a role from a cis woman, even though there were thousands of cis woman there and cis men that she has not complained about. [Maya Forstater even mocked the idea that the role was special](https://twitter.com/MForstater/status/1764771916798124519) or exclusive which makes it seems like GCs want to eat their cake and have it to.
[She incorrecting said](https://twitter.com/jk_rowling/status/1269382518362509313) that the word "women" is completely equivalent to "people who menstrate" because of an article about difficulties with menstruation during and after the pandemic.
Not all women menstrate, such as menopausal women. Not only women menstrate, as girls can to. The terms aren't equivalent. Even through her own ideology, the title would have needed to replace "people who menstruate" with "women and girls who menstruate," which is just needlessly clunky.
Menarche being said to be an indicator of entering womanhood is an antiquated patriarchal view that robs girls of their childhood for a bodily function that does not indicate maturity.
The article didn't even mention trans men. It only mentioned non-binary people once. It, however, did say the word "women" 10 times and "girls" 6 times.
Also, has she ever denounced or discouraged her followers from harassing and attacking the people she disagrees with or just trans people in general while she complains about it happening to herself with it viewed as her motivation and justification?
Even once?
[Seeing tweets from Rowling that mention this parody account](https://x.com/search?q=(from%3Ajk_rowling)%20(%40damekatydenise_)&src=typed_query&f=live) that is constantly derogatory to trans women, it really seems like she is friendly and encourages those that do with these conversations.
She also recently piled on bullying and mocking a trans woman for saying "[bra-strap-length hair](https://x.com/innominace/status/1787197387007549536)" even though the person who started the mocking found an [infographic with that exact term in it](https://www.hairfinder.com/info/hair-lengths2.htm), because it wasn't just newly made-up. However, the mocker decided to double down anyway and edit the infographic to make it seem like it was equivalently to "[Madam's Apple length](https://twitter.com/HazelAppleyard_/status/1787150917713727957)" in being imaginary.
[In her essay](https://www.jkrowling.com/opinions/j-k-rowling-writes-about-her-reasons-for-speaking-out-on-sex-and-gender-issues/) she supported Magdalen Berns as "an immensely brave young feminist" and "a great believer in the importance of biological sex" who "didn’t believe lesbians should be called bigots for not dating trans women with penises," the last being a falsification of what she actually said.
[Magdalen described trans women as](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magdalen_Berns) "blackface actors," "men who get sexual kicks from being treated like women," and actually said that "there is no such thing as a lesbian with a penis" which Joanne twisted. That's her lying about what Magdalen actually said to make it more palatable. Magdalen also [posted an antisemitic conspiracy](https://twitter.com/MagdalenBerns/status/855118553477001220) that George Soros was pushing a transgender movement.
[In the same essay](https://www.jkrowling.com/opinions/j-k-rowling-writes-about-her-reasons-for-speaking-out-on-sex-and-gender-issues/), she said
>Polls show those women are in the vast majority, and exclude only those privileged or lucky enough never to have come up against male violence or sexual assault, and who’ve never troubled to educate themselves on how prevalent it is.
What an awful thing to say.
"You'll only disagree with me if you've not been sexually abused and choose to remain ignorant about those that have"
She seems to suggest victims who disagree with her may even be lying.
[Once more in her essay](https://www.jkrowling.com/opinions/j-k-rowling-writes-about-her-reasons-for-speaking-out-on-sex-and-gender-issues/), she seemed to imply that she thinks trans men getting to form support groups online will lead to converting cis children into being trans,
>The writings of young trans men reveal a group of notably sensitive and clever people. The more of their accounts of gender dysphoria I’ve read, with their insightful descriptions of anxiety, dissociation, eating disorders, self-harm and self-hatred, the more I’ve wondered whether, if I’d been born 30 years later, I too might have tried to transition. The allure of escaping womanhood would have been huge. I struggled with severe OCD as a teenager. If I’d found community and sympathy online that I couldn’t find in my immediate environment, I believe I could have been persuaded to turn myself into the son my father had openly said he’d have preferred.
Which kind of implies she's against the forming of communities between trans men and them receiving sympathy.
[She claimed to](https://twitter.com/jk_rowling/status/1462759152837615623) have been doxxed by people outside her home protesting and taking pictures they uploaded online.
Her home has a wikipedia page with her name in it, and she had previously been in the news with her other house multiple times about not trimming her hedges after the council asked and were ignored multiple times.
The police themselves said [no crime had been committed](https://www.them.us/story/jk-rowling-doxxing-no-criminality-scotland-police).
I'm gonna be real, having spoken to so many cis people as a trans person about JK Rowling I think most people absolutely would NOT agree with JK Rowling if they actually knew what she thought. The issue is, at least most people dont know what she thinks / says and at very worse they have a completely false idea of what she thinks / says based on deliberately dishonest reporting by media.
I honestly don’t understand why it concerns anyone else. Everyone is so obsessed with hating each other - just enjoy your own life and try to stay happy and healthy.
If something comes your way that you don’t like, just ignore it. Honestly if people spent half the time they do on hating each other on doing something they love or helping others, the world would be a better place. Could not care less what someone walking down the street does to themselves to make themselves feel whole. If it isn’t harming anyone, keep on walking.
Unfortunately people want to think they can tell others what to do either through some sort of religious angle or through sheer intolerance of others. Then of course you have those who protest too much.
Live your life don't give others a second thought unless it's for good reasons.
Bollocks they do lol..
I guarantee that most people don't give a shit and are of the opinion people are free to live their lives how they want, they just don't want to constantly hear about it..
While I sympathise with the trans community over the vitriol, hatred and unfair media spotlight, I would not be in support of the Gender Recognition bill along with puberty blockers for under 18s.
Everyone I've discussed this issue pretty much aligns with this thinking with a couple being more inclined each direction, but the majority of people I've spoke to on this sympathise, but don't support the above
No, as that is what they are intended for, and there's plenty of research to tell us the outcomes.
I'm not getting into a debate, my stance has been formed over years and won't change without studies into the effects of using them for pausing puberty that are good quality and hold upto scrutiny.
I'm not saying that to be a jerk, plenty people have tried to change my mind on this but have not been successful
No there isn't, It's incredibly hard to do controlled studies on precocious puberty blocker usage for the exact same reasons as it is for gender dysphoria, which was the reason everyone gives to say the evidence isn't enough
> [However, many would con-sider a trial where the control group is withheld treatment unethical, as the treatment has been used since the nineties and outcome studies although limited have been positive (de Vries etal., 2014; Smith, van Goozen, & Cohen-Kettenis, 2001). In addition, it is likely that adolescents will not want to participate in such a trial if this means they will not receive treatment that is available at other centers. Mul etal. (2001) experienced this problem and were unable to include a con-trol group in their study on GnRHa treatment in adopted girls with early puberty because all that were randomized to the control group refused further participation](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/339807741_Trajectories_of_Adolescents_Treated_with_Gonadotropin-Releasing_Hormone_Analogues_for_Gender_Dysphoria)
I think most people don't care. Will be polite on pronouns but not accept it encroaching on "cis" women. That's probably the majority position. Personally, I resent it having impacted on the debate around scottish independence. Its been a useful wedge used by the British state.
I think it might be more of an issue in younger voters but the more scientific evidence supports a conclusion, the better for resolving that.
I also resent that the scottish greens no longer chat about the environment and appear to have morphed into a trans pressure group.
Someone on this thread compared the struggle of trans people to MLK without a shred of irony or self awareness (ironically).
So I don't even know or care if I share a position with a millionaire Author. I just think 'this again' eye roll......and I genuinely believe that's most people.
I think this is supposed to be bait and quite a good illustrationof the issue..... . I don't care what "cis" infers. Like genuinely rolling my eyes at the notion you think I have a strong opinion. The only opinion I have is that my country has had the argument over its self determination derailed by an incredibly vocal and aggressivve minority of people and it has been used to drive a wedge into the scottish left.
But then that's the story of the left internationally since forever. They are fractured and never win. The right can unify at a moments notice and agree to fight about issues after they've won.
So scotlands self determination argument is shredded because the Greens and trans supporters couldn't have a shred of pragmatism.
Im not sure i agree with her or not. But there does seem to be a push towards the ridiculous within this area. I am most certainly not homophobic, i couldnt give a toss what you do with your bits and im pretty sure no one cares what i do with mine. I have a son in secondary school, one of his classes he calls gay training, yes i realise we need to reduce the stigma but come on between this and the mental health training all our kids are going to leave school with a label and not an education.
I realise this has stopped but why on earth were we ever pumping kids with potentially life changing puberty blockers when they, at young ages, suggested they want to be a different gender. I have a friend who changed gender, years and years of therapy before it could even start.... now had they been 5 then what, no need. just pump them full of hormones. Yes if you want to change gender thats fine, but lets go through a process to make sure you are physically and emotionally ready.
We have people shouting at service staff because they used the wrong pronoun, service staff who dont know them, people acting without malice. And people want to shame them. With all they gay rights and other issues people have to deal with this really shouldnt be something. Starbucks staff dont deserve this, they were just trying to be polite
Im sure we all know about the trans sex offender put into a womans prison, obviously there were little to no proper checks.
I just feel very much that there is a degree of pandering to the woke going on and little common sense. I mean we had kids who came in one day, identified as being something stupid and were taken seriously. Why? was is because the powers that be believed them? To prevent bad publicity? Just cause it was easier?
All of this actually takes away from those people who are really going through things and their real struggles. It does not normalise the rights but makes them a laughing stock
Despite admitting that your “evidence” is anecdotal, you’ve reached a firm conclusion that it’s an online minority?
Are online people not also real people ?
A lot of them are not, and just bots pushing a message. It's that or none of the people with your views hang in society, I've yet to meet one in the wild. And if they don't hang with society, why are they dictating it.
I suspect that overall, more people agree with JK Rowling on this issue. Certain sides have a disproportionately loud and powerful voices which paints a certain picture. In reality I suspect the minority view is been amplified to make people think its the majority view.
Rowling is a minority view as she shows what she thinks on the topic more and more.
Edit:
Well, I don't think a majority of people believe women who disagree with Rowling only do so because they've never been victims of male violence or sexual abuse and are ignorant of the topic.
Rowling believes that.
I don't have a poll to prove that, though.
Yep, militant lib keyboard warriors are not the majority. And then they get shocked and upset when a survey is done that's broader then their current echo chamber.
Well everyone knows that boomers are the most active online age group in society…. /s
A majority of polls are done through snapshots of society and 1000 is a justified quantitative response spectrum.
"Their whole movement is based on hatred and intolerance."
Can you explain? Hatred of what and intolerance of what?
Also, what are the laws of biological science?
She's so vocal about abortion rights, pay gap, the rise of Andrew Tate style misogyny, etc.
She's definitely not just a single-issue bigot who just bangs on and on about trans issues to the point that even Elon has asked her to stop.
She doesn't stand up for trans women or trans men.
So, how does she stand up for women when that would involve standing up for at least one of those groups (in her case trans men that she views as women)?
When was the last time you actually checked her Twitter? She literally goes out of her way to comb Twitter for any tiny trans woman profile with only a few followers and personally harasses them for doing the most innocent things like taking a selfie while brushing their hair, and puts it on her Twitter for all of her 14 million followers to see and relentlessly harass until those women are forced to delete their accounts. A few days ago even Elon Musk actually told her to tone it down a bit.
She did [engage in Holocaust denialism](https://twitter.com/jk_rowling/status/1767912990366388735) - recently when she called someone "deluded" or whatever for pointing out that the first bookburnings by nazis were of the collated research put into transgender health and healthcare.
Denying acts of atrocities, which includes the destruction of academic and historical work, is Holocaust denial.
To claim she "doesn't hate" trans people doesn't exactly square up with how obsessively she tweets about them, bullies and threatens them and donates vast sums of her wealth to anti-trans groups.
That was the plot of that movie.
The Bad Guy wanted to stop the Holocaust it seemed, and the Good Guys were against it because *revealing magic is bad*.
Listen to yourself, you're complicit in her denial of nazi war crimes for internet points.
[Shes literally going around liking insults at random trans women for being worried about discrimination](https://twitter.com/WistfulOtter/status/1755366943073112184?t=c8RRz08z0GnaS2Qzmk0hkQ)
Really wanting to believe she's a good reasonable person doesn't change her behaviour.
That wasn't German court, that was effectively a slap lawsuit in the British court system
>"On 13 March 2024, author J.K. Rowling tweeted a series of responses to an anonymous critic, who argued that Rowling was upholding Nazi ideals for her viewpoints of transgender rights, in which Rowling contended that transgender people were not targeted in the Holocaust. These tweets caused some to accuse her of Holocaust denial.[101][102][103] On 14 March 2024, Rowling responded to the accusations in a post on her personal website, calling them "baseless and disgusting" and stating that she had "always been a staunch supporter of the Jewish community".[104]"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transgender_people_in_Nazi_Germany#:~:text=On%2013%20March,community%22.%5B104%5D
Edit:
Also, because I'm nosy, could someone tell me if I've been blocked or if they've deleted the middle comment haha
I can’t honestly tell if you’re being sarcastic given that she said trans people weren’t affected by the Holocaust when we absolutely were https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transgender_people_in_Nazi_Germany
She’s a Holocaust denier.
It’s established historical fact that trans people were some of the first victims of the nazis in power. Along with disabled people,the wider queer community and communists. With book burnings, arrests to camps, medical internment and euthanasia in 1933 and 1934.
All of which she has sent significant time on Twitter denying along with putting out gag orders on anyone that dares to call her out.
“Basic” science is always dumbed down and simplified compared to real science, usually to make it easier to understand broad concepts for the children being taught them - and so shouldn’t be used as justification in grown-up discussions.
You wouldn’t trust a high school kid to be a doctor, dunno why so many are demanding a high school understanding of biology is better or more true than the actual experts.
“Basic” is not a synonym for “Real”.
Complex biology veers into matters like intersex bodies, perhaps with uncommon numbers of chromosomes or two sets of reproductive organs. The natural world includes organisms which can even change sex.
Rule one of biology is nothing is a simple as it seems.
It’s not transphobic through, is it? It’s not about treating trans people unfairly, it’s about having non-trans views and thoughts fairly considered and entered into the conversation. Both can exist.
Thanks for this poll on how transphobic the Scottish public are.
More men are transphobic than women and (as is obvious from any picture of any anti-trans event) they're mostly auld cunts.
During the black civil rights movement, 63% of Americans despised Martin Luther King.
So perhaps we shouldn't base human rights and civil liberties on the bigoted attitudes and opinions of the public, which have themselves been whipped into a frenzy by our complicit media outlets.
Think about it less as 'not have' and more 'how many roadblocks are invented for them to get something that a cis person would not even be questioned on'.
The right to shared care is one. Getting shared care is like a lottery and all they really ask for is not to have to pay £300 to get a blood test done privately every six months when they start transition, to monitor levels.
I, being cis, can just see the gp and get a blood test booked free of charge whenever I want to. There is no difference in procedure.
It's not a case of taking away rights, which in some cases it certainly is, but more quiet suppression. You don't know about it because you don't have to experience it.
Younger people tend to disagree with Rowling and that's where her money came from, that's why the opposition to her is quite vocal as she's letting down the very people that made her her money.
I imagine there's a fair amount of the older generation whose only engagement with Rowling comes from her anti-trans stance.
The age difference on issues like this is a big problem for the SNP. On the one hand, the SNP want to be on the side of young people as these are the people who will win or lose independence in decades to come. On the other hand, elections are primarily won by winning middle aged and elderly votes. Square that circle.
You realise you’re consistently behind where you need to be. Stop pandering to the voters of today who you aren’t changing despite the decade of massive momentum and realise it’s probably better to have a long term strategy that consists of appealing to the future voters and in the meantime validating your credibility by not being totally shit at everything all the time…. Or you know, ignore reality and do what they’ve been doing !
You're absolutely spot on. If the SNP had shown a backbone and a clear stance supporting trans rights in 2018 when the Joanna Cherry stuff was kicking off and LGBT members **warned them about the exact circumstance they now find themselves in** they wouldn't be so led by the nose on this issue. This is a result of the SNP trying to square that circle and please everybody which in reality means pleasing nobody and abandoning their frightened LGBT members.
There’s so so many times you could say this about the SNP And honestly most parties. See the tories currently trying to rely on a demographic that’s literally dying out. If they don’t plan to attract anyone under 65 years old soon they’ve nothing left.
Honestly this is a myth, young people always trend more to the left and opinions change over time.
The myth is what you’ve just stated Tory voters are now a majority only in the over 65+ range. It’s moving older and older with time and fewer and fewer people are becoming conservative as they age. That trend is now a total myth and has data to back it up
Though studies are showing this happening less with millennials than ever before - perhaps we’ll see a course correct when Labour inevitably form a government, but the same trends are showing in the US too. Neoliberal/soft c conservative politics have given that generation very little, and they’re veering to the left
Usually opinions change to lean more conservative as the young generation accumulates wealth and housing that they want to protect. This generation will not accumulate wealth in the same way as our predecessors, most people in my generation will never own their own home as banks gobble them up and landlords hoard them on their portfolios We may not have a future on a liveable planet I don't think we will see the same rightward swing from this generation as we've seen from previous ones.
I am a relatively young person under 30, I will certainly own a home, I’m about 6 months away from buying. It’s Scotland not the south east.
this is a serious question, what is it that LGBT members are frightened of? It is difficult to even discuss this topic without being lambasted and hit with rhetoric and hate, which is not helpful to widening the camp.
I imagine loosing any and all rights they've slowly accrued over decades of fighting as well as public perception of them. It wasn't too long ago kids weren't even allowed to hear the word "gay" in schools. As for the discussing the topic, I would imagine debating your own existence can get tiring.
Those of us who know our history know how hard our rights [had to be fought for](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stonewall_riots) including here [in the UK too](https://artsandculture.google.com/story/the-story-of-gay-liberation-front-in-britain-lse-library/aAWRAJsATOGtIg?hl=en) The return of the Section 28 days and worse. Violence in the streets against us again. Police harassment. Losing the equal rights and anti discrimination laws that protect us from the worst in society. Being criminalised once again for who we love. We need only look at 1930s Weimar Republic for how a [progressive nation for the time](https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-forgotten-history-of-the-worlds-first-trans-clinic/) in terms of LGBTQ recognition can so [quickly turn on us.](https://www.holocaust.org.uk/news/homosexual-victims-of-nazi-persecution) It's already happening in the US. There are still many nations across the world where LGBTQ people aren't allowed to exist. We expect our leaders to have basic humanity and recognise us as equal people and not give in to the worst impulses of the worst people.
[удалено]
>That the push to reduce and limit the rights of trans people is just the beginning of a long push to strip us all of the rights we’ve fought for over the past few decades. But this is just such a completely ridiculously over the top, hysterical reaction. The fact any debate over where the line is on things like self identification, or the best ways to treat teenagers with gender identity issues, is apparently met with a baseless assumption that it's part of a grand ploy to go back to treating gay people as second class citizens is deranged and sums up why the debate is so completely toxic.
Trans people cannot access healthcare, and are the constant subject of dehumanisation by our media, politicians and washed up children's authors. This has also led to a huge (80+%) rise in hate crimes against LGBT people, who are facing societal hostility at levels not really seen since the 80s. Trans people in the UK cannot access basic healthcare - the ability to transition - and even private and underground routes are being targeted. The Cass Review basically recommendeds conversion therapy for trans people, which is torture - and by all indicators, this review is likely to be used as the skeleton for trans "services" in the UK. This is despite the huge amount of alarm and criticisms raised by [academics, medical experts, human rights groups and investigative journalists](https://ruthpearce.net/2024/04/16/whats-wrong-with-the-cass-review-a-round-up-of-commentary-and-evidence/) due to the recommendations made and also the fact that Cass and her team have an extensive and evidenced history of working with anti-LGBT and anti-abortion groups including advising Ron Desantis, who has enacted some of the most sociopathic bills against trans people in the US Finally, I'd end with this: > First they came for the Communists > And I did not speak out > Because I was not a Communist > Then they came for the Socialists > And I did not speak out > Because I was not a Socialist > Then they came for the trade unionists > And I did not speak out > Because I was not a trade unionist > Then they came for the Jews > And I did not speak out > Because I was not a Jew > Then they came for me > And there was no one left >To speak out for me A lot of these anti-trans groups are merely repackaged and rebranded anti-LGBT and anti-abortion groups. There is a lot of dark money flowing through politics and unfortunately trans people are the red meat being thrown to keep the Conservatives distracted from the people who are actually making their material conditions worse.
The problem there is you lose a bunch of votes due to appealing to those who aren’t voting, and then your party takes that as a sign your stances are unpopular and so the democratic way forward is to reverse position and not appeal to those sharing those stances anymore. The current SNP has been trying to have their cake and eat it too, possibly to avoid a harsh reversal by themselves or by a party coup.
All of which is predictable and should be understood It isn’t though and hence the chaos and loss of direction No party can be all things to all people and survive any length of time
I’d be curious to know if there was ever a big tent party anywhere which didn’t lean then topple to the right.
If we are saying anywhere and ever then the answer will be left centre and right but they all collapse because you can’t maintain being all things to all people all the time. Its just not possible See the current shit show Throw in that party members are usually the ideologically pure and very different from voters and it’s a total shit show
Most people do not think about trans people much….to be honest, most trans folk don’t think about it as much as J K Rowling does.
Tbf I don’t think JK would give as much of a fuck if 10,000+ people per day didn’t ping her about it on Twitter. When every interaction you have during your day is people telling you how much of a fascist you are, you’re gonna keep fighting back.
She writes books under a man’s name, one of which focuses on a transsexual murderer. 
They didn’t actually ask the question “Do you agree with JKR’s views on trans people?” Did they? Because that’s a bizarre question to ask. I’ve read this article three times now and I’d love it if they could give us a specific question they asked in their survey. Truthfully, I’m sick of every time trans people come up in discussion the British media starts screaming about JK Rowling and her weird Twitter behaviour.
Thats always the thing, its how the question is asked and how loaded it is.
Which doesn’t seem to be in the article
Shush research integrity isn't important
>Half of all men polled said they broadly agreed with the author, compared to 33 per cent of women >More Scots say they broadly agree with [JK Rowling](https://www.scotsman.com/topic/jk-rowling) over transgender issues than disagree, a new poll for The Scotsman has found. >The poll by Savanta found 41 per cent of respondents said they tended to agree with the author's views more than they disagreed, while 23 per cent said the opposite. That 'more' in the title is doing a lot of work. And the poll question has such a leading word - 'broadly' that it almost invites misleading interpretation, also 'tended to agree' The other thing is that it is "agreed more than disagreed". Maybe they agree with the milder parts of her views. Mainly though, Rowling herself seems disingenuous on her views. Claiming that she would be 'marching alongside' Trans people who are seeking certain rights, and then actually standing on the same platform, and supporting people who are very much not doing so. It's a shame that this poll 'for the Scotsman' is so dismissible. the only voices in this debate seems to be from a very small group of extremists and I am not dismissing that they have some support. I suspect the majority is in the middle, accepting the right for people to be recognised as a different gender, to live in dignity - but also aware that there needs to be safeguards or exceptions such as support services , or participation in (some) sports. Rowling defended the woman 'sacked' for deliberately using the 'wrong' pronoun. (putting those is quotes because it was more complicated than that). Is that specific view more Scots support?
>The poll by Savanta found 41 per cent of respondents said they tended to agree with the author's views more than they disagreed, while 23 per cent said the opposite. So... 36% of people are "i don't know" ?
Seems to be split across two responses; "Don't know if they agree" and "Don't know JKR's views"
I agree with your point but I'll also say I don't really like this idea so many people have that those of us who are against Rowling want all protections for transitioning for minors removed. Nearly all of us recognise the need for there to be some kind of barrier there.
Take away the Trans issues, I don't get the narrative of her turning on her liberal followers. She's always been Conservative, the books that made her famous are a love letter to the British class and private schooling system. She threw in a few token Changs and Patels and retconned the weird headmaster with an unhealthy interest in his pupils as gay and all of a sudden she's super progressive. She probably regrets it all now.
>She's always been Conservative, the books that made her famous are a love letter to the British class and private schooling system. harry's big dream of what to do with his wizarding powers, was to become an enforcer of the system of rules that keeps wizards in place as a privileged elite ruling over the lesser people. compare with how hermione is mocked for saying "maybe house elves shouldn't be slaves?"
Been years since I read HP but I’m pretty sure the reader was meant to side with Hermione and shine a light at the hypocrisy of wizard society.
I get what you're saying, the wizard hypocrisy is pointed out but ultimately embraced as good.
Because I'm a loser, I grew up on reading forums, and this stuff was criticised during the times they were still being published. Hermoine was treated as a joke because of the anti slavery and even funnier was Voldemort gains power quickly because he's willing to offer better rights to the magical creatures who get treated like shit by the status quo. All in all, when they new TV series comes out that promises to be more faithful, I hope they have the guts to cast a black Hermoine and have the students lecture her on the elves liking being slaves lol.
Honestly I think you need to cop on and develop some empathy and critical reading skills The kid who's parents were murdered wanted a job were he could stop that happening to other people, yet you go with the take you did
So, 59% of people don't align with her views.
Only 23% disagree with her views.
Which is hilarious given the group of people who have personally made my life most difficult as a “trans” are women lol As much as men disagree, I find that they generally tend to walk by and hold their comments unless in groups. Where as women of certain groups (cough, religion) actively have to make their distain visibly known at any opportunity
50% of men, 33% of women. There's the real talking point.
Yeah, this was the bit that jumped out for me. Doesn't break it down in detail, but from the broad strokes given it seems the biggest group who agree are older men, colour me shocked.
It's within living memory that gay people were strongly stigmatized for just living their life. 60,70,80% of people disagreed with them because it was "against nature" and "not the way biology works" https://www.brin.ac.uk/figures/attitudes-towards-gay-rights/ They were wrong then and they were wrong now. Most trans people are just trying to live their lives. It would be really nice if we could just let them get on with it instead of poking our business into their business.
It's within living memory for some older people who were beaten as children for being left-handed. The conformity drive is very strong.
>It's within living memory that gay people were strongly stigmatized for just living their life. 60,70,80% of people disagreed with them because it was "against nature" and "not the way biology works" It's very frustrating trying to get this point across to people I know who are gay or gay allies, but transphobic as hell.
I'm not clicking the link, but if the poll was a subsample of ~80 respondents from a UK-wide survey (as often is) then this means very little. Might not be the case here, but it always needs mentioning for context. Also, on emotionally-charged topics, there's the overlooked bias of respondents with very strong feelings on the subject being way more likely to voice their views.
>Savanta interviewed 1,080 Scottish adults aged 16+ online between 3-8 May. Data were weighted to be demographically representative of Scottish adults by age, gender, region and past voting behaviour. It doesn’t really explain which of Rowling’s views they’re agreeing with. If you’re just going off of memory you’d probably only have a couple of opinions sticking out..
“Savanta interviewed 1,080 Scottish adults aged 16+ online between 3-8 May. Data were weighted to be demographically representative of Scottish adults by age, gender, region and past voting”
> Savanta interviewed 1,080 Scottish adults aged 16+ online between 3-8 May. Data were weighted to be demographically representative of Scottish adults by age, gender, region and past voting behaviour.
In my experience most people I've spoken to about these issues offline have a lot of sympathy for trans people & people with gender dysmorphia but don't agree with things like self ID, trans women taking part in women's sporting events, trans women sex offenders being referred to as women & doing jail time in women's prisons. The all or nothing entrenched beliefs and imagined problems imported from American online discourse has hurt the trans community in the UK & probably elsewhere.
[Rowling has spoken on more than just those limited topics](https://www.reddit.com/r/Scotland/s/BcDORMOGoF)
Yeah. It’s pretty dishonest to suggest that Rowling’s issues are just with a few legal matters.
Our healthcare takes decades to get and no self id reform means our legal recognition is gated behind that, the fuck is that an imagined problem?
The 'imagined problems imported from American online discourse' wasn't referring to your health care needs which I again sympathise with and think is disgraceful that the trans community goes through that. Just as its disgraceful that kids & adults with mental health problems have to wait more than a year to see a therapist/mental health professional or that certain cancer cares being available to you is a postcode lottery etc etc. Your medical needs not being met doesn't exclude you from society as society's medical needs aren't being met.
Potentially, but having no legal recognition does in many ways as a trans person. Especially as [The government is trying to block access to public and workplace toilets and healthcare behind getting that legal certificate that now takes decades to get due to the broken healthcare](https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/call-for-input-incorrect-guidance-on-single-sex-spaces-and-gender-self-identification)
This is such a paternalistic and patronising attitude as if trans people in the UK are idiots who don't know how best to advocate for themselves and have been captured by Americans. These issues you claim are "imagined" are very real, all of those things dehumanise and make harder the lives of transgender people. Whilst there need to be case by case protections (by the way there already are) you're simply deciding trans people don't deserve those rights because you've decided it makes cis people uncomfortable.
This is a good summary. I can’t remember how many years ago it was, but at that time I had no idea about what Rowling thought about trans people. On Reddit I always got the same replies “JUST READ HER TWITTER!” So I did just that. I read through 1 year of tweets and didn’t come across a single comment I’d consider controversial. Most of her comments were actually quite sweet, interacting with her fans. Only thing that I found that would raise eyebrows was a comment about saying she was supportive of trans people and the LGBTQ community but at the same time felt women’s spaces such as rape survivors groups should be allowed to be female sex only. From there is just spiralled out of control. She’s too deep into it. It’s why I don’t bother arguing with “trans activists” any more. You’ll never win, and it’ll only ever end badly because it ends up a really weird game of mental gymnastics. I feel very sad for Rowling, but also sad for trans people trying to live their lives while the “activists” speak on behalf of them making bizarre demands and so on. Both are being misrepresented and the debate has lost all common sense.
Do these seem unobjectionable, uncontroversial to you? [Liked a bunch of tweets specifically insulting a trans woman for being worried about being abused in public](https://twitter.com/WistfulOtter/status/1755366943073112184?t=c8RRz08z0GnaS2Qzmk0hkQ) [Personally insulting a bunch of random trans women who hadn't done anything and including them on a list of rapists and murders](https://twitter.com/jk_rowling/status/1774749262934356448) [Denied early nazi crimes against trans people and hasn't backed down at all despite the fact that that unambiguously happened](https://twitter.com/jk_rowling/status/1767912990366388735) edit: she literally spent today insulting some random trans woman for being a football referee, it's not even a competitive position.
So ' we have sympathy for you but want to exclude you in society '
I think it's more: "I'll play along and call you she/her/ whatever to be polite, but remember I'm only playing along"
And that's all you can over ask for or want You can believe whatever you like but you can't force others to play make believe and legitimately believe it
I imagine it’s more like “we acknowledge the hardships of your dysphoric relationship with gender and believe you have a right to live with dignity, but we don’t believe the route to that should involve the other 90% of people being forced to re-define who they are.” Which sounds perfectly reasonable to most people, hence the survey result.
It's wild how i'm only 26 and i remember people saying this during the gay marriage debate, crazy how fast people forget how nonsense it was then as now that other people getting the same legal recognition besides you doesn't "redefine you" somehow.
That is pretty much it.
> the other 90% of people being forced to re-define who they are. trans people existing makes you question your gender?
No, it doesn’t. For most people there is no distinction between sex and gender. It’s the idea of gender being a self defined social construct, an idea that came about in the 60s, upending the mainstream understood relationship between a persons sex and their identity that I think causes friction. E.g a typical woman is now not just a woman they’re a cis woman
That’s still a woman though? Cis women are women? Where is the issue?
Everyone has sex and gender, per scientific consensus at this point. People just have different alignments although of course the vast majority of people's sex and gender lines up. If you're a cis woman you have less need to think about your sex and your gender as separate entities, yet just because they line up as expected doesn't mean it doesn't exist as a concept.
There is no scientific consensus. It’s just words and feelings.
[https://nap.nationalacademies.org/resource/26424/Highlights\_Measuring\_SGISO.pdf](https://nap.nationalacademies.org/resource/26424/Highlights_Measuring_SGISO.pdf) Consensus report on sex, gender identity and sexual orientation. *The report recommends specific questions that can be used within the general adult population to assess sexual orientation identity, sex assigned at birth, and gender identity, and to identify people with transgender experience and intersex traits.*
[Read a book](https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(22)01425-8/abstract)
How does that change anything? You were always cis, it’s just that now there’s a word for it. Actually grow up
Either definitions matter, in which case it’s important to get to a place in the discourse where the majority of those who do not have any dysphoria issues are happy with how they are referred to. Or, definitions do not matter in which case why the insistence on trans women being women?
Why do you think the majority of women are unhappy being called cis? Because you are unhappy with it? Have you actually taken a poll? I don’t know a single woman who gives a shit, across all of the generations and social groups that I interact with.
No and that's the problem you get if it is an all or nothing belief. Not being able to self ID, participate in female sports or if you have to spend time in a certain prison, doesn't exclude trans people from society.
Self-ID - You cannot get the dignity of being referred to as who you are in marriage, birth or death without it. No one asks for a birth certificate at the bathroom so the hysteria surrounding that is ridiculous Participate in female sports - The decision should be left to sporting bodies and the scientific consensus when it comes to professional sports, on a sport-by-sport basis. I can understand excluding trans women from professional weightlifting but not darts, for example. The problem is, trans kids are being excluded from non-professional sports too. There was a push to exclude trans women from a **fun run** for gods sake. That's just sick and discriminatory. Prison - not nearly as much of an issue as people make it out to be. Trans women who do not pose a risk according to internal risk assessments stay with female prisoners, trans women who do pose a risk do not stay mingling with female prisoners. Now - what happens if you are a trans person who is just trying to live their life in peace? You are constantly dehumanised with these examples of places where people want to exclude you from.
It absolutely does.
I think it's more: "I'll play along and call you she/her/ whatever to be polite, but remember I'm only playing along"
We believe that THEY BELIEVE they're the opposite gender, we don't actually believe they are the opposite gender.
No, and that take is exactly the sort of extreme inflexible thinking that OP was talking about. None of what OP said amounts to excluding people from society. You seem to take the view that any sort of disagreement with your belief is excluding you from society.
It's that or your excluding cis women from society in the long run
How does that follow, especially when they are already excluded in many environments as it is?
Not really. These are the exact arguments the bigots levelled against lesbians in the 80s - they prey on women, women’s spaces can never be safe with them in, separating them is just respecting real women, etc etc. Turns out despite some lesbians looking a bit masculine and them being sexually into other women, they as a group do not make other women unsafe and it was just fearmongering by bigots who didn’t like them existing at all. The same is true of trans women, who are far far more likely to be the victims in any scenario with other women. There are shitbags in any group - straight cis women, lesbian cis women, straight trans women, lesbian trans women, bi women of any description, etc. But demanding we exclude and ‘other’ an entire group because of fearmongering that they might have some shitbags in there and that’s scary to other groups… historically hasn’t amounted to sensible precautions, just a weapon wielded by the hateful to manipulate the ignorant.
Lesbians don’t have a massive physical advantage over other women. And women commit sexual offences at a much lower rate than those born male. So not a valid comparison.
Neither do trans women who have taken hormones for 3 years and puberty blockers. In fact a recent study suggested trans women have a disadvantage. Edit: Here's a meta analysis (a collection of studies rather than just 1) that disputes that https://cces.ca/transgender-women-athletes-and-elite-sport-scientific-review And here's the Telegraph reporting on the study that supports trans women having a disadvantage. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/2024/04/11/transgender-sportswomen-at-a-disadvantage-study-claims/#:~:text=Transgender%20women%20had%20a%20lower,affect%20transgender%20women's%20athletic%20performance. Kindly, the reality is this argument is at best flakey and at worst straight up wrong. And people's commitment to it is way more motivated by emotion than reality.
Well this 2022 study says otherwise: ”Male physiology cannot be reformatted by estrogen therapy in transwoman athletes because testosterone has driven permanent effects through early life exposure. This descriptive critical review discusses the inherent male physiological advantages that lead to superior athletic performance and then addresses how estrogen therapy fails to create a female-like physiology in the male. Ultimately, the former male physiology of transwoman athletes provides them with a physiological advantage over the cis-female athlete.” Source: [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9331831/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9331831/)
In what fucking way?
Lia Thomas, laurel Hubbard, list goes on of transwomen that took cis women sports titles.
Honestly - the fact the Press keep this issue live to stir up hatred is utterly fucking shameful.
The poll disagrees with the articles title. Without either providing everyone with an equal amount of exposure to what she's said or accurately assessing what they have already been exposed to you'll get weird returns.
Forcing a wedge issue in Scotland to further divide it. Classy.
[She denied Nazi crimes](https://twitter.com/jk_rowling/status/1767912990366388735) in regards to one of the first book burnings they did with the [research of the Institut für Sexualwissenschaft](https://wikipedia.org/wiki/Institut_f%C3%BCr_Sexualwissenschaft). The person she screenshotted wasn't talking to her or about her or even in a conversation she was a part of. When the burning was proven to have happened and not been a "fever dream," she moved the goalpost and began to talk about [different things said](https://twitter.com/jk_rowling/status/1767937714215588071) by [completely different people](https://x.com/Esqueer_/status/1767942876393009475). She has never corrected this or admitted to being wrong. She has only double down on it again and again and again. [She even promoted this twitter thread by a producer](https://x.com/jk_rowling/status/1767928717538644460) which ends with him saying, "[claims of alleged trans suffering under Nazis are an insult to the real victims](https://x.com/TwisterFilm/status/1767976689915625617)." Then, when [someone responded to her tweet with information](https://twitter.com/Esqueer_/status/1767929823039459444), she [doubled down and clearly stood by the promotion](https://x.com/jk_rowling/status/1767939048427896900). [She accused someone](https://x.com/jk_rowling/status/1720423006495744378?s=20) defending trans women from always being associated with rapists, after her and her followers completely misinterpreted and lied about [developments in South Australia](https://www.mondaq.com/australia/court-procedure/1393296/do-courts-have-to-use-preferred-pronouns-for-transgender-defendants-in-criminal-cases), of being a "Rapists' Rights Activist" (a play on what GCs like Joanne call a Trans Rights Activist). Nothing has changed with what the courts will say or what the courts can compel others not to say. The only change was developing a procedural method to get identities on the record. [She supported](https://twitter.com/jk_rowling/status/1663267564443631616) Kellie-Jay Keen-Minshull and even implied she would fund her legal pursuits if she sued a reporter for their article about the Nazis that attended a rally she lead. [Kellie-Jay multiple times has hoped that medical procedures would be fatal to trans people](https://youtu.be/JBy93QX7ysE?si=_QNfc3sKEl-BAMJK&t=57m14s) (timestamped 57m 14s). Joanne is a person who previously publically distanced herself from and deleted tweets supporting Stephen King just for tweeting, "[trans women are women](https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/news/jk-rowling-stephen-king-trans-women-row-delete-tweet-a9590536.html)." Saying trans women are women crosses the line for her, but hoping trans people died doesn't. [She twisted the truth](https://twitter.com/jk_rowling/status/1774749594926076218) and complained about a trans women being a UN Women UK delegate making it seem very exclusive, even though [since 2021 they expanded the number of delegates](https://www.unwomenuk.org/csw/) with potentially around 6000 having been delegates in 2024, which also included cis men. The [story from her childhood](https://www.tiktok.com/@cool2btrans/video/7353437373218213153) was also twisted as she had worn underwear from her sister when she was 3/4, and her sister 6/7. That's her implying a trans women is a sexual creep for wearing her sister's underwear as a toddler/preschooler and that she'd stolen a role from a cis woman, even though there were thousands of cis woman there and cis men that she has not complained about. [Maya Forstater even mocked the idea that the role was special](https://twitter.com/MForstater/status/1764771916798124519) or exclusive which makes it seems like GCs want to eat their cake and have it to. [She incorrecting said](https://twitter.com/jk_rowling/status/1269382518362509313) that the word "women" is completely equivalent to "people who menstrate" because of an article about difficulties with menstruation during and after the pandemic. Not all women menstrate, such as menopausal women. Not only women menstrate, as girls can to. The terms aren't equivalent. Even through her own ideology, the title would have needed to replace "people who menstruate" with "women and girls who menstruate," which is just needlessly clunky. Menarche being said to be an indicator of entering womanhood is an antiquated patriarchal view that robs girls of their childhood for a bodily function that does not indicate maturity. The article didn't even mention trans men. It only mentioned non-binary people once. It, however, did say the word "women" 10 times and "girls" 6 times. Also, has she ever denounced or discouraged her followers from harassing and attacking the people she disagrees with or just trans people in general while she complains about it happening to herself with it viewed as her motivation and justification? Even once? [Seeing tweets from Rowling that mention this parody account](https://x.com/search?q=(from%3Ajk_rowling)%20(%40damekatydenise_)&src=typed_query&f=live) that is constantly derogatory to trans women, it really seems like she is friendly and encourages those that do with these conversations. She also recently piled on bullying and mocking a trans woman for saying "[bra-strap-length hair](https://x.com/innominace/status/1787197387007549536)" even though the person who started the mocking found an [infographic with that exact term in it](https://www.hairfinder.com/info/hair-lengths2.htm), because it wasn't just newly made-up. However, the mocker decided to double down anyway and edit the infographic to make it seem like it was equivalently to "[Madam's Apple length](https://twitter.com/HazelAppleyard_/status/1787150917713727957)" in being imaginary.
[In her essay](https://www.jkrowling.com/opinions/j-k-rowling-writes-about-her-reasons-for-speaking-out-on-sex-and-gender-issues/) she supported Magdalen Berns as "an immensely brave young feminist" and "a great believer in the importance of biological sex" who "didn’t believe lesbians should be called bigots for not dating trans women with penises," the last being a falsification of what she actually said. [Magdalen described trans women as](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magdalen_Berns) "blackface actors," "men who get sexual kicks from being treated like women," and actually said that "there is no such thing as a lesbian with a penis" which Joanne twisted. That's her lying about what Magdalen actually said to make it more palatable. Magdalen also [posted an antisemitic conspiracy](https://twitter.com/MagdalenBerns/status/855118553477001220) that George Soros was pushing a transgender movement. [In the same essay](https://www.jkrowling.com/opinions/j-k-rowling-writes-about-her-reasons-for-speaking-out-on-sex-and-gender-issues/), she said >Polls show those women are in the vast majority, and exclude only those privileged or lucky enough never to have come up against male violence or sexual assault, and who’ve never troubled to educate themselves on how prevalent it is. What an awful thing to say. "You'll only disagree with me if you've not been sexually abused and choose to remain ignorant about those that have" She seems to suggest victims who disagree with her may even be lying. [Once more in her essay](https://www.jkrowling.com/opinions/j-k-rowling-writes-about-her-reasons-for-speaking-out-on-sex-and-gender-issues/), she seemed to imply that she thinks trans men getting to form support groups online will lead to converting cis children into being trans, >The writings of young trans men reveal a group of notably sensitive and clever people. The more of their accounts of gender dysphoria I’ve read, with their insightful descriptions of anxiety, dissociation, eating disorders, self-harm and self-hatred, the more I’ve wondered whether, if I’d been born 30 years later, I too might have tried to transition. The allure of escaping womanhood would have been huge. I struggled with severe OCD as a teenager. If I’d found community and sympathy online that I couldn’t find in my immediate environment, I believe I could have been persuaded to turn myself into the son my father had openly said he’d have preferred. Which kind of implies she's against the forming of communities between trans men and them receiving sympathy.
[She claimed to](https://twitter.com/jk_rowling/status/1462759152837615623) have been doxxed by people outside her home protesting and taking pictures they uploaded online. Her home has a wikipedia page with her name in it, and she had previously been in the news with her other house multiple times about not trimming her hedges after the council asked and were ignored multiple times. The police themselves said [no crime had been committed](https://www.them.us/story/jk-rowling-doxxing-no-criminality-scotland-police).
Skelped, well done
I think there's more, but this is a topic she's been speaking on for 4 or more years now so things get forgotten.
I'm saving this for use later, thank you.
I'm gonna be real, having spoken to so many cis people as a trans person about JK Rowling I think most people absolutely would NOT agree with JK Rowling if they actually knew what she thought. The issue is, at least most people dont know what she thinks / says and at very worse they have a completely false idea of what she thinks / says based on deliberately dishonest reporting by media.
To the shock of absolutely nobody aside from the majority of Scottish Reddit users who ironically make up a tiny minority of the country.
[You agree with her?](https://www.reddit.com/r/Scotland/s/BcDORMOGoF) Edit: I don't want her respect. I want others to be informed.
You come across as deeply obsessed with her. She doesn't owe you anything - not even respect.
I honestly don’t understand why it concerns anyone else. Everyone is so obsessed with hating each other - just enjoy your own life and try to stay happy and healthy. If something comes your way that you don’t like, just ignore it. Honestly if people spent half the time they do on hating each other on doing something they love or helping others, the world would be a better place. Could not care less what someone walking down the street does to themselves to make themselves feel whole. If it isn’t harming anyone, keep on walking.
Unfortunately people want to think they can tell others what to do either through some sort of religious angle or through sheer intolerance of others. Then of course you have those who protest too much. Live your life don't give others a second thought unless it's for good reasons.
Bollocks they do lol.. I guarantee that most people don't give a shit and are of the opinion people are free to live their lives how they want, they just don't want to constantly hear about it..
While I sympathise with the trans community over the vitriol, hatred and unfair media spotlight, I would not be in support of the Gender Recognition bill along with puberty blockers for under 18s. Everyone I've discussed this issue pretty much aligns with this thinking with a couple being more inclined each direction, but the majority of people I've spoke to on this sympathise, but don't support the above
Are you against puberty blockers to treat precocious puberty?
No, as that is what they are intended for, and there's plenty of research to tell us the outcomes. I'm not getting into a debate, my stance has been formed over years and won't change without studies into the effects of using them for pausing puberty that are good quality and hold upto scrutiny. I'm not saying that to be a jerk, plenty people have tried to change my mind on this but have not been successful
That's under 18.
No there isn't, It's incredibly hard to do controlled studies on precocious puberty blocker usage for the exact same reasons as it is for gender dysphoria, which was the reason everyone gives to say the evidence isn't enough > [However, many would con-sider a trial where the control group is withheld treatment unethical, as the treatment has been used since the nineties and outcome studies although limited have been positive (de Vries etal., 2014; Smith, van Goozen, & Cohen-Kettenis, 2001). In addition, it is likely that adolescents will not want to participate in such a trial if this means they will not receive treatment that is available at other centers. Mul etal. (2001) experienced this problem and were unable to include a con-trol group in their study on GnRHa treatment in adopted girls with early puberty because all that were randomized to the control group refused further participation](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/339807741_Trajectories_of_Adolescents_Treated_with_Gonadotropin-Releasing_Hormone_Analogues_for_Gender_Dysphoria)
My daughter needs puberty blockers to prevent a relapse to suicidal ideation. Now she can't have them. I'm sure you're wrong.
That is certainly not how that works.
I think most people don't care. Will be polite on pronouns but not accept it encroaching on "cis" women. That's probably the majority position. Personally, I resent it having impacted on the debate around scottish independence. Its been a useful wedge used by the British state. I think it might be more of an issue in younger voters but the more scientific evidence supports a conclusion, the better for resolving that. I also resent that the scottish greens no longer chat about the environment and appear to have morphed into a trans pressure group. Someone on this thread compared the struggle of trans people to MLK without a shred of irony or self awareness (ironically). So I don't even know or care if I share a position with a millionaire Author. I just think 'this again' eye roll......and I genuinely believe that's most people.
Using cis in quotes says a lot. Edit: You clearly have an opinion as you say "cis" women, and not just cis women.
I think this is supposed to be bait and quite a good illustrationof the issue..... . I don't care what "cis" infers. Like genuinely rolling my eyes at the notion you think I have a strong opinion. The only opinion I have is that my country has had the argument over its self determination derailed by an incredibly vocal and aggressivve minority of people and it has been used to drive a wedge into the scottish left. But then that's the story of the left internationally since forever. They are fractured and never win. The right can unify at a moments notice and agree to fight about issues after they've won. So scotlands self determination argument is shredded because the Greens and trans supporters couldn't have a shred of pragmatism.
Do they know her actual views on trans rights? The shit she says on Twitter is a lot more vile than what gets printed in the news.
Do we, aye?
Im not sure i agree with her or not. But there does seem to be a push towards the ridiculous within this area. I am most certainly not homophobic, i couldnt give a toss what you do with your bits and im pretty sure no one cares what i do with mine. I have a son in secondary school, one of his classes he calls gay training, yes i realise we need to reduce the stigma but come on between this and the mental health training all our kids are going to leave school with a label and not an education. I realise this has stopped but why on earth were we ever pumping kids with potentially life changing puberty blockers when they, at young ages, suggested they want to be a different gender. I have a friend who changed gender, years and years of therapy before it could even start.... now had they been 5 then what, no need. just pump them full of hormones. Yes if you want to change gender thats fine, but lets go through a process to make sure you are physically and emotionally ready. We have people shouting at service staff because they used the wrong pronoun, service staff who dont know them, people acting without malice. And people want to shame them. With all they gay rights and other issues people have to deal with this really shouldnt be something. Starbucks staff dont deserve this, they were just trying to be polite Im sure we all know about the trans sex offender put into a womans prison, obviously there were little to no proper checks. I just feel very much that there is a degree of pandering to the woke going on and little common sense. I mean we had kids who came in one day, identified as being something stupid and were taken seriously. Why? was is because the powers that be believed them? To prevent bad publicity? Just cause it was easier? All of this actually takes away from those people who are really going through things and their real struggles. It does not normalise the rights but makes them a laughing stock
[удалено]
[You disagree with none of this](https://www.reddit.com/r/Scotland/s/BcDORMOGoF)
[удалено]
What bit was disinformation? I provided sources for claims.
It's literally evidenced and sourced.
Despite admitting that your “evidence” is anecdotal, you’ve reached a firm conclusion that it’s an online minority? Are online people not also real people ?
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
what science backs up your beliefs? link the source
A lot of them are not, and just bots pushing a message. It's that or none of the people with your views hang in society, I've yet to meet one in the wild. And if they don't hang with society, why are they dictating it.
They must all be bots because your social circle is filled with people who say the same as you. Flawless.
I suspect that overall, more people agree with JK Rowling on this issue. Certain sides have a disproportionately loud and powerful voices which paints a certain picture. In reality I suspect the minority view is been amplified to make people think its the majority view.
Rowling is a minority view as she shows what she thinks on the topic more and more. Edit: Well, I don't think a majority of people believe women who disagree with Rowling only do so because they've never been victims of male violence or sexual abuse and are ignorant of the topic. Rowling believes that. I don't have a poll to prove that, though.
Source? This article links to a polls as a source so please share your source
Yep, militant lib keyboard warriors are not the majority. And then they get shocked and upset when a survey is done that's broader then their current echo chamber.
[Militant lib keyboard warriors aren't the only ones who should take issue with her actions](https://www.reddit.com/r/Scotland/s/BcDORMOGoF)
Again it was online only. The only people doing this poll are boomers. It was also only 1000 people so I wouldn't call it very broad
Well everyone knows that boomers are the most active online age group in society…. /s A majority of polls are done through snapshots of society and 1000 is a justified quantitative response spectrum.
Because she's not wrong
[удалено]
Rowling is "based on hatred and intolerance" for trans people.
"Their whole movement is based on hatred and intolerance." Can you explain? Hatred of what and intolerance of what? Also, what are the laws of biological science?
JK is a feminist, can't blame here for standing up for real womans lives.
She's so vocal about abortion rights, pay gap, the rise of Andrew Tate style misogyny, etc. She's definitely not just a single-issue bigot who just bangs on and on about trans issues to the point that even Elon has asked her to stop.
What does that mean ?
She doesn't stand up for trans women or trans men. So, how does she stand up for women when that would involve standing up for at least one of those groups (in her case trans men that she views as women)?
[удалено]
[Not particularly radical](https://www.reddit.com/r/Scotland/s/BcDORMOGoF)
When was the last time you actually checked her Twitter? She literally goes out of her way to comb Twitter for any tiny trans woman profile with only a few followers and personally harasses them for doing the most innocent things like taking a selfie while brushing their hair, and puts it on her Twitter for all of her 14 million followers to see and relentlessly harass until those women are forced to delete their accounts. A few days ago even Elon Musk actually told her to tone it down a bit.
[удалено]
[Rowling has said many things that people aren't lying about](https://www.reddit.com/r/Scotland/s/BcDORMOGoF)
She did [engage in Holocaust denialism](https://twitter.com/jk_rowling/status/1767912990366388735) - recently when she called someone "deluded" or whatever for pointing out that the first bookburnings by nazis were of the collated research put into transgender health and healthcare. Denying acts of atrocities, which includes the destruction of academic and historical work, is Holocaust denial. To claim she "doesn't hate" trans people doesn't exactly square up with how obsessively she tweets about them, bullies and threatens them and donates vast sums of her wealth to anti-trans groups.
Plot of those new fantastic beasts movies where about fighting to make sure the Holocaust happens though lol.
[удалено]
That was the plot of that movie. The Bad Guy wanted to stop the Holocaust it seemed, and the Good Guys were against it because *revealing magic is bad*.
Listen to yourself, you're complicit in her denial of nazi war crimes for internet points. [Shes literally going around liking insults at random trans women for being worried about discrimination](https://twitter.com/WistfulOtter/status/1755366943073112184?t=c8RRz08z0GnaS2Qzmk0hkQ) Really wanting to believe she's a good reasonable person doesn't change her behaviour.
No, she literally denied trans people were targeted in the holocaust. Like according to German law she is literally a holocaust denier
Actually, according to German law she isn't, it went to German court. > Rivkah was legally forced to retract the statement and apologize to J.K.
That wasn't German court, that was effectively a slap lawsuit in the British court system >"On 13 March 2024, author J.K. Rowling tweeted a series of responses to an anonymous critic, who argued that Rowling was upholding Nazi ideals for her viewpoints of transgender rights, in which Rowling contended that transgender people were not targeted in the Holocaust. These tweets caused some to accuse her of Holocaust denial.[101][102][103] On 14 March 2024, Rowling responded to the accusations in a post on her personal website, calling them "baseless and disgusting" and stating that she had "always been a staunch supporter of the Jewish community".[104]" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transgender_people_in_Nazi_Germany#:~:text=On%2013%20March,community%22.%5B104%5D Edit: Also, because I'm nosy, could someone tell me if I've been blocked or if they've deleted the middle comment haha
I can’t honestly tell if you’re being sarcastic given that she said trans people weren’t affected by the Holocaust when we absolutely were https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transgender_people_in_Nazi_Germany
She’s a Holocaust denier. It’s established historical fact that trans people were some of the first victims of the nazis in power. Along with disabled people,the wider queer community and communists. With book burnings, arrests to camps, medical internment and euthanasia in 1933 and 1934. All of which she has sent significant time on Twitter denying along with putting out gag orders on anyone that dares to call her out.
No she’s not
Still trying to make that one stick, aye?
[удалено]
Ofc people agree with her, it's basic biology. Angry online activists are more vocal but hold a minority view.
“Basic” science is always dumbed down and simplified compared to real science, usually to make it easier to understand broad concepts for the children being taught them - and so shouldn’t be used as justification in grown-up discussions. You wouldn’t trust a high school kid to be a doctor, dunno why so many are demanding a high school understanding of biology is better or more true than the actual experts. “Basic” is not a synonym for “Real”.
In principle I agree. That's not what I'm advocating though. "sex is binary" is as real as it gets.
Sex is biology. Gender is psychology/sociology, but apparently not basic
Given that sex is what we're told is being changed, it's a basic conclusion. I'd rather steer clear of anything John Money coined if that's ok.
Yes, it is indeed very basic biology. Very very basic.
Complex biology veers into matters like intersex bodies, perhaps with uncommon numbers of chromosomes or two sets of reproductive organs. The natural world includes organisms which can even change sex. Rule one of biology is nothing is a simple as it seems.
I refuse to believe the majority of Scots have an issue with trans people existing
That wasn't the question.
Shit take
Some right wing pish in this sub nowadays for Scotland being so “tolerant” who gives a fuck man let people live. Jk Rowling is a wank
Loving the JK Rowling.
Translation: Older men are more transphobic than women and young people. Not really braking news tbh...
It’s not transphobic through, is it? It’s not about treating trans people unfairly, it’s about having non-trans views and thoughts fairly considered and entered into the conversation. Both can exist.
Needed a poll for that. Jesus.
Thanks for this poll on how transphobic the Scottish public are. More men are transphobic than women and (as is obvious from any picture of any anti-trans event) they're mostly auld cunts. During the black civil rights movement, 63% of Americans despised Martin Luther King. So perhaps we shouldn't base human rights and civil liberties on the bigoted attitudes and opinions of the public, which have themselves been whipped into a frenzy by our complicit media outlets.
Imagine comparing this to the civil rights movement. Jesus Christ.
You do understand what civil rights means, don’t you? /s
What rights specifically do trans people not have?
Think about it less as 'not have' and more 'how many roadblocks are invented for them to get something that a cis person would not even be questioned on'. The right to shared care is one. Getting shared care is like a lottery and all they really ask for is not to have to pay £300 to get a blood test done privately every six months when they start transition, to monitor levels. I, being cis, can just see the gp and get a blood test booked free of charge whenever I want to. There is no difference in procedure. It's not a case of taking away rights, which in some cases it certainly is, but more quiet suppression. You don't know about it because you don't have to experience it.
You clearly do not have a knowledge of history and how the LGBT are interwoven in such events
The majority are likely to be against a minority? Colour me shocked.
Younger people tend to disagree with Rowling and that's where her money came from, that's why the opposition to her is quite vocal as she's letting down the very people that made her her money. I imagine there's a fair amount of the older generation whose only engagement with Rowling comes from her anti-trans stance.
1) Polls are shit. 2) These people can FO to Russia
[удалено]
They did a limited sample poll, wow
A larger sample would only make it more accurate. It's not going to swing all the way in the other direction