LogFAQs > #941048171

ElatedVenusaur posted...

Yeah, this isn't some context-less tweet into the void: Rowling has a history of boosting trans-exclusionary "feminists" and defending them. Pretending this tweet exists in a vacuum and that her intent is unknowable requires actively refusing to see the problem.

So there is that one tweet about that lady 6 months ago. What else?

You're gonna really have to break it down for me.

What I see is that people are eager to virtue signal their support for trans people. I don't see any real discussion or refutation of her points. Calling Rowling a bigot (something I see a lot of in general lately) just isn't productive and seems highly reductionist as to what her point is.

The reality is that women have had to deal with sexism and the way a cis female experiences that will be much different than what a trans person experiences. It just seems really odd to say trans women are women when they're trans women and all that comes with that. There will be some overlap between the experiences of trans women and cis women, but they are still distinct.

Like a trans person can go through all sorts of therapies, treatments, surgeries, etc. to change what is part of their biological identity to what they feel it should be to match their gender identity. That still won't be the same as being born a cis female. They deserve to be treated with respect and dignity and proper acknowledgment of their gender identity, but it seems incorrect to group them in with cis females in terms of how they experience the world.

It just seems like saying anything other than trans women are women is seen as unacceptable and that there is no room for nuance here.

---

just tell them all your base doesn't belong to us because we were getting stoned...they'll understand-Ken156