This cracks me up:
Anti-trans activist Caroline Farrow portrayed her arrest as an aggressive response to "some insulting messages on the internet”
She failed to mention she was arrested for doxing trans woman @flyinglawyer73 who this week received an arson threat...https://t.co/ilHYx9Bbls
— David Gilbert (@daithaigilbert) October 6, 2022
Based on the gigantic picture, you'd think that J.K. Rowling—who lives in Scotland—had been arrested recently by the Surrey police for her anti-trans activism. But no: It was Caroline Farrow who was arrested, and she is nothing more than an "ally" of Rowling, whatever that means.
Clickbait, clickbait, clickbait.
Also not arrested:
TFG
R. Giuliani
M. Gaetz
...and so many more
Rowling does make the top 1,000 of "newsworthy & not arrested."
does = doesn't
Eek.
Hating on JK Rowling must be a reliable click generator. Is it just that there is a disillusioned generation that can't get enough? As a person who never bothered to read the books, I just don't understand why so many people care so much about her opinions.
I'm with you re: caring what she thinks. But, about doxing trans women, activist or otherwise - that's just bad in all ways possible.
It mystifies me (an admittedly older male person) that Gen X and Gen Z (is there a Gen WHY?) hate on J. K. Rowling for having an opinion on whether transwomen/girls are the same as regular women/girls. I think she has raised some arguments or discussion points that are worth considering. Her opponents don't really argue back, though, they vilify her in a way that degrades the discussion. The Guardian in particular loves to hate on J. K. Rowling. The fact that she is a well-known author does not mean that her opinions are either reasonable or not reasonable. But IMO intelligent discussion of this issue is hampered by doctrinaire "influencers." I think Andrew Sullivan has some good points to make on this subject, but some people dislike him as well. What happened to reasoned discussion? Is that counter-revolutionary or something?
What Rowling did was deny agency of a group of people: You do not exist and you do not have the right to exist.
If Rowling has the right to express her thoughts on the matter, so too do people have the right to criticize. You cannot hold the expectation that one's "freedom of speech" (as conceived by many far-right advocates) is a one-way street. As I have long said, speech is consequential, and if it isn't, then it's worthless.
Rowling didn't have to say a thing, but she did. Lots of famous people don't say a thing on lots of topics.
Oh please stop. Just. Stop. I can't take so much nonsense any more. I just can't:
"What Rowling did was deny agency of a group of people"
Prove it.
You know who is actually harming trans people? You. And people like you who make these assertions (seemingly in every corner of the internet) without ever backing them up.
FFS: other than the remarkable feat of making herself into a self-made billionaire by writing young adult fantasy, JK Rowling is about as normal a person as you could possibly imagine. She's also a notable philanthropist.
The idea that she's some sort of cartoon-style villain who runs around denying others their right to exist is the sort of hyperbole that makes trans people and their supporters look like unhinged lunatics.
It may also be worth pointing out that Rowling's utterly mainstream views on trans rights are shared by a majority of people, including those who work at FINA (Fédération Internationale de Natation).
Look up: "Will swimming’s transgender ruling lead to wider change in sports?" on cnn.com:
"Delegates to the FINA congress in Budapest were told by members of the group that the evidence showed that going through male puberty gave trans women swimmers a physical advantage that remained even after hormone treatment as part of their transition."
The modern commandment that "trans women are women" is not progressive; it is, rather, self-destructive and reductive radicalism. No one that I know is against accommodating trans people. Rowling herself certainly hasn't voiced any opposition to reasonable accommodations. But when trans people attempt to enforce an extremist ideology upon the rest of us, they pretty much forsake any good will that might have otherwise been directed their way. And they have no one to blame but themselves. Not Rowling. Themselves.
Okay, I'll bite, but just this once.
This non sequitur attempted to undermine gender identity by confusing it with sexual orientation and biological sex.
Are you sure you want me to push back? I have a lot of time to keep throwing this back at you.
That statement that you quote strikes me as entirely reasonable. Not only is Rowling making some valid points, but they are points that the women's rights movement may want to keep in mind. If there is no such thing as "women," then how do "women" continue fighting for abortion rights? You have provided a quote that presents Rowling as an intelligent and insightful person, one who explicitly asserts, in your own example, her high regard for trans people. So, I repeat my original assertion: you have no actual evidence of her supposed wickedness.
No one says that there is no such thing as "women." This is a delusion that exists in your, and Rowling's, minds. It is an attempt at bullshit framing that allows exactly what is claimed: eliminating the existence of the transgendered.
Thanks for this! You've expressed what I feel about the whole "transphobic" nonsense and attacks on a remrkable writer.
It's as if these guys have never bothered to read a single thing that JK has written ... all of which disproves all of their assertions about her. They've got to lie and insult to make their "points."
As far as I can tell, "trans-activism" is just thinly disguised misogyny.
"Rowling herself certainly hasn't voiced any opposition to reasonable accommodations."
This complete and utter bullshit.
JK Rowling bigotry against trans people comes from the fact that in her mind, the trans movement is trying to erase women from the planet (a complete tin foil hat argument), and in her equating transwomen specifically, as a group of perverts and predators who transition merely to get opportunities to abuse women, which is why she opposes any accommodations towards them when it comes to legal protections or basic rights.
Perhaps you should cut back on the caffeine. This is seriously bonkers stuff. Hey, I hear the local Democratic party is holding a barbecue tonight! Baby back ribs!
Ah but it's the currency of the Empire, this clickbait.
Time to demonetize it, then.