Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The Atlantic)   When did J.K. Rowling go from being Hermione to...well, the article says Voldemort but she's really acting like Umbridge   (theatlantic.com) divider line
    More: Creepy, Harry Potter fandom, J. K. Rowling, pieces of fan fiction, books' author, major fan sites, love of Harry Potter, eighth Harry Potter book, Leaky Cauldron  
•       •       •

1051 clicks; posted to Entertainment » on 07 Jul 2020 at 7:42 AM (15 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



215 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2020-07-07 3:52:47 PM  

trialpha: To most of the populace, a woman is someone who has both female sex and female gender.



Okay, I'll bite.

How do you know? When you meet a woman on the street, how would you ever know if they don't match?

Even if you think you can just tell, how can you be certain they're trans and not simply in drag or a crossdresser?

At what point does it become your business?
 
2020-07-07 3:55:10 PM  

Eclectic: *re-checks thread over lunch*

Damn, some of y'all must have thrown your backa out carrying all that water for TERFs

But *thank you, allies* for being here and fighting the good fight. Much respect and love 💜


I'm sorry you and other LBTQG2S+ have to go through this every time there's a Fark thread about these kind of issues and the whargblblbl crowd shows up to tell us all that you're not real people.
 
2020-07-07 3:58:14 PM  

SirMadness: Okay, I'll bite.

How do you know? When you meet a woman on the street, how would you ever know if they don't match?

Even if you think you can just tell, how can you be certain they're trans and not simply in drag or a crossdresser?

At what point does it become your business?


Conservatives have this idea in their head that all mtf trans people look like

78.media.tumblr.comView Full Size


The same people who will spend all day screeching about "smaller government" want to make sure that people only have sex between a man, and a woman (probably in the dark in a missionary position through a blanket with a hole in it)
 
2020-07-07 4:00:25 PM  

SirMadness: Okay, I'll bite.

How do you know? When you meet a woman on the street, how would you ever know if they don't match?

Even if you think you can just tell, how can you be certain they're trans and not simply in drag or a crossdresser?

At what point does it become your business?


On the street? It doesn't matter. It's only relevant when accessing a sex/gender (usually woman) restricted area. And even then, only if not convincing.
 
2020-07-07 4:00:45 PM  

Eclectic: TERF


I see toxic liberals have a new catchphrase to shriek at people who disagree with them.
Along with the old reliable bigot and racist, along with the newish incel.

There are many more but those are the immediate fallbacks and most quickly used.
 
2020-07-07 4:03:38 PM  

trialpha: I don't either. But women do. Because they've spent their entire lives with "someone who looks like a man walking into their washroom = problem"


So your argument boils down to enforcing the idea that's it's ok to assume transwomen are sexual predators?  Is it ok to assume a gay school teacher is a rapist?  A black guy walking down the street is a mugger?  The problem isn't the transperson, it's the bigot who thinks they're a threat.

trialpha: "Not worth discussing", "idiots", etc. You've just lost the support of anybody who may have been mostly on your side but needed to be convinced of the remainder. Now, instead of a possible ally, you have someone going "fark your cause"


For the same reason I'm not going to listen/debate/indulge a Nazi on race discussions, I'm not going to indulge transphobes and TERFS on gender issues.  It's not worth the time, and it slows progress.  Everything has to stop while you argue for the basic human rights of someone.  We don't need to "have the discussion" on whether black people can use the same water fountain anymore.  Someone who is "mostly on my side" but calls the police on a black guy in a park isn't a possible ally.  They're a racist.
 
2020-07-07 4:04:11 PM  
trialpha:
On the street? It doesn't matter. It's only relevant when accessing a sex/gender (usually woman) restricted area. And even then, only if not convincing.

So in other words, women in the bathroom are threatened if they perceive other women in the bathroom to be sufficiently ugly enough that their imagination paints a picture of brutal assault. Is that right? How did you come to this conclusion?
 
2020-07-07 4:04:22 PM  

Trik: Eclectic: TERF

I see toxic liberals have a new catchphrase to shriek at people who disagree with them.
Along with the old reliable bigot and racist, along with the newish incel.

There are many more but those are the immediate fallbacks and most quickly used.


What are you on about? Eclectic said that there are people echoing TERF talking points. You're the one shrieking.
 
2020-07-07 4:05:33 PM  

Enomai: You're the one shrieking.


umm, no.
 
2020-07-07 4:06:04 PM  

Trik: Eclectic: TERF

I see toxic liberals have a new catchphrase to shriek at people who disagree with them.
Along with the old reliable bigot and racist, along with the newish incel.

There are many more but those are the immediate fallbacks and most quickly used.


Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-07-07 4:07:11 PM  

SirMadness: So in other words, women in the bathroom are threatened if they perceive other women in the bathroom to be sufficiently ugly enough that their imagination paints a picture of brutal assault. Is that right? How did you come to this conclusion?


Yes. Don't look at me - this is what I've been hearing from women.
 
2020-07-07 4:07:13 PM  

trialpha: "Not worth discussing", "idiots", etc. You've just lost the support of anybody who may have been mostly on your side but needed to be convinced of the remainder. Now, instead of a possible ally, you have someone going "fark your cause"


If the tone of one person is enough for you to galvanize your opinion that a group of people don't deserve equality or protection then maybe you aren't as open minded as you think.
 
2020-07-07 4:09:45 PM  

trialpha: Yes. Don't look at me - this is what I've been hearing from women.


Yeah, and I hear white people talking about "black people" and I hear straight people talking about those "gay people".  What's your point?
 
2020-07-07 4:12:13 PM  
Hey, it's me. One of those scary scary trans women you're trying to tell where she's allowed/not allowed to pee. You want to force me into the men's bathroom where I'll be targeted for assault? Where I'll be outed against my will in public? F*ck you to death with an iron cactus.

Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-07-07 4:12:16 PM  

trialpha: SirMadness: So in other words, women in the bathroom are threatened if they perceive other women in the bathroom to be sufficiently ugly enough that their imagination paints a picture of brutal assault. Is that right? How did you come to this conclusion?

Yes. Don't look at me - this is what I've been hearing from women.


Okay. Do you feel threatened when bigger, stronger men utilize a public washroom at the same time as you?

Regardless of that answer. How many times have you actually been assaulted in a public washroom?

Even if that answer is greater than zero, how often does the perception of a threat align with an actual danger?
 
2020-07-07 4:21:39 PM  

Geotpf: hammer85: Geotpf: Mindfield of a subject, obviously, but here's one place where there's at least a logical argument: Sports.

Men and women are separated in most sports, in large part because men have distinct advantages over women in many/most sports due to muscle mass, etc.; if women and men competed against each other in such sports (assuming the same level of practice and training) men would beat women all or almost all of the time in such sports.

So, should a trans woman (especially assuming no hormones, surgery, etc.) be allowed to compete against people who were born female, considering this advantage?

/I'm full on devil's advocating this here
//in general, I tend to go by "people are who or what they want to be"

Fark this argument and fark everything about considering it "logical".  Farking just respect and love people for who they are, not what you want to dictate them to be and do.

To get a larger percentage of people to accept trans people for who they are, reasonable counters to arguments like this need to be made.  Just screaming "Fark you" is not helpful.


I mean, it is.  Civil Rights entire history are people saying fark you when told to go back to their place and accept it.  There is no reasonable counter to slavery, or forcing people into being who they aren't so that assholes can feel better about themselves.
 
2020-07-07 4:29:24 PM  

Trik: Enomai: You're the one shrieking.

umm, no.


Your contribution to this thread has been, to paraphrase: "Libs be like", "you know how libs are", libs, libs, libs. "Libs want to make me tolerant, ain't gonna happen".

So, you know, shrieking.
 
2020-07-07 4:35:09 PM  

trialpha: Khellendros: See, this is where you completely trip over your own argument. The public doesn't have to change shiat. Stop bugging people about what goddamn bathroom they use. I don't have to change a damn thing about my bathroom habits, regardless of whether a transperson decides to use the bathroom I'm in or not. Leave. Them. The. Fark. Alone. About. It.

I don't either. But women do. Because they've spent their entire lives with "someone who looks like a man walking into their washroom = problem"

Khellendros: Utterly irrelevant, and people like you seem to have a pathological need to make definitions based on biological distinctions you clearly don't understand to exclude people. We don't need to have the lunch counter argument again. We don't need "separate but equal" bathrooms based on gender, sex, genitalia, testosterone levels, Y chromosome tests, or anything else.

At this point, you're effectively advocating for unisex bathrooms. I don't have a problem with that (as long as urinals are still present), but again, women do.

Khellendros: I didn't scream. I said if people's arguments are based on stupid idea, they're not worth discussing. Telling someone who's convinced that blacks shouldn't have the same rights until we define if they need to wear reflectors at night while jogging isn't a worthwhile discussion. And they're idiots if they're making those arguments. Same with sporting classifications or whether bathrooms should be based on sex, gender, or some other arbitrary concept. I don't give a fark if JK Rowling is uncomfortable with someone in the stall next to her. If they're in there pissing, leave them alone about it.

"Not worth discussing", "idiots", etc. You've just lost the support of anybody who may have been mostly on your side but needed to be convinced of the remainder. Now, instead of a possible ally, you have someone going "fark your cause"


Why is it always women?  Why do we assume women are so farking precious and helpless that they can't even pee in a farking private stall without worried that there might be another woman in the stall next to them who might be using a penis to pee at the same time.

What about men having to go against transgender men in sports?  What about transmen in men's bathrooms?  I'm willing to bet more transmen are assaulted in bathrooms than transwomen or people pretending to be them assaulting women in them.

A person whipping their dick out in a ladies locker room, trans or not, is still harassment.  There's nothing a bathroom bill/sports bill is designed to do is parrot bullshiat think of the virgin white women who are sacred above all else but don't somehow also deserve their own body autonomy and fark trans people because I think they don't deserve rights.

I almost feel bad for transmen.  It's like they don't even matter enough to be discriminated against publicly.
 
2020-07-07 4:36:40 PM  

Commander Lysdexic: truthandjustice: Trik: bglove25: If you don't like what JK Rowling says or thinks, don't listen to her. Problem solved.

Liberals believe they have the right to control your thoughts and opinions.

I am a liberal.
And I've recently learned - that you are correct.

The world is not flat.
vaccines work.
transwomen are women.

Each of those three statements will throw a group of people into a frenzy of righteous indignation, claiming that they are the real victims of an alleged conspiracy to control them and force them to think a certain way.
All three groups are wrong.

\Does your username refer to the things you hate and want to see erased?


You do not have the right to control the way any one else thinks. You do not have the ABILITY to control the way anyone else thinks.
And I'm not a hater.
I'm a lover :)
 
2020-07-07 4:48:01 PM  

bglove25: PickleBarrel: bglove25: If you don't like what JK Rowling says or thinks, don't listen to her. Problem solved.

That does not solve the problem because what she says harms others.

Speech is not violence. Sorry. Heck, she never even threatens violence.


Ever heard the phrase "The pen is mightier than the sword"?

One of the things that people do to make it easier to harm others is to dehumanize them.  That IS speech.  The aggregate weight of constant dehumanization, the constant slander and libel of who these people are, the steady stream of disrespect and hate; these things encourage others to join in the hate and eventually commit physical and emotional harm.  When this becomes systemic, then you really start getting into the subtle persistent evil that can be committed against people.

So you are correct, she did not incite violence and words themselves cannot harm others in the literal sense, but she did encourage others to join in the hate and eventually, there is and will be violence committed.
 
2020-07-07 4:52:28 PM  

bglove25: PickleBarrel: bglove25: If you don't like what JK Rowling says or thinks, don't listen to her. Problem solved.

That does not solve the problem because what she says harms others.

Speech is not violence. Sorry. Heck, she never even threatens violence.


Henry II: Will no one rid me of this turbulent priest?
 
2020-07-07 4:56:26 PM  

CanisNoir: Enomai: CanisNoir: Enomai: God damn, three of these in 3 days? Fark is really farming this topic right now. Has to be exhausting for trans people to keep defending this with the same posts pointed at different screen names.

As exhausting as it is for Lesbians having to defend themselves against accusations of Bigotry because they feel that not liking male sex organs is a large part of their Lesbian Identity.

Yes, it's exhausting but it's a debate that needs to be had.

If it needs to be had, I have questions as to whether an anonymous forum as snarky as this place would be the appropriate venue for it. Lesbians might not be attracted to male parts, but pansexuals probably do not have an issue with them since sex isn't the primary vector for attraction. Why then isn't it sufficient to just say that you aren't into those people? If you aren't bigoted then don't take offense when someone tries to label you as such. You have agency as much as anyone does to choose a partner for yourself. I'm a southerner who doesn't fly confederate flags and thinks racism is one of THE things holding back humanity. The mocking in the public space of the "south will rise" jackasses doesn't land with me and doesn't make me defensive.

Well first, I stated up front that the Trans community was suffering and that needs attention, I also stipulated that Social Constructs were real and that any one persons identity was valid. I do not see any attempts at mockery in that - there tacit recognition of each individuals "Truth" as being valid.

As to why a public forum? Because it's a public debate, and sadly the venues with which to have it in are very limited. I try to keep my points to the broader philosophical debate as I see it and hope I get some intelligent people from the other side to challenge me and I try and ignore the chaff - occasionally piping in, admittedly.

I think I am right but am no way claiming I absolutely am right - this is why I hope for intelligent challenge.

Regarding ...


As a person who identifies as a lesbian, I must say that you seem to be rather black and white in your assessment of what makes a lesbian a lesbian.  Trans women who identify as lesbian, ARE lesbians.  Lesbian is an identity and a sexual orientation.

You are assuming all sorts of things about individuals here.  Some lesbians will not enter into relationships with an individual possessing male genitalia.  Some really don't care about genitalia possessed as long as the person generally fits their type and the sex is compatible.  Personally, I'm not interested in men.  I'm also not attracted to trans men either, because they're men. I don't care what is or isn't in their pants, I'm attracted to women.  I refer to my partners by she/hers.  By your logic, lesbians should be dating trans men and cis women.  But really you miss the main point of these lesbians being deplatformed for their 'preferences.'  A man having a blog or youtube channel or whatever and using that to say that he's just 'not attracted to black women' is racist and should be treated as such.  A lesbian saying she won't date another woman because of her physical attributes on a public platform invites the same kinds of response.

It seems to me that you are essentially boiling relationships down to sex and sexual objectification.  It's also the same simplistic way you seem to treat biological sex.  Biological sex is expressed in so many different ways via different mechanisms.  As others have pointed out, you're completely ignoring intersex individuals.  Nature doesn't just fit neatly into binary boxes.
 
2020-07-07 4:59:17 PM  

Geotpf: hammer85: Geotpf: Mindfield of a subject, obviously, but here's one place where there's at least a logical argument: Sports.

Men and women are separated in most sports, in large part because men have distinct advantages over women in many/most sports due to muscle mass, etc.; if women and men competed against each other in such sports (assuming the same level of practice and training) men would beat women all or almost all of the time in such sports.

So, should a trans woman (especially assuming no hormones, surgery, etc.) be allowed to compete against people who were born female, considering this advantage?

/I'm full on devil's advocating this here
//in general, I tend to go by "people are who or what they want to be"

Fark this argument and fark everything about considering it "logical".  Farking just respect and love people for who they are, not what you want to dictate them to be and do.

To get a larger percentage of people to accept trans people for who they are, reasonable counters to arguments like this need to be made.  Just screaming "Fark you" is not helpful.


Dude. If these people were reasonable, then we wouldn't be having this conversation.

Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-07-07 5:00:34 PM  

Armored Vomit Doll: bglove25: PickleBarrel: bglove25: If you don't like what JK Rowling says or thinks, don't listen to her. Problem solved.

That does not solve the problem because what she says harms others.

Speech is not violence. Sorry. Heck, she never even threatens violence.

Henry II: Will no one rid me of this turbulent priest?


sigh...and I wasted all those other words...
 
2020-07-07 5:04:07 PM  

PickleBarrel: Armored Vomit Doll: bglove25: PickleBarrel: bglove25: If you don't like what JK Rowling says or thinks, don't listen to her. Problem solved.

That does not solve the problem because what she says harms others.

Speech is not violence. Sorry. Heck, she never even threatens violence.

Henry II: Will no one rid me of this turbulent priest?

sigh...and I wasted all those other words...


Brevity is ... wit.
 
2020-07-07 5:06:19 PM  

Trik: Trik: bglove25: If you don't like what JK Rowling says or thinks, don't listen to her. Problem solved.

Liberals believe they have the right to control your thoughts and opinions.

Oh and that they have the right to punish you until you comply.


"Get that son of a biatch off the field right now"

-famous liberal
 
2020-07-07 5:16:52 PM  

Eclectic: Hey, it's me. One of those scary scary trans women you're trying to tell where she's allowed/not allowed to pee. You want to force me into the men's bathroom where I'll be targeted for assault? Where I'll be outed against my will in public? F*ck you to death with an iron cactus.

[Fark user image 384x624]


Ye gads, you're terrifying - run!

(Because I'm gonna run away from anyone I see that's farking someone to death with an iron cactus.)

/the rest of it?
//not so terrifying
///no, no idea wtf is with a bunch of my fellow olds and oldishes
 
2020-07-07 5:19:59 PM  

FeuDePoubelle: CanisNoir: Enomai: CanisNoir: Enomai: God damn, three of these in 3 days? Fark is really farming this topic right now. Has to be exhausting for trans people to keep defending this with the same posts pointed at different screen names.

As exhausting as it is for Lesbians having to defend themselves against accusations of Bigotry because they feel that not liking male sex organs is a large part of their Lesbian Identity.

Yes, it's exhausting but it's a debate that needs to be had.

If it needs to be had, I have questions as to whether an anonymous forum as snarky as this place would be the appropriate venue for it. Lesbians might not be attracted to male parts, but pansexuals probably do not have an issue with them since sex isn't the primary vector for attraction. Why then isn't it sufficient to just say that you aren't into those people? If you aren't bigoted then don't take offense when someone tries to label you as such. You have agency as much as anyone does to choose a partner for yourself. I'm a southerner who doesn't fly confederate flags and thinks racism is one of THE things holding back humanity. The mocking in the public space of the "south will rise" jackasses doesn't land with me and doesn't make me defensive.

Well first, I stated up front that the Trans community was suffering and that needs attention, I also stipulated that Social Constructs were real and that any one persons identity was valid. I do not see any attempts at mockery in that - there tacit recognition of each individuals "Truth" as being valid.

As to why a public forum? Because it's a public debate, and sadly the venues with which to have it in are very limited. I try to keep my points to the broader philosophical debate as I see it and hope I get some intelligent people from the other side to challenge me and I try and ignore the chaff - occasionally piping in, admittedly.

I think I am right but am no way claiming I absolutely am right - this is why I hope for intelligent challenge.

Regarding ...

As a person who identifies as a lesbian, I must say that you seem to be rather black and white in your assessment of what makes a lesbian a lesbian.  Trans women who identify as lesbian, ARE lesbians.  Lesbian is an identity and a sexual orientation.

You are assuming all sorts of things about individuals here.  Some lesbians will not enter into relationships with an individual possessing male genitalia.  Some really don't care about genitalia possessed as long as the person generally fits their type and the sex is compatible.  Personally, I'm not interested in men.  I'm also not attracted to trans men either, because they're men. I don't care what is or isn't in their pants, I'm attracted to women.  I refer to my partners by she/hers.  By your logic, lesbians should be dating trans men and cis women.  But really you miss the main point of these lesbians being deplatformed for their 'preferences.'  A man having a blog or youtube channel or whatever and using that to say that he's just 'not attracted to black women' is racist and should be treated as such.  A lesbian saying she won't date another woman because of her physical attributes on a public platform invites the same kinds of response.

It seems to me that you are essentially boiling relationships down to sex and sexual objectification.  It's also the same simplistic way you seem to treat biological sex.  Biological sex is expressed in so many different ways via different mechanisms.  As others have pointed out, you're completely ignoring intersex individuals.  Nature doesn't just fit neatly into binary boxes.


Well said, but you won't make any progress with him. He's sealioning like he always does.
 
2020-07-07 5:23:50 PM  

bglove25: PickleBarrel: bglove25: If you don't like what JK Rowling says or thinks, don't listen to her. Problem solved.

That does not solve the problem because what she says harms others.

Speech is not violence. Sorry. Heck, she never even threatens violence.


It is often used to justify violence. You don't get credit for not threatening violence when you find yourself in wholehearted agreement with those who do. Especially when they turn around and use your words to justify their violence.
 
2020-07-07 5:41:25 PM  

truthandjustice: You do not have the right to control the way any one else thinks. You do not have the ABILITY to control the way anyone else thinks.


If you truly believe this, then stop acting like you're the victim.
 
2020-07-07 5:59:50 PM  
Leftists want to destroy people's lives and take away their ability to earn a living or get an education simply because they have different opinions - even if they are fellow leftists like JK Rowling. 

Look in the mirror and you will see the biggest evil plaguing the world right now.
 
2020-07-07 6:07:36 PM  

Khellendros: CanisNoir: So I admit, I did not major in Biology, so I pulled my answer from Live Sciences article :Chromosomes: Definition & Structurehttps://www.livescience.com/2​7248-chromosomes.htmlHow sex is determinedHumans have an additional pair of sex chromosomes for a total of 46 chromosomes. The sex chromosomes are referred to as X and Y, and their combination determines a person's sex. Typically, human females have two X chromosomes while males possess an XY pairing. This XY sex-determination system is found in most mammals as well as some reptiles and plants.Whether a person has XX or XY chromosomes is determined when a sperm fertilizes an egg. Unlike the body's other cells, the cells in the egg and sperm - called gametes or sex cells - possess only one chromosome. Gametes are produced by meiosis cell division, which results in the divided cells having half the number of chromosomes as the parent, or progenitor, cells. In the case of humans, this means that parent cells have two chromosomes and gametes have one.All of the gametes in the mother's eggs possess X chromosomes. The father's sperm contains about half X and half Y chromosomes. The sperm are the variable factor in determining the sex of the baby. If the sperm carries an X chromosome, it will combine with the egg's X chromosome to form a female zygote. If the sperm carries a Y chromosome, it will result in a male.

This is a very good middle school explanation.  But it's a statistical argument focusing on a general case.

Among a sizable portion of the population, there is a significant disconnect between the bits between their legs, the chromosomes they carry, and the juices flowing in their bodies.  There are many people with a penis who have XX chromosomes, or XY with a vagina.  There are some that have both.  There are some with XXY (Klinfelters and non-Klinefelters), XYY, XXXY, XXYY, XO, and other combinations as well.

Many have completely disparate sexual or genital development from their general physic ...


BTW, you didn't mention it directly here, so I'm not sure if you are aware of it or not, but look into chimerism if you haven't run across it..  That is always good to bring up in discussions on this topic.

/Have deliberately made chimeric chickens in the past.  Too much work to be viable in agriculture, unfortunately.
 
2020-07-07 6:39:19 PM  

soporific: bglove25: PickleBarrel: bglove25: If you don't like what JK Rowling says or thinks, don't listen to her. Problem solved.

That does not solve the problem because what she says harms others.

Speech is not violence. Sorry. Heck, she never even threatens violence.

It is often used to justify violence. You don't get credit for not threatening violence when you find yourself in wholehearted agreement with those who do. Especially when they turn around and use your words to justify their violence.


By your logic, we can hold you personally responsible and destroy your life because you are in political agreement with the following people:

- James Hodgkinson - leftist activist who shot Congressman Steve Scalise
- Micah Xavier Johnson - BLM activist who killed 5 Dallas Police Officers
- The BLM rioters who killed David Dorn and Secoriea Turner and killed or injured scores of others
- etc, etc, etc.

Heck, let's add the Ted Kaczynski (the Unabomber) to the list.  He was a left-wing environmentalist.

The ideals you support sparked this violence.  So now we can some after you personally right?
 
2020-07-07 7:06:18 PM  

garron: Leftists want to destroy people's lives and take away their ability to earn a living or get an education simply because they have different opinions - even if they are fellow leftists like JK Rowling. 

Look in the mirror and you will see the biggest evil plaguing the world right now.


How do you know this? You found an issue of Leftist Monthly lying around? Did someone leave a bulleted list at your local gas station? Not a single person in this thread has stated that Rowling or her progeny should starve to death or said that she doesn't deserve to get an education. So ship that shiat because you're talking out of your ass.

BTW, is this "get an education" bit springing from the dumbasses who have had social media vids show up where they're dropping n bombs leading their acceptances to various universities to be dropped? Those people are the true victims?
 
2020-07-07 7:25:01 PM  

Armored Vomit Doll: Khellendros: CanisNoir: So I admit, I did not major in Biology, so I pulled my answer from Live Sciences article :Chromosomes: Definition & Structurehttps://www.livescience.com/2​7248-chromosomes.htmlHow sex is determinedHumans have an additional pair of sex chromosomes for a total of 46 chromosomes. The sex chromosomes are referred to as X and Y, and their combination determines a person's sex. Typically, human females have two X chromosomes while males possess an XY pairing. This XY sex-determination system is found in most mammals as well as some reptiles and plants.Whether a person has XX or XY chromosomes is determined when a sperm fertilizes an egg. Unlike the body's other cells, the cells in the egg and sperm - called gametes or sex cells - possess only one chromosome. Gametes are produced by meiosis cell division, which results in the divided cells having half the number of chromosomes as the parent, or progenitor, cells. In the case of humans, this means that parent cells have two chromosomes and gametes have one.All of the gametes in the mother's eggs possess X chromosomes. The father's sperm contains about half X and half Y chromosomes. The sperm are the variable factor in determining the sex of the baby. If the sperm carries an X chromosome, it will combine with the egg's X chromosome to form a female zygote. If the sperm carries a Y chromosome, it will result in a male.

This is a very good middle school explanation.  But it's a statistical argument focusing on a general case.

Among a sizable portion of the population, there is a significant disconnect between the bits between their legs, the chromosomes they carry, and the juices flowing in their bodies.  There are many people with a penis who have XX chromosomes, or XY with a vagina.  There are some that have both.  There are some with XXY (Klinfelters and non-Klinefelters), XYY, XXXY, XXYY, XO, and other combinations as well.

Many have completely disparate sexual or genital development from their general physic ...

BTW, you didn't mention it directly here, so I'm not sure if you are aware of it or not, but look into chimerism if you haven't run across it..  That is always good to bring up in discussions on this topic.

/Have deliberately made chimeric chickens in the past.  Too much work to be viable in agriculture, unfortunately.


Chimerism is fascinating. Best guess for my individual intersex variation is that I absorbed my fraternal twin in utero.

Which is why when someone kevtches about "but your chromosomes!", I get to ask them "well, which set of my chromosomes are you referring to?". Because depending on which tissue you sample, there are two potential results.

I bring it up sometimes in these threads, but tend to not jump right to it, because I've seen too many "oh, you're ok then but other trans women blah blah blah". It shouldn't matter why I'm trans, and I had to transition the same as every other trans person does. Same legal hurdles. Even *more* medical hurdles than many, as the "fix" my folks had done when I was small so they could raise me male made some things more difficult.

But hot damn does it make me shake my head at all the "experts" in here with their hot takes on sex, gender, and reproductive biology.
 
2020-07-07 7:54:59 PM  

Geotpf: Mindfield of a subject, obviously, but here's one place where there's at least a logical argument: Sports.

Men and women are separated in most sports, in large part because men have distinct advantages over women in many/most sports due to muscle mass, etc.; if women and men competed against each other in such sports (assuming the same level of practice and training) men would beat women all or almost all of the time in such sports.

So, should a trans woman (especially assuming no hormones, surgery, etc.) be allowed to compete against people who were born female, considering this advantage?

/I'm full on devil's advocating this here
//in general, I tend to go by "people are who or what they want to be"


I'm glad you brought this up. I'm liberal and consider myself open minded and not bound by tradition or some desperate need to cling to old ways. But I have to admit that when I hear a parent of a daughter who was born female ask why she should have to compete against females who were born male, I'm at a loss when trying to think of what the answer to that would be.

My position, as best as I've been able to work out, is that the question of who can compete against whom is strictly a matter of keeping things competitive. This means if someone is not allowed to compete against girls who were born girls, this rule is not denying the would be competitor is a girl. The rule is setting parameters for competitive purposes. You can't look to organized sports for validation of who you are, that's not their purpose or responsibility. Neither can they deny who you are. All they can do is say if you meet the requirements or not.

If we say the boys' little league won't allow adults to play, we are not passing judgement on the sexual identity of those adults. We aren't allowing it because it would tilt things against the boys who are not adults. So what am I missing here? Is there something going on with being trans that negates any potential physical advantage? Are we supposed to shrug and say it doesn't matter if someone has an advantage? If so, what's the point of competition then, keeping track of wins/losses and stats?

And I don't trivialize this question because people, including me, can laugh at the idea of parents worrying about this but I keep in mind I probably worry about my share of things that other people would laugh at. So my answer to parents like that won't be "Who cares?".
 
2020-07-07 8:10:53 PM  

garron: Leftists want to destroy people's lives and take away their ability to earn a living or get an education simply because they have different opinions - even if they are fellow leftists like JK Rowling. 

Look in the mirror and you will see the biggest evil plaguing the world right now.


Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-07-07 8:17:29 PM  

Enomai: Trik: Enomai: You're the one shrieking.

umm, no.

Your contribution to this thread has been, to paraphrase: "Libs be like", "you know how libs are", libs, libs, libs. "Libs want to make me tolerant, ain't gonna happen".

So, you know, shrieking.


No indoor speaking level pointing out what liberals do to those with differing opinions.
Things like doxing, stalking, harassing families, harassing employers or sponsors.
Name calling and so on.
 
2020-07-07 8:22:10 PM  

Eclectic: Armored Vomit Doll: Khellendros: CanisNoir: So I admit, I did not major in Biology, so I pulled my answer from Live Sciences article :Chromosomes: Definition & Structurehttps://www.livescience.com/2​7248-chromosomes.htmlHow sex is determinedHumans have an additional pair of sex chromosomes for a total of 46 chromosomes. The sex chromosomes are referred to as X and Y, and their combination determines a person's sex. Typically, human females have two X chromosomes while males possess an XY pairing. This XY sex-determination system is found in most mammals as well as some reptiles and plants.Whether a person has XX or XY chromosomes is determined when a sperm fertilizes an egg. Unlike the body's other cells, the cells in the egg and sperm - called gametes or sex cells - possess only one chromosome. Gametes are produced by meiosis cell division, which results in the divided cells having half the number of chromosomes as the parent, or progenitor, cells. In the case of humans, this means that parent cells have two chromosomes and gametes have one.All of the gametes in the mother's eggs possess X chromosomes. The father's sperm contains about half X and half Y chromosomes. The sperm are the variable factor in determining the sex of the baby. If the sperm carries an X chromosome, it will combine with the egg's X chromosome to form a female zygote. If the sperm carries a Y chromosome, it will result in a male.

This is a very good middle school explanation.  But it's a statistical argument focusing on a general case.

Among a sizable portion of the population, there is a significant disconnect between the bits between their legs, the chromosomes they carry, and the juices flowing in their bodies.  There are many people with a penis who have XX chromosomes, or XY with a vagina.  There are some that have both.  There are some with XXY (Klinfelters and non-Klinefelters), XYY, XXXY, XXYY, XO, and other combinations as well.

Many have completely disparate sexual or genital development from their general physic ...

BTW, you didn't mention it directly here, so I'm not sure if you are aware of it or not, but look into chimerism if you haven't run across it..  That is always good to bring up in discussions on this topic.

/Have deliberately made chimeric chickens in the past.  Too much work to be viable in agriculture, unfortunately.

Chimerism is fascinating. Best guess for my individual intersex variation is that I absorbed my fraternal twin in utero.

Which is why when someone kevtches about "but your chromosomes!", I get to ask them "well, which set of my chromosomes are you referring to?". Because depending on which tissue you sample, there are two potential results.

I bring it up sometimes in these threads, but tend to not jump right to it, because I've seen too many "oh, you're ok then but other trans women blah blah blah". It shouldn't matter why I'm trans, and I had to transition the same as every other trans person does. Same legal hurdles. Even *more* medical hurdles than many, as the "fix" my folks had done when I was small so they could raise me male made some things more difficult.

But hot damn does it make me shake my head at all the "experts" in here with their hot takes on sex, gender, and reproductive biology.


Gods, there are way too many legal and medical hurdles to jump over.  All it takes is one person somewhere to conveniently lose something to delay things for months, or a doctor simply refusing to provide treatment (life saving or otherwise).  This process has been maddening for me without having to worry about some overzealous woman claiming she needs to know what is between my legs.  That anxiety sucks no matter how femme I look.

Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-07-07 8:41:48 PM  

Birnone: Geotpf: Mindfield of a subject, obviously, but here's one place where there's at least a logical argument: Sports.

Men and women are separated in most sports, in large part because men have distinct advantages over women in many/most sports due to muscle mass, etc.; if women and men competed against each other in such sports (assuming the same level of practice and training) men would beat women all or almost all of the time in such sports.

So, should a trans woman (especially assuming no hormones, surgery, etc.) be allowed to compete against people who were born female, considering this advantage?

/I'm full on devil's advocating this here
//in general, I tend to go by "people are who or what they want to be"

I'm glad you brought this up. I'm liberal and consider myself open minded and not bound by tradition or some desperate need to cling to old ways. But I have to admit that when I hear a parent of a daughter who was born female ask why she should have to compete against females who were born male, I'm at a loss when trying to think of what the answer to that would be.

My position, as best as I've been able to work out, is that the question of who can compete against whom is strictly a matter of keeping things competitive. This means if someone is not allowed to compete against girls who were born girls, this rule is not denying the would be competitor is a girl. The rule is setting parameters for competitive purposes. You can't look to organized sports for validation of who you are, that's not their purpose or responsibility. Neither can they deny who you are. All they can do is say if you meet the requirements or not.

If we say the boys' little league won't allow adults to play, we are not passing judgement on the sexual identity of those adults. We aren't allowing it because it would tilt things against the boys who are not adults. So what am I missing here? Is there something going on with being trans that negates any potential physical advantage? Are we ...


WHO... FARKING...CARES

Why?  Why the fark does this keep getting brought up?  Guess what, that daughter is practically guaranteed to suck at sports.  Because 99.99999999999999999% of kids in school sports do.  Who farking cares that there's a transwoman that might be faster than their little precious, whose running a 13 minute two mile, when the state record is 10.

I raced against women and played soccer with and against them my entire school life.  Some of them beat me.  Did I farking cry about it?  No.  Did they cry they had to run a two mile against boys?  No.  Because no one wants to watch eight separate runs instead of four of people going around in circles for two miles.  Some of the relays were mixed gender teams because they just didn't have enough to do all four.  No one farking cares except busybodies who want to "care" to discriminate against LGBT folks.

Why did you use transwoman as your example instead of transmen?  Do you just assume a transman can't beat a non-transman?  I mean, think of the awful humiliation someone might feel when someone AFAB beats little Timmy at football?  That's just unacceptable.  Hysteria, dogs marrying cats!  God forbid someone be better at something than little Timmy!  Why don't we just burn all of society so that Timmy can get his farking trophy?

WHY WON'T ANYONE THINK OF THE NON-TRANS BOYS?

And why still won't anyone think of the transmen?
 
2020-07-07 8:47:25 PM  

Trik: Enomai: Trik: Enomai: You're the one shrieking.

umm, no.

Your contribution to this thread has been, to paraphrase: "Libs be like", "you know how libs are", libs, libs, libs. "Libs want to make me tolerant, ain't gonna happen".

So, you know, shrieking.

No indoor speaking level pointing out what liberals do to those with differing opinions.
Things like doxing, stalking, harassing families, harassing employers or sponsors.
Name calling and so on.


Lol. Here's my calm indoor speaking voice pointing out that you used "toxic liberal" as a pejorative so you yourself are name calling in this very thread. I guess we need not dwell on the fact that the original doxxing was in the 90s and was when right wing extremists posted a list of abortion providers complete with markings for wounded and killed doctors who performed a procedure protected by US law. Are you just upset that your adversaries now use the tactic? They hardly have a monopoly on it. Harassing sponsors? I still remember the conservatives picketing the small businesses in New Orleans who advertised on the Stern show. Evidently this is now bad because the other side does it. Harassing families? Like the Westboro Baptist right wingers who harass the families of dead soldiers, you mean like that or is there a different situation? Cause they aren't left wing. Stalking, you mean like when the pizzagate conspiracy people showed up with guns looking for abused kids to a legit business or do you mean like when the Gamergaters forced people to leave their homes under death threats? Those also aren't leftists.

Clear the mote from your own eye, sir.
 
2020-07-07 10:53:27 PM  

thatguyoverthere70: truthandjustice: You do not have the right to control the way any one else thinks. You do not have the ABILITY to control the way anyone else thinks.

If you truly believe this, then stop acting like you're the victim.


Say what now.
Not THAT is projection.
???
Please point to my victim act. When did it happen? What time.. which post ... where ??
 
2020-07-08 2:18:18 AM  
CanisNoir:

This confuses me, "Gender is a social construct that is separate from Sex" has no basis in scientific reasoning and cannot be proven through the Scientific Method

Are you posting from 1972?
 
2020-07-08 2:27:46 AM  
trialpha:

You've just lost the support of anybody who may have been mostly on your side but needed to be convinced of the remainder. Now, instead of a possible ally, you have someone going "fark your cause"

The people who are openly disregarding the humanity of another person for things that have no impact on them, as bigots like Rowling are willing to do, aren't interested in becoming allies.
 
2020-07-08 7:52:43 AM  

truthandjustice: thatguyoverthere70: truthandjustice: You do not have the right to control the way any one else thinks. You do not have the ABILITY to control the way anyone else thinks.

If you truly believe this, then stop acting like you're the victim.

Say what now.
Not THAT is projection.
???
Please point to my victim act. When did it happen? What time.. which post ... where ??


1. The thread from a couple of days ago where you said you were there because you were morbidly fascinated to see other liberals attacking you.

2. Your initial writings in this thread, where you just had to point out that you agree with that farker and you also think your fellow liberals are so mean and that they try to dictate what others think and say.

3. The post I responded to and quoted directly above where you say "You do not have the right to control the way any one else thinks. You do not have the ABILITY to control the way anyone else thinks" Because for you this is all about the feelings you get when YOU get when YOU feel attacked and when YOU think it's all about someone trying to control the way YOU think. For you, this isn't about trans people and their rights, it's about your right to say you agree with JK Rowling.

If you want to agree with Rowling, go for it. No one here has stopped you.
 
2020-07-08 8:04:24 AM  
These threads stress me out.
 
2020-07-08 8:16:03 AM  

thatguyoverthere70: These threads stress me out.


They suck the life out of me. The same tired-ass "I'm not anti-trans, but..." arguments in every single thread for the 17 years I've been on Fark. The individual posters are slightly different from thread to thread, but it's the same script.

I've tried hard to educate. To be visible, at least. To push back against the worst of it. But it gets so old. And when we reach a saturation point like we have this week with four Rowling/trans threads in 72 hours, most of us in the Fark trans community have to walk away for our mental health. Which unfortunately means that sometimes the threads get even worse.

I am so grateful for the allies that fight for us when we're not here, because we just get ground to paste and need breaks.
 
2020-07-08 8:34:31 AM  

Eclectic: thatguyoverthere70: These threads stress me out.

They suck the life out of me. The same tired-ass "I'm not anti-trans, but..." arguments in every single thread for the 17 years I've been on Fark. The individual posters are slightly different from thread to thread, but it's the same script.

I've tried hard to educate. To be visible, at least. To push back against the worst of it. But it gets so old. And when we reach a saturation point like we have this week with four Rowling/trans threads in 72 hours, most of us in the Fark trans community have to walk away for our mental health. Which unfortunately means that sometimes the threads get even worse.

I am so grateful for the allies that fight for us when we're not here, because we just get ground to paste and need breaks.


I know this thread will be closed any minute. I had planned on tapping out of this one because this subject stresses me out so badly. I know there will be opportunities to post on this subject in the near future, since these Rowling threads are a daily thing now, it seems.

"Liberals" are not trying to control what anyone else thinks. If someone wants to agree with Rowling, they can do it. Go for it. Knock themselves out. Rowling has the freedom to think what she thinks and she has the freedom to hold and express whatever opinions she wants to hold and express, no matter how ignorant or enlightened they may be. And the people that disagree with her are also free to express their opinions as well.

I am so sick of certain people that say they believe that transgender women are women, but still feel the need to post on these threads acting like they are the ones that are being attacked unfairly and oppressed. And then they're so self-unaware that they don't even realize that they're trying to make it all about themselves. Helpful hint to those people: if you believe transgender women are women and transgender men are men, yet are still in here trying to pick arguments with trans people and allies and acting like you're the one being oppressed, you are not helping.
 
2020-07-08 9:41:05 AM  

garron: soporific: bglove25: PickleBarrel: bglove25: If you don't like what JK Rowling says or thinks, don't listen to her. Problem solved.

That does not solve the problem because what she says harms others.

Speech is not violence. Sorry. Heck, she never even threatens violence.

It is often used to justify violence. You don't get credit for not threatening violence when you find yourself in wholehearted agreement with those who do. Especially when they turn around and use your words to justify their violence.

By your logic, we can hold you personally responsible and destroy your life because you are in political agreement with the following people:

- James Hodgkinson - leftist activist who shot Congressman Steve Scalise
- Micah Xavier Johnson - BLM activist who killed 5 Dallas Police Officers
- The BLM rioters who killed David Dorn and Secoriea Turner and killed or injured scores of others
- etc, etc, etc.

Heck, let's add the Ted Kaczynski (the Unabomber) to the list.  He was a left-wing environmentalist.

The ideals you support sparked this violence.  So now we can some after you personally right?



Bless your heart. You're trying so hard. It's almost adorable.
 
2020-07-08 9:56:34 AM  

thatguyoverthere70: The post I responded to and quoted directly above where you say "You do not have the right to control the way any one else thinks. You do not have the ABILITY to control the way anyone else thinks" Because for you this is all about the feelings you get when YOU get when YOU feel attacked and when YOU think it's all about someone trying to control the way YOU think. For you, this isn't about trans people and their rights, it's about your right to say you agree with JK Rowling.If you want to agree with Rowling, go for it. No one here has stopped you.


Ding Ding.  We have a winner.

When someone wants to feel safe in a position they don't want to scoot from, they often conflate being "challenged" with being "attacked".  It stops being about the issue, and starts being about how it makes them feel, civil discourse, and decorum.
 
Displayed 50 of 215 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking





On Twitter



  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.