JK Rowling’s Tweet and why it’s A) Repulsive and B) A pile of shit....
JK Rowling tweeted her support for a woman who recently lost an employment tribunal over transphobic comments she made on Twitter...
To understand why JK is a massive TERF and why her tweet is a perfect example of smoke screen transphobia we must first understand who she was defending...
Who is Maya Forstater and what did she say…
Maya was working in her capacity as a tax expert for a think-tank. During this time she posted a series of tweets which questioned the governments plans to allow people to self-identify as another gender.
Maya stated “men cannot change into women”, she stated that she is concerned about expanding the definition of “woman” to include both males and females.
Maya lost her tribunal, the judge stated that her views were “incompatible with human dignity and fundamental rights of others”
In response to the ‘freedom of speech’ argument that so many trans exclusionary people use the judge stated “Even paying due regard to the qualified right to freedom of expression, people cannot expect to be protected if their core belief involves violating others’ dignity and creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating, or offensive environment for them” in short… you cant just spout damaging rhetoric and claim that its protected under freedom of speech.
Following the judgement - JK tweeted -
“Dress however you please.
Call yourself whatever you like.
Sleep with any consenting adult who’ll have you.
Live your best life in peace and security.
But force women out of their jobs for stating that sex is real? #IStandWithMaya #ThisIsNotADrill”
Now - there is a lot to break down here. But lets start with the big juicy one that a lot of trans exclusionary feminists like to tout…
Sex is real…
Something we hear when people try to justify their transphobia is ‘its science’, ‘its biology’, ‘sex is real’.
This is an attempt to put an ‘intellectual’ spin on their exclusionary views. They use these lines in the hopes that the people engaging with their posts will take them at their word and either celebrate their educated stance OR feel inadequate academically and bow down from any argument on the matter.
It also suggests that these people believe that the value, identity and worth of a person is in their possession or lack of certain sexual organs… A very strange concept with you really think about it.
It suggests that to decide how much or how few rights to give to a person depends on what’s in their pants, how it functions, how they choose to use it and, does it match the clothes they have put on the outside. That you still believe you have a right to look in their pants before you decide the level of respect they’re entitled to from you. BIZARRE
When stating ‘Sex is Real’ what they are saying is sex is either man or woman, penis or vagina, male or female, one or the other.
This argument has one gaping hole though…. Science actually tells us the opposite.
The Sciency Bit…
So we all know the old XX vs. XY chat
i.e. Genetically, based on their chromosomes A man is a man and a woman is a woman.
BUT it isn’t as clear cut as what we were taught in high school, lets be honest, what is?
In the earliest days of development a fertilised egg contains a group of cells called the Bipotential Primordium. These are the cells that have the potential to form ovaries or testes or neither. It will be partly down to SRY a protein found in the Y chromosome to get that party started… BUT exactly how it all works is still not fully understood.
The SRY is, for illustrative purposes, the starter whistle to the process that will form the gonad. This process is a delicate balance which requires signals to be sent at exactly the right time and without that starting whistle of the SRY there will be no testes and therefore ovaries or something in between will form.
It gets even more interesting when we throw in genes like DMRT1 & FOXL2 and when we also have to remember that secondary sex characteristics like the penis, vagina, vulva and their development and function are another subplot! Then there is hormonal balance, the role of the brain and the behaviour of the person. These complexities lead to almost endless possibilities for sexes, sexual characteristics, developmental appearances etc.
Complex yes? Should we forgive those who are getting it wrong in their quest to deny trans people their basic human rights? NO!!! Cause they’re the ones taking the intellectual high ground… we should be holding them to account.
Sex is not a straight up XX or XY, penis or vagina, man or woman. Science trumps that argument… so WHY do people not seem to ‘get it’. Maybe they didn’t realise this, maybe they’re confused, maybe they’re not that smart…
I DONT BUY IT… A billionaire best selling author, a tax expert etc etc etc??
We must entertain the idea that they are indeed as intelligent as they like to make out and that something far more sinister than being ‘confused’ is at work. We must conclude that they are simply transphobic, they, for whatever reason, do not want to accept the existence of the trans people, they want to deny them their rights, they will tout phoney science to slip the anger and outrage that they deserve.
Now, lets look at the tweet itself -
Those first two lines, may, on first glance seem pretty supportive… WRONG
They not-so-subtley elude to trans people as simply playing ‘dress-up’. It is a sweeping statement designed to paint a facade of support but which minimises the daily fight to live that trans people have. To reduce the transgender experience to their clothes and name is diminishing the violence they suffer, the rejection they experience, the dysmorphia they live with and the constant battle they have to just lead a recognised and respected life.
Its a disgusting pair of lines which perfectly demonstrate just how insidious JK’s transphobia is.
Next up we have the almost mocking line which contains the cruel ‘whoever will have you’. She descends into straight up bullying. Implying that trans people are in some way less than desirable. Its clear, unintelligent, blatant HATE. Denial of which is laughable.
Thats before we even ask… what does this have to do with sexual orientation JK? Why are you sexualising trans people? Its also a well documented line that dates back to the homophobic ‘do wha you want… BeHiNd ClOsEd DoOrS’ which tells us that unless we are het then our sex lives and romance must be kept out of the sight of those who deem us offensive….
Next she tells trans people to ‘live their best life in peace and security’… OK so can she, a billionaire cis white woman, possibly expect this to be an acceptable statement. Privilege at its best. What she is basically saying is ‘I don’t believe in you, you don’t exist, but go away and be quiet about it for god sake, go live your life out my way’…
Its here that she demonstrates just how badly we have been led on by her. She is out of touch, deluded and dangerous.
The last line, we have dealt with…
I hope this helps some of you to process your feelings/understanding of the matter.
I know many of us come from a place where Potter was a huge part of out childhood. But we cannot separate art from artist. We must begin the process of grieving that part of our childhood because its gone, it was a lie.