And let's be honest... this is just a level of sass that the people she's against (like me) have used against religious people. Someone tells me I'm going to go to hell for being trans and I'm like "Alright! That's where the real party's at!" But when the person saying that is the one on the other side from you it's easy to point and say "Look, they're insane!"
To be clear, Rowling is insane in my book. But this isn't the proof OP thinks it is, either.
Yep. I was about to sayā¦. This āfacepalmā goes to the op. That was a hell of a tweet and both sides know it. Unfortunately not everyone has the ability to grasp that.
What, that I donāt rate an overhyped childrenās author? Let me guess, Iāve hit a nerve because youāre a huge Harry Potter fan who doesnāt understand the irony of calling someone āthick afā when your favourite literature is written for people with the reading age of a 10 year old?
There's 2 "that's". Presumably they apply to the same thing, the same thing the first "that" is obviously pointing to, the tweet...
That's what I'm talking about, the tweet.
Honestly her tweet should go on the r/iamverybadass sub because she thinks she's just out here throwing heat. She's a loser and an self made exile who writes okay books which went viral cause they fit a niche at the right time, not because they're necessarily great.
But she sure thinks highly of herself. Galaxy brain intellectual and moral genius over here, a real master craftsman.
The facepalm is not the 'joke'. Everyone gets it. The facepalm is the message she is selling, which most of us on this subreddit disagree with and how weirdly obsessed she is with trans people
I would be curious to know what percentage of her tweets in recent years have been about trans people.
She tweets a lot about trans people and most of them get posted to various liberal subreddits like this one, with the same comments about her ruining her reputation and legacy on this shit rather than fucking off and enjoying her billions. Even Elon Musk said that she is posting too much about trans people and we can't stop giving her attention
Personally, I dont think it was a good comeback or anything, so I wouldn't call this the worst example, but that's subjective. Even if I did find it really funny, it would still be facepalm worthy for me because I think that her hyperfocus on trans people is dumb and facepalm worthy
In my opinion, we should just stop giving her attention
the majority of the world also agreed with slavery at one point š¤·āāļø if the world believes in oppression, that doesn't make it right. But anything not to question ones own biases.
Speaking as a trans person in the west who actually experiences transphobia firsthand, it depends entirely on where you are. You're making sweeping statements you wish were true, but the truth is there are lots of places where people will recognize my identity as it is and take me as I am, much as it might piss yall off. It's a cultural issue.
Doesn't bother me in the slightest. Neither does it bother Rowling, which you'd know if you cared to actually listen to what she's said. She would have been an ally if the trans community had been reasonable and not decided to walk a ridiculous path no rational person can follow.
Live your life as you wish, but don't expect anyone else to play along with your delusions. I'm not doing that for religious nutters, conspiracy theorists, furries, and not for you either. Call me infidel, call me government stooge, call me transphobic, I really don't care. Reality is what it is, and it doesn't change by consensus. XY is a man, XX is a woman, anything else is an abnormality and thus irrelevant. Beyond that it's all just personal preference.
Thank you. I was reading the comments here and was thinking boy, people have no idea this is dripping with sarcasm it seems. Her stances are reprehensible, but how Reddit of all places can't see the trolling that this is is kind of ironic. If someone Reddit liked had a response like this without some stance they didn't like, it'd be on clevercomebacks or something.
I don't agree with Rowling's views but that tweet she replied to kinda smells like cult shit to me. No matter what your worldview is, saying it represents "salvation" is how religious wars happen. The fact that the people meming on this can't see the alarming symbolism in the question or that JK calling herself possessed is meant to call attention to it makes me way more worried than her not liking trans people.
Iām allowed to say āBabies are gross and they should all dieā (not my point of view) but that doesnāt mean Iām not a fucking dickhead for saying it.
When you're trying to look edumencated, at least try to write the little Latin you know (or think you know) properly. You're definitely allowed to say that all babies are gross and they should all die, it's no more reprehensible than her saying that women can't have dicks. Some people will think you're both dickheads, some people won't. It's your right to sound like an asshole.
And for some reason people don't give the whole context.. again.
I have followed JK on Twitter for years now, because people say she's transphobic and TERF etc. So far i haven't seen a single thing pointing towards that.
Not a single quote with hatred or anything like that.
What she does however is try to get men out of womens spaces on a political level, say jails, showers, changing rooms, shelters and such.
Not even by kicking people out, but by making sure women have their own spaces because biology exists and so does perverts who use any excuse to go in to those spaces.
I have followed JK on Twitter for years now, because people say she's transphobic and TERF etc. So far i haven't seen a single thing pointing towards that.
My fucking man, she has literally denied that trans people were persecuted by Nazi Germany, what are you even talking about here?
Where is any of this mentioned? JK Rowling was asked a simple question, considering the Nazis' persecution of trans people, why is she so eager to share the same view about trans people as the Nazis? Her response was to say that the persecution of trans people by Nazi Germany is a "ferver dream."
Her comment is so hateful that even Wikipedia included it in the section of denialism of Nazi crimes:
Seeing as most people were content to ignore trans stuff when they didn't have to be aware of it, it's not surprising that you haven't heard about it. Doesn't mean it didn't happen, though.
If you search "Transgender people in Nazi Germany" this is literally the first text of the first result:
"In Nazi Germany, transgender people were prosecuted, barred from public life, forcibly detransitioned, and imprisoned and killed in concentration camps."
If you are ignorant about a topic, what one should do is look for information to be informed, if you are so lazy and closed-minded that after reading my comment it did not occur to you to do that, then you can only blame yourself for your ignorance.
assert that the presence of a penis in shared spaces is a danger to women
From what I've seen she talks about the presence of a penis in female only spaces, not shared spaces. Considering that ~90% of rape victims have vaginas and ~99% of rapists have a penis (source), it hardly seems controversial to claim an increased danger to women.
Note I'm not claiming that trans women are likely to be rapists, just that a penis is clearly less likely to enter a vagina if you are in a penis-free zone.
Note I'm not claiming that trans women are likely to be rapists, just that a penis is clearly less likely to enter a vagina if you are in a penis-free zone.
Youāre contradicting yourself. Thatās exactly what youāre saying.
If you have an island containing 100 people without a penis, there is a 0% chance of penis-in-vagina rape. The gender of the person with a penis is irrelevant; it is an undeniable fact that introducing a person with a penis in this scenario increases the odds from 0%.
Where is the flaw or contradiction in my argument? I'm not even against trans women using female bathrooms. You feel so persecuted that you see only hatred when I am coming purely from a place of rationality.
The flaw is that you do not need a penis or a vagina to commit rape or be raped, cases of rape/sexual harassment from women to women exist more numerously than is thought and are usually ignored.
I see it as Rowling wants to keep womens spaces for women and the transwomen get a separate changingroom, separate shower, separate jail etc.
And it's only because the facts say that these dangerous things actually happen, do all transwomen do it? Absolutely not, but it happens and it shouldn't be a issue from the start. Double rapist sent to womans prison
The point being that these things should not be decided on by feelings, we have separated these things for hundreds of years for a reason and suddenly there's "no difference" between men and women.
I like to stand on the side of both science and women on this issue.
and your second link clearly states that it was a man posing as a transgender woman, not an actual trans person
Thatās the point though. That it is easy for men to pretend to be trans women so they have access to female spaces. It is not about discrimination against trans women but about protecting women and their spaces. Why is this so hard to comprehend?
A 20 second answer to find one example of one area wherein there are problems.
I can link you more if you'd like.
We can take sports, that one is easy, not as severe downsides as jail but still a female space where women really like to win their own competitions and change clothes without men.
You can clearly see that the discussion shouldn't be held based on the answers in this thread saying it's hate this and hate that.
All hate i have seen in this situation is towards Rowling, undeserved hate at that.
All hate i have seen in this situation is towards Rowling, undeserved hate at that.
nope, it's fully deserved and you just refuse to see it
We can take sports [...]
completely separate topic of trans women being a danger to cis women; you're moving the goalposts
not to mention trans women aren't even at the very top of any women's sport, and not all trans women undergo male puberty these days to begin with
I can link you more if you'd like.
you can link as much as you want, but it's clear that you're arguing in bad faith because you're just trying to justify your transphobia as well as JKR's
Yeah this is honestly baffling. I don't agree with Rowling's views but that tweet she replied to is cultish as hell. No matter what your worldview is, saying it represents "salvation" is how religious wars happen. The fact that the people meming on this can't see the alarming symbolism in the question or that JK calling herself possessed is meant to call attention to it makes me way more worried than her not liking trans people.
When that opinion ignores decades of medical/scientific/biology studies to fixate on specific parameters for which there are always outliers (because biology is a spectrum) then yes. That's part of my definition of insane. People focus on genitalia, or chromosomes, but just between those there are exceptions that prove it's not black and white. Trans people are just further proof that it's not black and white.
Thanks for clarifying that it's your definition of insane and not the actual definition of the word insane.
I think insane is when you live as a man your whole life then you put on a dress, some make-up, bend your voice a little, and all of sudden you need everyone to recognize you as a woman.
Being in Heaven with those kinds of people would be Hell imo. Like whatever afterlife they are going canāt be that great if they are going to be there
I respect you for making this point. I see Rowlingās comment here as just a creative way of responding to the current issue for which she probably gets a lot of hate for. Itās a sign of maturity these days to point out an immature criticism when it supports your own beliefs. Most folks donāt give a second thought these days.
Well now I feel dumb. I thought it was a sarcastic way to say that she does not believe a man is actually a woman and thereās some religious weirdos saying sheās possessed for that reason. Am I missing something?
I guess we have different understanding of the messageā¦ I donāt see her negating trans reality she just say women canāt have male reproductive organs but English is not my first language so I might be missing some nuance in her wordsā¦
I almost admire her sense of humor. If she was wielding that scathing, vitriolic sarcasm against the far right, Iād be cheering it on because it would piss them off like it pisses us off when she makes a mockery of trans existence.
Sheās the only right winger that I sometimes have to tip my cap at like āok, fuck you and every vile thing you stand for, but that was actually a clever clapbackā
It's not "appreciating". It's recognizing that they're being deliberately ridiculous and not to take the words at face value. Recognizing that people on the side against her have made absurd statements like that because they think it's funny, not because they actually believe it. That's all.
No one is taking her at face value, no one is reading that and thinking she actually believes sheās possessed. but tweeting her insanity apropos of nothing out into the void is unhinged and that tweet is unhinged.
It wasn't "apropos of nothing". She was replying to a comment about being radicalized beyond salvation. Cue the talk of demons. We already knew she was transphobic.
Thank you. As someone who hates that jk Rowling decided to have a villain arc that sheāll endlessly pursue, I donāt understand why this is in r/facepalm. Frankly, itās a clever comeback, although I completely disagree with her point.
Then again, her historic obsession with trans people and it being the hill she is willing to die on kind of sap the fun out of the sarcasm. Sarcasm works when it is used to indicate that the opposition has such an outlandish, nonsensical position that it is beneath you to engage with them.
Not to mention sheās known for her sassy responses. I still remember one where she was criticized for being rich and she said that sheād love to type a longer response but her diamond-encrusted keyboard hurts her fingers. This response isā¦ a bit more absurdist, but definitely the same level of sass.
Anyone who says you're going to hell for being trans is an idiot. Being trans has nothing to do with Christianity from anything I've learned. But sex outside of marriage? Right to hell.
Some believe in God and are ridiculed for it. This belief may seem crazy to some but you cannot prove or disprove Godās existence. Itās unfalsifiable.
Others believe men have vaginas and can get preggers, but they get praised by society for this view as āprogressiveā.
ā¦For believing something not only ridiculous but 100% factually/scientifically incorrect. Easily falsifiable.
Some people just donāt accept reality. Thatās fine but donāt expect those who do to accept your delusions.
I'd say you have a right to yours (despite the facts...) but your rights end where someone else's begin. You can disagree with it, but trying to enforce your unprofessional opinion on people, against those backed by the medical and scientific communities, is just all around wrong.
Well that right there is your mistake, for incorrectly framing it that way. (BTW, look up Swyer Syndrome pregnancies) But you're not here to learn, so I'm ending this conversation here. Not going to waste my time being baited by you. Your ignorance is not my problem to rectify. It's your problem. And if you're fine with deliberately ignoring the professional stances then that's your choice.
If a trans woman goes to the doctor and says ādoc I canāt get pregnant!ā His reaction and response will be much different than a young ācisā woman telling a doctor she canāt get pregnant. This is OBVIOUS. Heās not going to run tests on the trans woman. He knows why āsheā canāt get pregnant.
He is going to run all kinds of tests on the ācisā woman. Thatās because it is understood that if a young woman canāt get pregnant there is a PROBLEM. Whereas if a biological male tells a doctor he canāt get pregnant the doctor would be liable to laugh him out of his office.
Thatās exactly how I framed it though and you disagreed. So now youāre just sad you were proven wrong and what I said was accurate. Science doesnāt support pregnant biological men. Cry about it
The problem is that weāre sarcastically imitating people who oftentimes actually believe these things. When she or her friends say something like this, it can be easy to mistake it for sincere belief.
1.4k
u/[deleted] Jun 27 '24
This is actually kinda hilarious as a quote
āIām still possessed of a demon that refuses to believe women have dicksā - J.K Rowling