TERF's - Feminists that don't think trans women are women

Post Reply New Topic

I think that these are all good points, and I myself recognise them as parts of what Rowling has said. There is only so much I can really say as AMAB, I do consider myself a feminist and so concerned.

Pardon any ignorance I might have, but my thoughts on areas that may be specific to AFAB people would be the likes of medical things such as menstruation and its products (the fact they should not be taxed), birth control, pregnancy, menopause and several types of cancers that affect organs that currently cannot currently be given via sex changes. Please tell me if there are more, but I do recognise all of these things are relevant for medical history with a doctor for cis women, trans men and AFAB Enbies, but not necessarily relevant for what toilet or changing room used. I also understand that a number of them have a history as trials of womanhood, maybe even pride among many that was a foundation for women movements of the past, and could feel alienating to those still with a focus on the second wave of feminism issues.

Although those issues are common for women, they are not always universal for even all AFAB women that might be something like sterile, and thus as a part of intersectionality should not be as gatekeeping for womanhood, let alone trans women. I have heard of some anecdotal stories of transwomen that might have acted inappropriately around certain subjects, and could even say act a bit delusional, but it is not only trans women that can have a monopoly of delusion on them, nor do most have any such delusion like they suddenly grew a uterus to release eggs. And many social issues such as sexual harassment and the other types of discrimination that cis women experience can be shared by trans women.

I kind of believe that many women like Rowling do think that this whole topic of trans people being treated by their identified gender has appeared to come out of nowhere, making it feel like their input was never asked and that they are not being allowed to talk now. But I also know that many fighting for trans rights are past the point of wanting to slide back the discussion of whether a trans people should have to out themselves every time they want to tinkle, try on clothes or change to go swimming. From my understanding those things are already stressful enough for them as is. I think that they all know that if they give ground there, it is going to become entrenched in something like at least needing to meet half way, where a person would need a certain amount of transitioning like surgery to be allowed to go the toilet without people knowing why a woman has to use the men's room, or feel sick every time an ID or letter misgenders the.

Question is then who should put in the effort so that Rowling feels like her feelings are not being overlooked. Whether she should try a little herself to understand why people are so upset at her. Or whether those for trans rights take great pain to control the speech of all of its members to not attack the woman dog whistle language (like sex is real), and drill into her head where he argument really is. But it has gone on this long that I don't think that someone like Rowling would listen to the arguments along the line that I have put, she already sees herself as a victim of bad words because of the bad rhetoric she has been spreading on her large platform.

I just find it upsetting that we're not even allowed to talk about these things.

Anyway, take the issue with which changing room to use, say.
There are deep-rooted reasons why most women would feel very uncomfortable around sharing a changing room with a man.
I think many of us, who don't believe ourselves to be transphobic, would agree that a transwoman should have the right to use the ladies changing room.
But the issue then becomes where to draw the line. If we give the right to self-identifying transwomen who still appear like men, obviously from the point of view of the transwoman's rights that should be OK also.
The trouble then is that women lose the ability to self-police their spaces to avoid the entry of men. Because they know that when someone looking like a man walks in, they are no longer allowed to say "hey, you're not allowed in here", because that person might be transgender.
So in the name of political/gender correctness, we are creating a situation in which cis men could easily take advantage of the situation by wandering into the changing room, knowing that he is unlikely to be called out. Women would then lose their security of knowing such spaces, where they may be feeling naked and vulnerable, are safe from male predators.

The above is just one example to illustrate why I think Rowling's comments are not coming from a place of transphobia so much as a place of having been abused by men before - as she herself says.

So I disagree with everyone here (even though this is a very lonely place for me to be at, I'm feeling a bit stressed at being the only one to feel this way) because I don't think Rowling should just accept she's wrong and shut up. I think she raises the point that we should be able to discuss these kind of issues without being pilloried for speaking up.

I think it is a fair issue to discuss how to prevent cis male predators from taking advantage of social climate to then creep into a woman only space. I myself have said a thought before that being able to willy-nilly choose should probably be downplayed a little, because a predator is not going to choose to consistently be trans to be able to listen to women pee. Although, being aware of the gender spectrum, I think that a buffer space of gender neutral bathroom would not be too far either, a Bathroom 9 3/4 if you will, although that could create some difficulties with logistics.



If we really want to police who should go into what, then that gender spectrum, where if I pulled up a bunch of images that say you could see went from masculine to feminine and I asked at what point you would put a line of who should go to what bathroom. Before I revealed that the metric used could put some cis women on the masculine side and cis men on the feminine side, because there can be some butch women and some femme men. By looks alone you are not always going to have a clear answer either, and cis women have been embarrassed before by being accused of being men.

I really earnestly think that in most cases of society you are not going to have a hard single way to police people use the correct restroom without the possibility a creep could sneak through. The really only answer would probably only be social pressure have people police themselves social stigma, so that trans girl's dysphoria of going to the ladies room is winning out against dysphoria of not passing. And shame anyone from acting as creeps, regardless of how they look.

My personal vision of a future is three gendered restrooms; masculine, feminine and both/neither, it be normalized without discrimination for what used, no shame over the gender neutral restroom. Perhaps transgender people transition over time through gender neutral until they don't worry over passing or not, and hopefully we don't need to microchip to keep track that cis men are alternating from the masculine and feminine restroom. I think the greatest tools we can do for this sort of future is to continue to fight against things like toxic masculinity, so we don't have this culture that makes so much creepy straight cis men.

She is a professional writer who chose her words deliberately. She doesn’t include that fact as a nifty piece of trivia. It’s there to support the section it is embedded in about “detransitioning” and “Rapid Onset Gender Dysphoria”.

It’s like if somebody said they were “concerned about threats to white identity” and then posts facts about crime committed by black people. Sure it’s “just a fact” but if you wave it around like that then people are going to think you’re trying to use it.

Girls are now bought into men's bathrooms at movie theaters. At least they were just before the lockdown.
What else is single dad to do when his little daughter wants to see a movie?

The thing with this is though, it's not very often that "self-identified" trans women who haven't made any attempts to pass as women are going into women's bathrooms and locker rooms. Usually they just continue to use the men's room, as that's safer and more comfortable for both parties. It's also already vastly uncomfortable and even sometimes confusing just to decide what bathroom to use for trans people that are making an effort.

Just like you're worried about cis men using this as an excuse, trans people have to consistently worry about whether they're going to get in trouble for using the bathroom. Whether someone is going to clock them and get angry, possibly even violent, or not. If someone is saying they're a trans woman but isn't out enough to begin wearing female clothing and taking other steps to be viewed as a female, then I really doubt they're going to risk walking into the women's room where they'll most likely, 100%, get nasty looks and start a problem. I mean, I'm a pre-T trans male and even when I'm not passing well really at all and have to use the women's restroom for everyone's comfort I can get angry, disgusted looks from women, especially women with children. Inversely, the same happens when I have to use the men's room, and it's certainly terrifying having men aggressively stare you down like that. I really can't imagine being comfortable and safe looking like an actual man and then walking into the women's restroom.

To end this little ramble, I think we both are in agreement, and that most people are in agreement, that if you look like a man you should be using the men's restroom, even if just for your own safety.


I don't want her to just "accept she's wrong and shut up", but a lot of the statistics she's brought up plus the reasons for doing so, and bringing up things such as "Rapid Onset Gender Dysphoria", just straight up aren't representative of most trans people or are genuinely not accurate, and it doesn't help her case at all.

I've already addressed the autism statistic and the ROGD stuff, but think about the part regarding women including trans men in their "feminism", because face it, we're not women. Why would you say you include someone who desires to pass as a man, and would get the social privileges a man has, into your feminism? Maybe we've had similar experiences before transition, but after you make serious attempts to pass your experience as a "woman" dwindles further and further and you become more distant from those issues.

She's reducing trans men to their genitalia and including them as women when we're really, really not. Mentioning that is not accurate, nor necessary, and doesn't help her in this situation. She's honestly just consistently digging holes for herself which is a huge part of the problem. People do overreact to these things, but I don't think she'd be getting the hate she is if she wasn't doubling down without actual thought and making things worse.

The problem is that there's a climate of fear being created here, in which no-one is being allowed to discuss issues without being labelled transphobic or bigotted.

The fact is, autistic people are over-represented in the trans population. This is probably something that deserves further study. But nobody will have the balls to study it further, or even discuss it, if they are going to be pilloried in this way.

To take your example, if I were to say that black people are over-represented in the criminal population, does that make me rascist? Maybe I'm saying that because I think there's something inherently wrong with black people. Or maybe I'm saying that because I think there are societal issues we need to address to make sure blacks are given a fair go and not reduced to criminality out of poverty or police discrimination.

I believe Rowling's comments are towards the latter - she is saying (in my view) "hey look, there are societal issues here we should be free to discuss".

Well, isn't that essentially what Rowling is saying, for which she is being labelled TERF and transphobic?
Nowhere has she said or implied that all transwomen should be excluded from women's spaces.
So obviously not everyone in the trans community agrees with what you've just said, there are many who would consider they should have the right to use whichever restroom they like?

I think people are reading things into what she's said that aren't there.
If you read her statement with an open mind, what she's suggesting is more inclusive, in the sense of wanting to protect cis women, transwomen and transmen. Which necessarily means accepting that a transman can be gendered male but at the same time still have some underlying female biology which may affect their health, for example. And that a transwoman, depending on their background and where they are at with transition, may have views shaped by a male childhood, and may have physical differences such as muscular strength based on hormonal history.
She's not saying that transmen are or should be treated as women at all. SHe's just saying that these biological differences should not be completely ignored.

Most trans people attempt to pass and "self-identifying", whatever that means, doesn't mean someone isn't taking steps to pass. You were talking about trans people who are essentially visually presenting as their birth given gender, which usually comprises of people who either aren't out to others or can't take the steps to at least socially transition yet. So they would not be presenting as the gender they identify as yet, so they would not be using the women's restroom if they're a trans woman. No one who falls within this category who is sane and enjoys their safety is going to go in the women's restroom if they look like a man.

How many cases of non-female presenting trans women entering women's restrooms have you seen, can you show me any of them? Also, definitely not everyone agrees with me. It is, after all, a community of probably millions of people with different opinions. Whether those opinions are reasonable or not.

[quote="MrsPeel”]The fact is, autistic people are over-represented in the trans population. This is probably something that deserves further study. But nobody will have the balls to study it further, or even discuss it, if they are going to be pilloried in this way.[/quote]
That’s ludicrous and a complete misrepresentation both of what trans people are saying and the wider climate.

Right now the bigots have almost total control of the media. Every major newspaper publishes anti-trans editorials. Even the BBC is sheltering plenty of transphobes. There is no danger of transphobic opinions being silenced.

Nobody is saying you can’t state facts. They are however criticising people who use facts in a slanted fashion to support bigoted agendas.

Both trans people and autistic people, and particularly autistic trans people, spend a lot of time talking about the overlap between the two groups. Nobody is afraid to study this overlap.

I think you’re wilfully misreading Rowling. She certainly isn’t making a neutral “this is interesting” point, she is deliberately downplaying autistic people’s agency in order to support her transphobic screed. If she was casually calling for more study then she would have explicitly stated so, rather than leaving the sentence hanging at the end of a paragraph talking about how many trans people are confused.

First off, I want to say that I don't want you to feel like people are ganging up on you, I understand how alienating that can feel. But also that no one is saying that you can't discuss something, just that you have to be careful with you language, and be aware of bad arguments that are used to attack. No one is going to call you a bigot for wanting to make sure women are safe, but you are going to get pushback the moment an argument is leaving out trans people as their identified gender.

I imagine there would have to be actual studies to look into if this is an actual fact, but my hypothesis is that there is a larger percentage of non-cis people than we are generally aware of, our culture just pushes down a good percentage of them so that they might never notice that they are trans. The reason that people with autism have a higher representation of trans people would not be that they are mistaking themselves as trans (binary or not), but that they already have problems with fitting in socially that they are more likely to realize they are trans. NT people are better at reading the room and adapting to social expectations, that many essentially trick themselves.


A video by Sarah Z just came out today and she take a good look at exactly what has been said by Rowling and how the context is built around it that it is not as innocent as Rowling is trying to say or might even think, and also whether this should have or ruins the series. I promise that this is a very fair look at the situation without letting emotions run wild. Although, my heart broke from a recent Council of Geeks video where they were incredibly hurt by the creator of something they love saying what she did.

In response to Walrus:

Well, I can't say I've seen a lot of transphobic articles in the media, but it may be different here in Aus (and it may be the type of media I read, as I tend to the left).

As far as I can see, the type of backlash against Rowling is going the other way, it seems to be driven by some quite radical and/or rigid-thinking elements who are so intent on standing up for trans rights they are failing to see the nuances in the issues that Rowling has presented.

For example, I've seen a lot of media posts by upset trans folk saying that "I am not confused". I can understand why they are upset. However, the fact that most trans folk out there do not feel confused about their gender does not mean gender confusion does not occur amongst young people and is not an issue deserving of discussion. Similarly, there are people who have transitioned and then regretted it, and we ought to be able to talk about that, too.

At the moment, it is taboo to even mention such things. There is a culture of silencing anyone who dares mention such facts, as it is deemed to be transphobic. That is a problem.

Maybe it is a fact that I don't watch a whole lot of Australian only media, but I have never really felt that there is a pro-transgender mind either. When I watch an ABC video that involves a trans person I can expect the dislike ratio to be rather bad, and if comments were permitted they would just the worst, and that is just for being ABC neutral. I just don't think a lot of media in Australia actually pushes for transgender rights, they might not act mean, but mostly barely talked about.

I rather think in general that Australia is a place of political apathy, where people are not too interested in discussing important things like transgenderism. It is why it took so long for gay marriage to be legalised. Like most media will pretend things like racism just does not exist, and then something like The Project gets treated as if it is extreme for even bringing a social issue up that something like ACA on the fairly conservative Channel 9 would not do.

Also, most challenging ... are men who identify as men, and are FORCED to become women, really women?

Homosexuals in Iran are having sex reassignment surgery to avoid execution
https://www.jpost.com/middle-east/iran- ... ion-619968

Response to Bradleigh:

I really appreciate that you are willing to discuss this rationally without resorting to name-calling.

The video by Sarah Z was quite enlightening and has helped me understand better why Rowling has upset a lot of people. I do feel that Sarah was quite biased in presenting only a 1-sided argument, designed to pull us all to her point of view. She is clearly a debater with great skill at presenting her case, so it's hard for me to argue as I'm tongue-tied at the best of times.

What I did do was, since Sarah has fact-checked things like the Forstater case in support of her argument, was to attempt a little fact-checking of her own statements.

Obviously I am no scholar of trans issues or anything, so apologies that the below is only taken from Wikipedia (and some of it does have a warning that it needs more medical references). But I think it can help explain the difference of opinions here. Sarah is saying that detransition rates are 0.6% (implying that this is not worth considering). She also thinks Rowling's assertion that 60% of kids with gender dysphoria grow out if it is ludicrous. From Wikipedia article on detransition:

"It is estimated that the number of detransitioners ranged from less than one percent to as many as five percent.

"Desistance rates among young children may be higher. Of children refferred to gender clinics for either gender dysphoria or gender non-conformity, a 2008 study found 61% desisted from their gender incongruence or nonconformity before reaching the age of 29, and a 2013 study found 63% desisted before age 20. A 2019 clinical assessment found that 9.4% of patients with adolescent-emerging gender dysphoria either ceased wishing to pursue medical interventions or no longer felt that their gender identity was incongruent with their assigned sex at birth within an eighteen-month period.

"There is a lack of legal, medical, and psychological guidelines on the topic of detransition and a perceived atmosphere of censorship around researching the phenomenon. Detransitioners say they have been harassed by activists who view detransition as a political threat to trans rights."

I think the above helps to show that dismissal of all Rowling's comments as coming from a transphobic agenda may not be correct, some of the issues she presented are genuine phenomena (albeit for a minority of a minority) - and also there is a culture of fear to speak up over the very real likelihood of being labelled transphobic.

Hope that helps to show where I'm coming from. I can't speak for Rowling on this, but I'm pretty sure I'm not transphobic in the sense of not recognising trans folks in their identifying gender or in the sense of excluding them from gendered spaces without reason. I'm just concerned about the silencing of discussion over how we as society can better cater for the multitude of gender identity / physical sex intersections in the modern world.

And yes, I would love to see the building of restroom 9 3/4 !