Except that for all of her anti-trans stuff, she never advocated for killing trans people or anything of the sort. Or did I miss something?
EDIT: Holy shit, so many downvotes for an honest and open question? I fully realize that what she advocates for is harmful (which was what I alluded to in my original question), but there’s still quite a difference between that and advocating for the murder of every trans person, jfc.
If you take healthcare away from trans people, suicide numbers go up. And she wants to take healthcare away from trans people and shove us back in the closet. She’s chosen to attack kids, the most vulnerable of us. I believe she’s already taken lives through her lobbying.
I might be wrong as I haven’t looked too much into it in recent years, so maybe her rhetoric has changed, but isn’t even that a little beyond what she actually has said? From what I recall, isn’t her entire stance just that trans women are not the same as biological women?
Again, I could be wrong, I might be going off of outdated info, but has she ever actually argued that trans people shouldnt exist, or that they should be denied medical care? From what I’ve seen, it’s all boiled down to not wanting trans women in sports or bathrooms. Which, yea, that’s problematic, but that’s not the same as saying they shouldn’t exist or shouldn’t have healthcare.
Ok, but that article doesn’t actually say anything different? She’s donating to organizations that are pushing against legislation that say trans women are the same as biological women. They aren’t saying trans people shouldn’t exist or shouldn’t have healthcare. Or am I missing something? Again, still shitty, and it doesn’t change my opinion of her either way, but am I crazy to think that’s not exactly the same as trans erasure?
Oh, I see the misunderstanding. Affirming a trans person’s preferred gender is healthcare. It’s a thing society does which improves their health. You know, like wheelchair ramps and flouride in water. Taking away legal recognition is taking away healthcare.
She’s also praised and encouraged the Cass Review, which claimed medical treatment for trans teens isn’t safe or effective, and is being used to excuse the new ban on puberty blockers.
Lemmy unreasonably hates her because she’s a successful woman that won’t nicely shut up and know her place. Misogyny runs deep here. Nobody will provide you with justification for the hyperbole in the OP because it doesn’t exist.
People are quite clear in their criticism of her based on the things she says she does. You’re trying to shift the conversation to something unrelated.
If criticisms of Rowling’s Transphobia are invalid they should be easy to dispute instead of trying to build an ad hominim Strawman.
They’re not clear at all. They’re histrionics. People don’t bother reading what she wrote. They read someone’s shit take worst possible interpretation of what she wrote
Then once again: that should be very easy to discredit. The fact that you have invented a strawman instead of addressing the criticisms actually being presented speaks volumes.
“I haven’t kept up to date on this topic that you seem to have a lot of interest in, but let me tell you why you’re wrong based on my vaguely remembered outdated information”
Did something change recently, or are you just being contrarian? I did a quick search before posting to see if there was something I missed, but I didn’t do a deep dive because I have better things to spend my time on. So yes, I based my response on things that I knew while being open to the possibility that I was wrong. What exactly do you want dude?
Like arguing with people about it on social media? Any time you’re spending here is time you could have been spending looking into it, so you are literally saying it is a more valuable use of your time to argue with people about a subject you don’t know much about than to look it up yourself.
What exactly do you want dude?
To point out the sheer arrogance of saying “I’m not up to date on this but you’re wrong.” A better response would have been “I’m not up to date on this, what has been said recently?”
So, a common metric people bring up in discussions of trans people that make their way into politics is ‘trans suicide rates’. Right-wingers tend to mention it in reference to “We shouldn’t let anyone be trans, because trans people commit suicide often,” and left-wingers tend to argue “Trans suicide is so high because they get degraded by society, and aren’t allowed to express themselves.”
Edit: As for why it gets mentioned, transgenders overall commit suicide far more often than the average population.
thanks, i’m reading this link and looking for data about suicide rates. this report is talking about a collection of self-reported data about suicidal thoughts, which many people can have and fortunately not go through with it.
I also see a statistically significant correlation, and i’m still looking for a reliable causation and data on suicide rates. how do we know if the lack of gender affirming care directly leads to increased suicides in a systemic pattern? perhaps the same people who cannot access it also are likely to have other things in life that could cause terrible suicidal thoughts or actions. i’m wondering how we can rule this out.
You want causation? How about a study that looked at the suicide attempts per year before and after anti-trans state laws were passed? https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-024-01979-5
good for them for having such a large sample size. i admit i’m confused though, the results are an increase “by 7–72%.”? i wonder what is up with this huge range. how can we have confidence in this?
i wish the abstract explained what types of anti-trans laws were passed, cause of course different laws end up having different effects. that could explain the uncertainty in the results range. in this case we’re concerned with how a lack of gender affirming care would directly influence systematic suicide rates, so I’m still looking out for more evidence on that topic.
Except that for all of her anti-trans stuff, she never advocated for killing trans people or anything of the sort. Or did I miss something?
EDIT: Holy shit, so many downvotes for an honest and open question? I fully realize that what she advocates for is harmful (which was what I alluded to in my original question), but there’s still quite a difference between that and advocating for the murder of every trans person, jfc.
shes harming through rhetoric and influence, and also funding anti-trans bills, and that leads to death or injury.
If you take healthcare away from trans people, suicide numbers go up. And she wants to take healthcare away from trans people and shove us back in the closet. She’s chosen to attack kids, the most vulnerable of us. I believe she’s already taken lives through her lobbying.
I might be wrong as I haven’t looked too much into it in recent years, so maybe her rhetoric has changed, but isn’t even that a little beyond what she actually has said? From what I recall, isn’t her entire stance just that trans women are not the same as biological women?
Again, I could be wrong, I might be going off of outdated info, but has she ever actually argued that trans people shouldnt exist, or that they should be denied medical care? From what I’ve seen, it’s all boiled down to not wanting trans women in sports or bathrooms. Which, yea, that’s problematic, but that’s not the same as saying they shouldn’t exist or shouldn’t have healthcare.
Here’s a fun one: She accused cisgender women’s Olympic gold medalist in boxing, Imane Khelif, of “being a man”. Seemingly just because she’s black.
Anyway, back on topic: https://www.yahoo.com/news/j-k-rowling-uses-harry-175223238.html?guccounter=1
Ok, but that article doesn’t actually say anything different? She’s donating to organizations that are pushing against legislation that say trans women are the same as biological women. They aren’t saying trans people shouldn’t exist or shouldn’t have healthcare. Or am I missing something? Again, still shitty, and it doesn’t change my opinion of her either way, but am I crazy to think that’s not exactly the same as trans erasure?
Oh, I see the misunderstanding. Affirming a trans person’s preferred gender is healthcare. It’s a thing society does which improves their health. You know, like wheelchair ramps and flouride in water. Taking away legal recognition is taking away healthcare.
She’s also praised and encouraged the Cass Review, which claimed medical treatment for trans teens isn’t safe or effective, and is being used to excuse the new ban on puberty blockers.
Lemmy unreasonably hates her because she’s a successful woman that won’t nicely shut up and know her place. Misogyny runs deep here. Nobody will provide you with justification for the hyperbole in the OP because it doesn’t exist.
People are quite clear in their criticism of her based on the things she says she does. You’re trying to shift the conversation to something unrelated.
If criticisms of Rowling’s Transphobia are invalid they should be easy to dispute instead of trying to build an ad hominim Strawman.
They’re not clear at all. They’re histrionics. People don’t bother reading what she wrote. They read someone’s shit take worst possible interpretation of what she wrote
Then once again: that should be very easy to discredit. The fact that you have invented a strawman instead of addressing the criticisms actually being presented speaks volumes.
Image Khelif is biologically male and has said so directly:
https://www.lemonde.fr/en/sports/article/2026/02/05/boxer-imane-khelif-reveals-she-took-hormone-treatment-before-paris-olympics_6750171_9.html
People really want to hate on J.K. Rowling for that, but she was 100% correct.
Not what that article says at all.
Yes, it is
Okay, you’ve convinced me that the article says something that it doesn’t say at all. Good job.
It remains true that Khelif is self-admittedly biologically male, despite your wish that reality weren’t so
“I haven’t kept up to date on this topic that you seem to have a lot of interest in, but let me tell you why you’re wrong based on my vaguely remembered outdated information”
Did something change recently, or are you just being contrarian? I did a quick search before posting to see if there was something I missed, but I didn’t do a deep dive because I have better things to spend my time on. So yes, I based my response on things that I knew while being open to the possibility that I was wrong. What exactly do you want dude?
Like arguing with people about it on social media? Any time you’re spending here is time you could have been spending looking into it, so you are literally saying it is a more valuable use of your time to argue with people about a subject you don’t know much about than to look it up yourself.
To point out the sheer arrogance of saying “I’m not up to date on this but you’re wrong.” A better response would have been “I’m not up to date on this, what has been said recently?”
Fine. I’m not up to date on this, what has been said recently?
the suicide numbers go up?
So, a common metric people bring up in discussions of trans people that make their way into politics is ‘trans suicide rates’. Right-wingers tend to mention it in reference to “We shouldn’t let anyone be trans, because trans people commit suicide often,” and left-wingers tend to argue “Trans suicide is so high because they get degraded by society, and aren’t allowed to express themselves.”
Edit: As for why it gets mentioned, transgenders overall commit suicide far more often than the average population.
so different people have different “explanations” for the suicide rates. has there been any unbiased evidence to explain it?
Yeah, sure. Here’s some research by the government that assessed the impact of gender affirming care and legal recognition on suicidal thoughts. More healthcare meant fewer suicidal thoughts. https://www.aihw.gov.au/suicide-self-harm-monitoring/population-groups/lgbtqia-sb-people/gender-affirmation
thanks, i’m reading this link and looking for data about suicide rates. this report is talking about a collection of self-reported data about suicidal thoughts, which many people can have and fortunately not go through with it.
I also see a statistically significant correlation, and i’m still looking for a reliable causation and data on suicide rates. how do we know if the lack of gender affirming care directly leads to increased suicides in a systemic pattern? perhaps the same people who cannot access it also are likely to have other things in life that could cause terrible suicidal thoughts or actions. i’m wondering how we can rule this out.
You want causation? How about a study that looked at the suicide attempts per year before and after anti-trans state laws were passed? https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-024-01979-5
good for them for having such a large sample size. i admit i’m confused though, the results are an increase “by 7–72%.”? i wonder what is up with this huge range. how can we have confidence in this?
i wish the abstract explained what types of anti-trans laws were passed, cause of course different laws end up having different effects. that could explain the uncertainty in the results range. in this case we’re concerned with how a lack of gender affirming care would directly influence systematic suicide rates, so I’m still looking out for more evidence on that topic.