https://www.jkrowling.com/opinions/j-k-r...er-issues/
Long, but good read.


"...I’ve read all the arguments about femaleness not residing in the sexed body, and the assertions that biological women don’t have common experiences, and I find them, too, deeply misogynistic and regressive. It’s also clear that one of the objectives of denying the importance of sex is to erode what some seem to see as the cruelly segregationist idea of women having their own biological realities or – just as threatening – unifying realities that make them a cohesive political class. The hundreds of emails I’ve received in the last few days prove this erosion concerns many others just as much. It isn’t enough for women to be trans allies. Women must accept and admit that there is no material difference between trans women and themselves.

But, as many women have said before me, ‘woman’ is not a costume. ‘Woman’ is not an idea in a man’s head. ‘Woman’ is not a pink brain, a liking for Jimmy Choos or any of the other sexist ideas now somehow touted as progressive. Moreover, the ‘inclusive’ language that calls female people ‘menstruators’ and ‘people with vulvas’ strikes many women as dehumanising and demeaning...."

She's such a bigot....lol.

She's always in trouble for this stance, she's had it for awhile.

She is right and its sad that we are even to this point in this jacked up world we live in.



Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk

(06-11-2020 11:24 AM)fsquid Wrote:  She's always in trouble for this stance, she's had it for awhile.

True. But let’s be clear: “this stance” is just the anatomical equivalent of saying water is wet. An assertion of one the most basic, elementary facts of human biology is now triggering an online mob of people who (at least in the US) typically support the “Party of Science”.

I love watching the left eat themselves.

Saw this here
https://www.darkhorizons.com/radcliffe-i...gs-tweets/

Kind of a follow up
https://www.darkhorizons.com/j-k-rowling...itter-row/