the title confuses me. umm… don’t you think Elon would find most of us insufferable?
I doubt he even thinks of us at all.
hence the keyword “would”
I doubt he even would think of us at all.
And that’s Elon saying this.
Just because people are famous doesn’t mean their opinions are valid.
Uff
“X isn’t just for Transphobia, it’s also for racism”
A real feminist would have realized, he’d never say that to a man.
Nah he just calls them pedos when they irritate enough
AKA women who no longer produce large gametes are no longer women.
I mean at least read what she said. “Belongs to the sex class” doesn’t mean you’re a man at menopause.
What’s a sex class? How is it defined? Does it include age groups? How about hermaphrodites?
I mean you could just read what she said. Do hermaphrodite produce large gametes? Idk, probably not. Go look it up.
Yeah see the thing is she didn’t say anything like that. She just assumes everyone knows what a “sex class” is to avoid having to define it herself.
It’s literally in the posted picture. Read it again.
Show me where she says what those words mean.
Are you some sort of idiot needs a definition of each word used? That’s what dictionaries are for. Anyways she defines what she meant in the complete sentence. Arguing with me about whether or not she’s right is pointless, I didn’t make the statement, merely pointed out she did define it.
What’s a sex class?
There’s an in-depth documentary about this on pornhub, featuring acclaimed scholar Lisa Ann.
Of which the “class” of women after menopause would not be women then.
We haven’t yet got a definition of a man though, so presumably most older ‘women’ are non-binary in their world
Conservatives learn about set theory, transphobes in shambles.
trans men ⊆ men
trans women ⊆ women
nonbinary people ⊈ men + women
me ∈ your mom
She forgot to define “sex class”, which could be all sorts of things. She did that because either she doesn’t know shit about classes, or because she wants to just say “women are women goddamnit” without actually saying it.
A sex class is defined by the material conditions of the exploitation of labor it’s members experience while producing their respective gametes. Obviously.
Read the whole thing.
I did. She doesn’t define “sex class” anywhere.
And of course she doesn’t, because she can’t. She has a middle-school grasp of the subject, and she’s trying to define “woman” as “woman” by using the weasel word “class”.
I believe a woman is a human being who belongs to the sex class that produces large gametes. It’s irrelevant whether or not her gametes have ever been fertilised, whether or not she’s carried a baby to term, irrelevant if she was born with a rare difference of sexual development that makes neither of the above possible, or if she’s aged beyond being able to produce viable eggs. She is a woman and just as much a woman as the others.
I can only deduce that “sex class” is some kind of group where you produce large gametes, but it doesn’t matter if they’re viable.
I don’t have ovaries, but I had them at some point in my life. I can only surmise I’m not in the “sex class” woman according to Rowling, since I don’t produce large gametes, viable or not.
irrelevant if she was born with a rare difference of sexual development that makes neither of the above possible,
Sounds like being born with a condition that makes your bits not develop the same as your brain would qualify?
Yeah, except I’m pretty sure she disagrees. Weird, it’s almost as if any rational definition actually is actually automatically inclusive, except when you jump through a million hoops to make it less so.
Of course she’ll disagree.
As a 58 year old, JK Rowling is, by her own definition, very unlikely to be a woman any longer.
That’s why she’s so mad all the time!
“belongs to the sex class”… The heck. Such a meaningless circular definition just to provide a veneer of justification for her transphobia.
Also:
3 Ways Squidward Makes It Really Difficult To Jerk Off To Him
What the hell is this website lmao. It’s awesome.
They have a youtube channel too!
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source; check me out at GitHub.
It used to be owned by The Onion, but it’s since become its own thing. But it’s basically if The Onion was clickbait/buzzfeed.
Biologist here. The main problem with this argument is that Rowling is trying to win her argument through scientizing, and is not only doing it in an inept way, but in a way that’s completely ironic.
She’s invoking biology, but infortunately she’s adopting an approach that incorporates a high school level of biology. When we start teaching science, we start with highly simplified presentations of the major topics, then build both in breadth and depth from there. If you really want to get down the rabbit hole of sex determination (and multiple definitions of genetic and phenotypical “sex”), you really need to get into molecular biology, genetics, and developmental biology. She’s been advised of this multiple times by multiple experts, so at this point it’s willful ignorance.
The painfully ironic part is that she’s relying on an area where she has no expertise in order to make her point, while ignoring the fact that, as a world-known literary figure, she should know that the applicable part of the definition of “woman” is linguistic and semiotic - which is to say it’s cultural. The definition of “woman” was different in the 1940s South, among the 17th century pilgrims, the Algonquin tribes, cultures throughout sub-equatorial Africa, and so on.
The definition of “woman” was different in the 1940s South, among the 17th century pilgrims, the Algonquin tribes, cultures throughout sub-equatorial Africa, and so on.
Can you give an example? Not trying to be a bigot, just curious.
There’s entire branches of research on this, but I think one of the easiest ways to approach it for starting out is to think of the word “womanly.”
having or denoting qualities and characteristics traditionally associated with or expected of women.
I would strike the word “traditionally” from that definition since we’re talking about a comparative and differential analysis and concentrate on the “qualities and characteristics” part. Although most people in the US today wouldn’t think of it this way, imagine the perception of a woman army officer commanding male troops in 1845. You can take the same approach when looking through history or across cultures. What roles, qualities, and characteristics are associated with “women” and how do they differ and evolve?
There’s some complexity when you get into the details - indigenous cultures change when they come into contact with, say, colonialism, and the people who studied them might themselves be observing through their own prejudices. History is replete with examples of British colonialists being unable to properly deal with things like the egalitarian democracies of the northern indigenous peoples or the matriarchal social structures. Picture the used car dealership where the salesman still insists on engaging with the man even though it’s the woman buying the car.
Semantics is the study of the meaning of words, and semiotics is the study of symbology. When we’re talking about these things, we’re talking about how the ideas and symbols associated with the idea-token “woman” differ.
The reason why this is important is that this is the crux of the transphobic argument. Their argument is cultural, not biological (although like I said, even their biology is sketchy).
I think a great study that includes cross cultural anthropological analysis of the role of women, as well as politics and economics, is David Graeber’s The Dawn of Everything.
here’s one example for you (click here) exploring igbo gender norms
here’s a second report that’s worth reading too (click here)
i don’t have much knowledge about the other cultures suggested, others can provide info for those
In examining sex and gender in Igbo society today, it is evident that colonisation was not just an event. Colonisation is a structure, an unhealed wound that remains open to this day, in the form of Western gender norms among multiple other manifestations.
Thank you for this article. Deeply interesting.
However, this was weakened by the flexible gender system of traditional Igbo culture and language. As Ifi explained, a major component of this gender framework was that “male roles were open to certain categories of women through such practices as “nhanye”- “male daughters” and “igba ohu” – “female husbands”
What, you’re telling me that boywives were real all along!?
Sorry if this question seems stupid, but you seem to really know what you’re talking about.
My understanding is that the main issues TERFs have is protecting women’s spaces, and that by having a vague or arbitrary definition of womanhood it erodes those spaces.
I personally would like to see a society that’s far less focused on gender and minimises that kind of segregation outside of medical necessity. But I know that’s quite extreme and I don’t have a “perfect” solution, assuming we’re going to keep things like women’s only gyms, domestic violence shelters, and professional sports.
Judging based on “passing” is clearly transphobic and ignores any kind of intersex/non-binary presentation. As well as some masculine featured afab women somehow failing. And basing on biology is clearly flawed. So if it’s not too much trouble what would your suggestion be?
The person you asked your question of claims to be a biologist, but you dismiss the relevance of biology.
…basing on biology is clearly flawed…
It sounds like you might be more interested in an answer from a sociologist. Or are you asking the biologist to argue that basing it on biology is not flawed?
How large do gametes have to be to be considered large?
I mean human gametes aren’t very large compared to chicken gametes.
BEHOLD! ROWLING’S WOMEN! Throws chicken
Probably larger than pollen
Are you a woman?? SHOW ME THE GAMETES!
TERFs? Posting interesting and positive content? I don’t think so, Elon - they’re usually regurgitating same bullshit over and over, and being as miserable as possible. Just like the Twitter’s usual far right user base, but somehow even more so.
She wrote one of the most popular book series of all time, certainly she can think of something to tweet about other than whining about trans people
she ran out of Earthsea to rip off and she has nothing else
So as a likley post menopausal human. JK Rowling no longer belongs to the ‘sex class woman’ and likely has no ‘sex class’.
Given she spends like 80% of her free time talking shit about a marginalized minority, she also has no class in general
Nice
Fuck that’s a great burn.
“But I could in the past” or “I was meant to” or some other contrived bullshit that gets the end result she wants.
Jesus, it’s way more dehumanizing to be thought of only in relation to checks notes Large Gametes than simply accepting that people of the same gender can be born with different bits.
It’s even worse than that. Individuals are a vessel for those gametes, not the gametes themselves. I’m sorry, but sperm aren’t fucking people Robert Rowling. You aren’t your cum or your period. Inhaling pollen during spring isn’t killing trees.
Joanne Galbraith’s conservative gender ideology values genes and bloodlines more than people. Living a good life doesn’t matter, only reproducing like e coli.
Phobes want the world to make sense because they think it’ll fill the emptiness in their soul. It’ll never work. The void can’t be filled that way.
Who are the people you’re talking about?
Joanne Rowling has released books under the name Robert Galbraith, and the poster above has mixed up the names for humourous effect.
Also Robert Galbraith Heath was a psychiatrist who was a big proponent of conversion therapy for queer people. Probably nothing to do with why Rowling chose that name…
I always thought it was a way to stay relevant, cause she cant think of any more film franchises to copy, but clearly its been an issue for a while.
It’s so sad how this kind of people succeeded. Or, is the society designed this way? Ugh.
Eh. Despite its problems, Harry Potter was fairly decent, especially in terms of having characters people care about. The world building was mid and there was bigotry against people outside of England, but there is a lot to like about it. It had a huge Fandom, many of whom were queer. That series earned her most of her wealth and popularity originally.
I think it was possible for her to have grown out of her conservative worldview if she was willing to. Unfortunately, it’s hard to critically examine your beliefs. Her financial success probably affected the chances of her knowing queer people personally, which decreased her motivation to understand us. If she wasn’t successful, she might have been a better person than she is now. Then again, maybe not. At least she wouldn’t have caused as much harm.
Yeah, I am more curious about if e.g. being a bigot even helps your chances in success. Bleak…
