J.K Rowling.

The photograph is taken from JK Rowling’s essay that I recommend you read.

https://www.jkrowling.com/opinions/j-k-rowling-writes-about-her-reasons-for-speaking-out-on-sex-and-gender-issues/

For over a year I’ve been trying to understand sex and gender issues also. These issues affect everyone but I have doubted how honest people are when talking about them. When is it pure bigotry versus concern over “cis” girls and women’s safety? I’ve seen and heard so many mocking comments over anyone who doesn’t tick a stereotypical box and I have heard about one too many incidents where a person is killed for it.

Last year I wrote a letter on my sub stack addressed to trans YouTuber, Contrapoints. I defended her but questioned JK Rowling and others aligning with gender critical feminism. As Contra said, I wondered if they weren’t being disingenuous.

It is of course reasonable to be cautious over women’s safe spaces such as public bathrooms but I have myself experienced intimidating behaviour from racist women. Just because they have taken a personal dislike to me doesn’t mean I am to be excluded from any space they inhabit.

(I assume they are regressive idiots who read headlines about immigrants and assume I’m part of the problems in society).

JK Rowling has suffered through violent physical abuse so I can understand her further caution over who shares a bathroom with her. For her the experience of intimidation and physical harassment and violence is on another level.

I said in my letter that maybe some gender critical feminists protest too much. I shouldn’t have said that because it invalidates their experiences but I am still somewhat weary when reading about other people’s concerns over gender and sex issues.

I want to defend our safe spaces and I also believe in tolerance within society. Did those who killed Brandon Teena, a transgender man, do so in the fight for women’s spaces or did they do so because they were deeply hateful bigots with personal vendettas? It has been proven to be the latter and even if they used the women’s spaces argument, this isn’t how issues are settled. Stating the obvious here. That incident was decades ago but recently we had the death of a transgender woman called Brianna Ghey. Her killers referred to her as “a thing.”

This dehumanisation of people is a pattern throughout a lot of murders.

No one who is moral and sane would hound trans people or any people. I’ve talked about gender and sex issues with others, including my husband. We both agree that regardless of anyone’s  tastes and feelings, transgender people deserve basic respect.

This must be practically incorporated into society and not at the cost of other people’s rights.

Yet continually when women in particular speak about this they are called transphobic or TERFS. Trans-exclusionary radical feminists.

I’m very interested in psychology and phobias. I have one myself and I think phobias are innate. You can’t completely hide the visceral reaction to something but in order to integrate socially you can kind of cover it up.

My point is that I think transphobia exists based on phobias existing. Someone who is different, who presents a threat, who triggers something visceral in you, you as a person who has seen the world and is “tolerant.”

This can not possibly the case for all of the people who talk about gender and sex issues and concerns over women’s safety. Phobia has been used as an argument to shut the other person down.

It’s also one thing to be emotional about your cause that affects you personally but it is quite another to send death threats to those who are gender critical. In fact it actually doesn’t matter if someone spews hatred and then you send a death threat. You’ve still done something a lot worse. (This isn’t to condone hate speech, by the way).

So, when I watched ContraPoints’ The Witch Trials of JK Rowling, I understood Contra’s point about homophobia and transphobia. However, her thesis is that JK Rowling is a bigot and when called out Rowling feigns surprise. Contra is determined that Rowling is a bigot and her whole video depends on that one “truth.”

Whereas there should also be room to ask if JK Rowling is a bigot? Where is the critical thinking that allows us to ask that as opposed to just being told that as a truth?

I adore Contrapoints’ stylistic videos because when accompanying substance, they contribute to the dialogue. However, the substance of her videos has to not be one sided, otherwise this is just Contrapoints’ opinion and if she believes so much in honesty (as to call JK Rowling dishonest), shouldn’t her videos also incorporate multi faceted views?

Sometime after watching a few of Contra’s videos, I watched King Critical on YouTube. He is gender critical and looks at ContraPoints videos (as well as other left wing video essayists like PhilosophyTube and Shaun). KC is very good at analysing and articulating arguments. From him I learned to not take what any YouTuber says as the truth and developed my critical thinking skills. This brought me back to looking at JK Rowling’s letter about gender and sex issues without the influence of video essayists disregarding her experiences and views.

I could write more based on the many podcasts I’ve listened to from biologists, psychologists and writers about gender and sex issues. I want to keep listening to all sides and in many ways this goes beyond someone’s autonomy to live as they please.

I also ask myself, how do we differentiate between a group or a cult? When you leave a cult that thrives on one or more narcissists’ toxic behaviour, they black list you. That doesn’t happen when you leave a normal and healthy group. By taking on ideological thinking and slogan politics you can shut down debate by decrying bigotry. Then you can blacklist those who leave your ideology.

However, by saying I have the right to live like this and do not need to justify my body, my mind and choices to you and by being civil yet firm, then surely that is non toxic, non cult like and healthy behaviour.