World of KJ :: View topic

Snrub wrote:

Malcolm wrote:

Trans-women/men can use a women's/men's room all they want, I don't care, but I do find the "trans-women ARE women" POV a bit too simplistic. A biological woman is different from a trans-woman so while they might identify/live as woman (and shouldn't be subject to discrimination etc), I don't think it's unfair to make the distinction.

So, is it fair to say there are men, women, trans-men, and trans-women?

Again, no one (apart from the aforementioned few who will ALWAYS argue the sky isn't blue) is saying biological sex isn't real. Biological (or cis) women exist. The argument is whether trans women should be considered women in the eyes of the law and have the same rights and protections as cis women.

Those arguing for the definition of woman to be strictly biological women are doing so to allow themselves the right to misgender trans women as men, and, vice versa, trans men as women. They want to deny trans women the right to gender themselves as women.

The video I posted earlier describes it nicely. Imagine the term woman to be an umbrella, and underneath that umbrella is an array of different types of women: cis women, trans women, small women, tall women, black women, white women... all different, all with different needs medically and in society, but ultimately... all women.

Author:	BK [ Mon Oct 19, 2020 5:34 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Jk Rowling
Snrub wrote: Malcolm wrote: Trans-women/men can use a women's/men's room all they want, I don't care, but I do find the "trans-women ARE women" POV a bit too simplistic. A biological woman is different from a trans-woman so while they might identify/live as woman (and shouldn't be subject to discrimination etc), I don't think it's unfair to make the distinction. So, is it fair to say there are men, women, trans-men, and trans-women? Again, no one (apart from the aforementioned few who will ALWAYS argue the sky isn't blue) is saying biological sex isn't real. Biological (or cis) women exist. The argument is whether trans women should be considered women in the eyes of the law and have the same rights and protections as cis women. Those arguing for the definition of woman to be strictly biological women are doing so to allow themselves the right to misgender trans women as men, and, vice versa, trans men as women. They want to deny trans women the right to gender themselves as women. The video I posted earlier describes it nicely. Imagine the term woman to be an umbrella, and underneath that umbrella is an array of different types of women: cis women, trans women, small women, tall women, black women, white women... all different, all with different needs medically and in society, but ultimately... all women. Twitter is full of TRAs screaming with their dick pics and violence at the ready. If they really are a minority, they've overtaken the entire conversation. You also have to wonder why the conversation always revolves around transwomen and not transmen. Perhaps it's because transwomen were formerly men and are taking their male privilege over and making a scene. Not all of course, but this entire discussion is misogynistic from the outset. Anyway, all of these arguments are disingenuous because fundamentally transwomen do not know what it is like to be a woman. They think they know by taking their cues from culture, but they were born as men. The most accurate descriptor for them would be, drumroll transwomen since their experience does not describe either men or women or even transmen. Why is there a need to subsume women's rights when they can advocate for trans rights? And when you see the debate centred around women and transwomen leaving out men and transmen - what can you conclude? I cannot divorce the misogyny away from TRAs. It's blatant and far from 'woke'. I have a cousin who is trans and I fully supported their decision, no questions asked. Only after seeing the backlash to JK Rowling have I gained more insight and perspective, and I cannot agree with TRAs at all. Fight for trans rights, I'm there for it, but calling women menstruators, subsuming women's rights, demanding lesbians/gays/heterosexuals find them attractive or else they are transphobic - nope. That's just their old male privilege speaking and even moreso than male privilege, that kind of entitlement seems very akin to the incels.

Author:	Shack [ Tue Oct 20, 2020 6:59 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Jk Rowling
Nice post BK, check out politics forum if you have some rants you want to get off your chest, we're one of the few forums left where both liberal and conservative posts are valued

Author:	Alex Y. [ Tue Dec 01, 2020 2:35 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Jk Rowling
https://www.tmz.com/2020/12/01/ellen-pa ... ns-elliot/

Author:	stuffp [ Tue Dec 01, 2020 8:20 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Jk Rowling
Interesting

Author:	Flava'd vs The World [ Wed Dec 02, 2020 4:18 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Jk Rowling
If I ever see him I'm gonna raise my hand to their face and say "Elllllllliiiioootttttt."

World of KJ https://www.worldofkj.com/forum/

Jk Rowling https://www.worldofkj.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=87020	Page 2 of 2

Author:	Shack [ Fri Dec 04, 2020 2:58 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Jk Rowling
This tweet shows part of the problem the radical feminists have with trans. Trans activists have a lot in common with masculine dad from the 1950s telling his daughter "Girls don't wear boy clothes". There will be no tomboys in popular cutlure anymore, next time you see a Netflix show that has a character where they have short hair and dress like a man, they're turning trans for sure. All women who dress like men are men, all men who dress like women are women, they just don't know it yet.

Author:	zwackerm [ Fri Dec 04, 2020 3:04 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Jk Rowling
I’ve had it explained to me that tomboys don’t feel weird having breasts and curves, but trans men are disgusted looking at their own bodies, and that’s the main difference.

Author:	Alex Y. [ Fri Dec 04, 2020 9:24 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Jk Rowling
Pregnant women have the female right to control their own bodies and abort babies they don't want, while pregnant men don't share that same right, so they must carry baby to full term and then give unwanted babies up to adoption.

Author:	Shack [ Mon Mar 08, 2021 7:56 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Jk Rowling
I thought the Super Straight (+Super Gay/Super Lesbian) thing would just be a satirical hashtag, but since it touched a nerve maybe it will stick. LGBTQS! Not sure what the rules are, I would never date someone born a male but if I see a picture of someone like the trans Milo Blaire White, my brain still hits the "hot" button

Author:	Alex Y. [ Mon May 24, 2021 7:27 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Jk Rowling
Elliott Page post-surgery:

Author:	zwackerm [ Mon May 24, 2021 8:29 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Jk Rowling

Author:	Shack [ Mon May 24, 2021 9:19 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Jk Rowling
Did his surgery include getting a 6 pack?

Author:	zwackerm [ Mon May 24, 2021 9:34 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Jk Rowling
Sad to see a once beautiful woman so mutilated.

Author:	Jack Sparrow [ Mon May 24, 2021 9:42 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Jk Rowling
Shack wrote: Did his surgery include getting a 6 pack? I was wondering the same.

Author:	Corpse [ Tue May 25, 2021 12:18 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Jk Rowling
If a person changes something in their life to better themselves, good for them. Many are unwilling, for whatever the reason may be, to make such change in their own lives to better themselves.

Page 2 of 2	All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/

Author:	Jack Sparrow [ Mon May 24, 2021 9:43 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Jk Rowling
zwackerm wrote: Sad to see a once beautiful woman so mutilated. Eh I am indifferent because we only see them through movies and make-up. Knowing a person in real life is very different.