Does J.K. Rowling believe that trans people — or at least trans women — don’t deserve the presumption of innocence? That seems to be the clear implication of an op-ed she wrote for the Times (UK) today. But she is cagey enough in her wording that she can and probably will figure out a way to say, my goodness, I wasn’t saying anything of the kind.
You can decide what you think she meant.
Here’s the relevant quote in context. She is — in the midst of a longer attack on First Minister of Scotland Nicola Sturgeon –insinuating that men routinely pretend to be trans women in order to get easier access to women to abuse:
The third argument Sturgeon uses is that it’s transphobic to suggest any man would fraudulently claim a female identity. This claim is extraordinary. Nobody but the very naive can fail to be aware that predatory men are capable of going to great lengths to gain easy access to victims, and have often sought out professions or special status that offer camouflage for their activities. Sex offenders have historically been found among social workers, teachers, priests, doctors, babysitters, school caretakers, celebrities and charity fundraisers, yet no matter how often the scandals break, the lesson appears never to be learned: it is dangerous to assert that any category of people deserves a blanket presumption of innocence.
In the next paragraph, she backtracks a little, if only a little:
This shouldn’t need saying, but in the current climate, it does: literally no feminist I’ve ever met claims all trans women are predators, any more than we believe that all men are predators.
As @Bronwen85 puts it on Twitter,
Seriously if you can tell me how any of this is different from Trump’s “they’re murderers, they’re rapists…and some, I assume, are good people” speech you’ll be a liar, because it’s not
It’s the same fucking thing.
Follow me on Mastodon.
Send tips to dfutrelle at gmail dot com.
We Hunted the Mammoth relies on support from you, its readers, to survive. So please donate here if you can, or at David-Futrelle-1 on Venmo.
Also Anna
Since you want to know so badly. I’ve been to several different nude beaches, sex clubs. Peep shows with an audience of men and women watching me get laid out. Changing rooms. Nude swimming pools. Weird japanese bathhouses And I can tell you this, I support no sex or gender separation. I think the world would be a much better place if we all just got over nudity and sexual arousal all together. I think nudity doesn’t have to be sexual and if some young males and women with a penis get a boner because they are of the age of teenage to early 20s and you can get a boner over soup at that age. Then so be it. As long as they are not masterbating, being lewd or harassing other people it’s not a big deal. It’s a penis. Not a gun. It won’t bite you or shoot you or cause you harm by being their. Trust me. I’ve seen many in my short life time. They won’t hurt you. Okay? Be a big girl now and stop crying.
I’m in my late 40s and have had a lifetime of pretty much the same experiences as Elaine (can’t claim to have been at a japanese bathhouse, though I’ve been naked at hot springs, and can’t claim to have been a peep show attraction, though I was an actual-sex-with-clients sex worker for awhile). I agree, and have said much the same in the past. It really shouldn’t be a big deal.
I would also add that where trauma is involved – such as domestic abuse shelters – there is going to be a tough decision who stays and who goes if you end up with a pre-op/non-op trans woman and a cis woman with phallophobia, particularly if there’s no other shelter in the region or spaces in them are scarce – but otherwise, you can’t exclude people from a public place just because someone else might be uncomfortable. There are people who are uncomfortable because someone of a different race is present, because someone who is obviously disabled present, because someone of ambiguous gender is present, because someone who is gay or lesbian or jewish or muslim or athiest or unpopular is present. Or is Ted Cruz. 😜 Private places can set their own rules, of course, so long as they aren’t a public-access business, but most communities/spaces/events/groups/clubs these days don’t discriminate in order to maximize participation.
Anyone can set up their own “wombyn-born-wombyn” [*gag, blech*] club if they want, but good luck finding enough members to make it worthwhile. Anyone who isn’t going out of their way to discriminate, which is most people, is going to be elsewhere.
Also worth pointing out that AK’s point here is wrong:
The argument is not that trans women don’t feel safe in men’s spaces, it’s that they are not safe in those spaces.
@call me mark
that’s the whole point, isn’t it? we got a crumb of dignity and the world wants to snatch it back.
GSS,
“Fuck your fee-fees”
Should we pass on that sentiment to those trans women uncomfortable at using male facilities? That they should put their big-girl panties on and deal with the fact that they are male and not female? Fair’s fair.
===
Jazzlet,
The goalposts didn’t move, the conversation did. New points were brought up and addressed.
===
Elaine,
I thought I made it clear to you that what I want is to maintain public amenities as they have been for over a century. In this legal regime, male partners have – as you can attest yourself – been permitted entry without legal repercussion. As for the others you bring up, they are female.
Elaine again,
“Since you want to know so badly. I’ve been to several different nude beaches, sex clubs. Peep shows with an audience of men and women watching me get laid out. …”
In what lurid dream of yours did I ask you for these details?
“…males and women with a penis…”
You repeated yourself.
===
Mark,
“The argument is not that trans women don’t feel safe in men’s spaces, it’s that they are not safe in those spaces.”
I said “AN argument” deliberately, as it is one of the arguments used. And as for your point, the spaces reserved for the female sex are due to the exact same reasoning.
Anyway this has run its course I think.
@anna
Your argument is that trans women make you feel uncomfortable. There for they should be beaten, raped and murdered in the men’s rest room. All because little Anna doesn’t feel comfortable and can’t be an adult.
But Anna.
I just told you that bi and lesbian women make straight women uncomfortable. Shouldn’t we care about those straight women feel feels and hand them from changing rooms and bathrooms?
@Elaine: The absolutely least-sexy and most safe for people of all genders/orientations, plus THE SAFEST place for children was my friend’s naturist club (aka nudist resort).
The teens mostly kept their clothes on (because like Elaine said, teen boys can get erections over soup) and played video games in the clubhouse. Everyone else ran around with not a stitch on, swimming, volleyball, hiking well-groomed trails (with proper footwear), camping overnight.
The kids were everyone’s kids. We all treated them as our very own. If someone was even possibly looking funny at children — or at anyone — large menacing men would come and speak to to them about it. And they were ejected and banned pronto.
It’s so much better for swimming. None of that SHLORK when your bathing suit sticks to your ass when you get out of the water. No changing, unchanging, etc. But people were also perfectly accepted if they wanted to wear clothes all the time and just enjoy the forest, restaurant (basic but good, with a fair wine list), the live music (about 75% of the artists performed nude), tennis courts, etc.
And nobody judged anyone on their body, either. I for one would not play pool volleyball against the extremely extra-large women who did — they would have whupped my butt.
Also: nobody’s fee-fees got hurt, nor were they scared little babies. Unlike Anna, who wants the entire world to cater for her personal problems, rather than just getting over her irrationality, or staying home wrapped in cotton wool where the scary people who don’t look and think like her can’t show up.
Maybe there should be a separate bathroom just for FARTs, so they can be with their own kind and not bother the decent folks who just wanna pee without being hassled by the pearl-clutching flibbertigibbet genital police.
@gss
Anna a fucking prude. I bet she ask breast feeding women to cover up.
@Elaine: I think so too. It’s all a package deal.
I don’t think being a “prude” is the issue. I’m a prude and very sex-repulsed. The issue is that transphobes (and conservatives in general) make bad-faith claims about people or things being “sexual” based on who they are bigoted against. Any trans person existing at all is called “sexually explicit” or “pedophilia” purely because they are trans. On the other hand, TERs demanding to see children’s genitals to make sure they are cis are not considered sexually exploitative by TERs.
(See also: in 1982, Donald Trump went on live national TV holding a baby, and said to the camera that he would totally find the baby sexually attractive if she wasn’t his daughter. According to Trump supporters, Trump is not in any way a pedophile, but all ‘liberals’ are.)
@bcb
Understood and that’s not the right word for it. I appologize. My use for the word prude is not quite right. I don’t know the word for people sexualizing things that aren’t inherently sexual. A naked body is not sexual. Nor is awkward boner from a teenage amab person or young adult. I think bodies are so over sexualizes that people like Anna seeing a trans person having to pee as a sexual thing, or said akward boner as a assualt. When really it is a person actions that are sexual in nature.
There is nothing wrong with being sexually repulsed and I am not judging you in the slightest. I’m simply tired of nudity and bodies being sexualized.
@Elaine the Witch:
The obvious problem is, once you’ve had a lot of experience with both casual nudity and sexualized nudity, the difference between the two is stark… but most people have very little experience with the former. This does put some limitations on people’s imaginations, and affects how issues involving sex and/or nudity typically get framed. You get people who refuse to believe non-sexual nudity is possible, those who kind of get that it is possible but would much rather keep nudity an inherently sexualized thing, and those who are just like “well, but some people are really uncomfortable with the human body, so we have to respect them” (and that “some people” might occasionally include themselves). And then a lot of businesses would see their profits drop if casual nudity were common…
So it’s not something that’s going away any time soon, sadly. It *is* an issue people tried to tackle during the 1960s and 1990s, but it never got a lot of attention or really went anywhere, and right now there are too many other things on our plate.
@anna
it’s run it’s course because you don’t want to talk about the danger that trans women would face if we’re forced to use men’s facilities. that’s a feature of your belief system that you’d like to keep on the DL i’m sure
@Ada Christine: She just thinks trans people are icky and this hurts her fee-fees. So trans women being raped, beaten, and killed in the men’s room is probably fine with her, or at least acceptable collateral damage. Just so long as her juvenile Karen brain doesn’t have to deal with reality.
She’s basically sticking her fingers in her ears and going “la la la” and ignoring things like facts because she’s got a tween mentality at best and has lived a very sheltered life, but possibly realizes that ignoring facts about trans people and admitting she thinks they’re lesser beings unworthy of safety would make her look bad, so she veers away from stating that outright. Even though it’s extremely clear.
As our Catholic friends know, a lie of omission is still a sin, and as all our other friends know… it’s whatever word they use for sins/evil/being a bad neighbor/stirring up shit they got no bidness in. Sin, bad karma, being a jerk.
It’s a bad case of Main Character Syndrome.
@bcb: I bet you DGAF about the genitals of whoever’s in the next stall, though, and you realize breast-feeding is about nourishing a baby, and aren’t out there trying to get those things banned everywhere.
@Elaine: People who sexualize non-sexual things (like peeing and children’s genitals!) in a harmful matter, I don’t know what the technical name is, but I call ’em “pervs.” (if non-harmful to others, then they just have a kink, like the people who marry buildings)
If they’re talking about inspecting/policing kids’ genitals, I call ’em “possible pedophiles”. At the mildest, I call them “extremely rude people who should mind their own business”.
JKR and Miss Priss Anna can decide what I’d call them beyond “hateful”. Because they are quite literally full of hate; it’s a dictionary definition, not an insult.
Elaine,
If that is your understanding of my position, you display an utter lack of reading comprehension. My arguments have always been based on safety rather than personal distaste, and I not once have I condoned violence against anyone.
But Elaine, they’re female. The amenities are and should continue to be protected against male entry.
“I bet she ask breast feeding women to cover up.”
I’ll take that bet. You’ll lose whatever you put up.
===
GSS,
Some people are nudists therefore everyone ought to be? Or, therefore no sex-segregated spaces? Worthless reasoning. I’ve no problem with nudists and nudist camps, but the comfort some people have does not map to the rest of the population.
===
Ada,
No, a better explanation would be that you and others refuse to see the danger in letting any male in to a female-reserved space so long as he puts on a dress and calls himself a woman. If you can’t see how easily exploited such a permission would be, you are blind. But in that response, you show very clearly that you side with the safety of such males over that of the entire female sex. Same with GSS.
@Anna Kiddna
I think you should show us your chromosomes if you’re to be allowed to keep commenting here.
Dear Anna:
Try digging up.
@Yagottabe Kidding:
That’s because it doesn’t exist, as Crip Dyke proved. Allowing trans people to use the bathroom of their choice
a) Had no effect on the safety of cis women in bathrooms and
b) Improved the safety of trans women in bathrooms.
Nobody was made worse off, safety-wise.
And since you also said:
that should be the end of it. You should concede the entire argument at this point. If you do not do so, you will be putting the lie to that statement of yours I just quoted.
@ Anna
Why don’t you take your discomfort and stick it up your transphobe ass. Your whole argument has been about cis women being uncomfortable and yet your argument now is that straight girls will get over it. Suck the fattest part of my ass and go to hell. I’m done with your bullshit.
As long as this is *still* ongoing, let’s try a perspective shift: trans women are sin eaters.
It’s a similar concept to a scapegoat, but the difference is, the people punishing the sin eater(s) know that they’re probably innocent; they just don’t care. Their real target(s) are too dangerous or virtually untouchable, but the offense so great that it cannot go unpunished; so they choose a more vulnerable, easier target to act as a proxy for the real one. It feels good. It feels right. It’s cathartic. But it leaves the real offender free to offend again, prompting the need to punish the sin eater(s) more. In the long run catharsis is a form of self-sabotage, and can be addictive as well – not to mention that when it also involves harm to others, it’s creating more evil.
A small but significant number of men inflict harm on women and are allowed to get away with it. Trans women are an easier target than those men, or even men as a whole, and being AMAB they can serve as a symbolic proxy. Or perhaps, “effigy” would be better. The real problem is the culture and the legal system, and this doesn’t help; if anything, some of the anti-trans legal measures put out there “to protect women and/or children” actually make it a little easier for evil men to prey on others. Because again, it’s less about reigning them in than it is about proxy-punishing an easier target.
Also to the dipshit
Ive also told you they don’t need a dress. If a man wants to rape you, rake pictures of you, jack off on to the back of your jeans. Whistle at you or even get a boner while looking at you. He’s going to do it. And cis women will let it happen without so much as a phone call to help. You aren’t safe now whether trans women are in it or not But you didn’t want to acknowledge that. Instead you for all pearly clutch that I mention raped. Then you talked to me like you didn’t believe it. And then when you really don’t want to acknowledge it. You take the ablest route and insult my intelligence. Very feminist of you. Just silence the voice of those with actual lived experience because it doesn’t match your narrative.
Also you asshole. I did hear your argument. And it’s the same one straight girls gave when they didn’t want me into the changing rooms. So now I only picture you as a bitchty rich track star that throws clites at queer girls when they try to shower.
You don’t even want to protect women from rape! You want to protect them form feeling uncomfortable.
Now go back to your terf circles and cry about how some mean dumb whore didn’t join your hate cult.
Makroth,
If that is an attempt to turn my position back on me, it indicates a level of non-comprehension to rival that of Elaine.
Surplus,
I pointed out already that Crip’s arguments did not address the underlying reasoning behind the creation of female-exclusive spaces (the disproportionate burden of sexual crime falling on women), and I pointed out that her rebuttal against patterns of criminality in the trans population was undermined by a failure to read the reasoning given in the study. Oh and she ignored the point that such revisions to law necessarily redefine certain crimes as non-criminal, removing e.g. male voyeurism by way of intrusion provided the person puts on a female costume and calls himself a woman, and ignored the point that such changes would not be expected to have any change on the more brazen physical crimes.
Elaine,
Why don’t you? Small child, your entire presence in this conversation has been feelings based: angry name-calling.
And I’ve told you that the system you support – cessation of sex-segregated spaces – will have the same weakness. A person brazen enough to enter a public facility to commit rape will case as little for gender-segregation for those spaces as for sex-segregation.
You don’t read for comprehension, do you.
Assaults of cis women do not increase in places that allow trans bathroom access, full stop. And assaults upon trans women decrease.
And do you really think people can’t tell someone engaged in voyeurism from someone using the toilet, regardless of what they’re wearing? Yeesh.
@Anna Kiddna
You STILL haven’t addressed the fact that trans people are not safe when put into the bathroom of their assigned-at-birth gender. The difference is simple, FART. Transphobes FEEL unsafe. Trans people ARE unsafe.
And again, the study you posted does not say what you think it does.