Well, if she’s not 100% on board with all my ideas let her burn!
5 Likes
This is becoming a far too common worldview.
2 Likes
so what exactly is JK rowling trying to say when she says that people who menstruate used to be called women
That may be some people’s opinion of her, but it’s not mine.
That feminist debate on trans issues is complex. I see their pov but side with trans.
Has there been a push in the trans community to say biological sex isn’t real recently? Or is she responding to the idea that sex is more complicated than just female/male by saying of course biologically female people exist.
What a bloody mess she’s gotten herself into.
2 Likes
I havnt followed it at all. I do follow the trans community some and there are some pretty militant advocates in that community who argue biological sex is socially constructed which is silly.
I think her position is basically “Trans women are not women, but that doesn’t mean they should be discriminated in in any way or thought of as less than anybody else”.
Trans women find the “Trans women are not women” part offensive as do many others on their behalf.
It’s the old ‘we can’t abolish student debt because I had to pay mine off’ argument. You can’t just become a woman because I’ve had to struggle for 50 years as a woman. But to me it’s like then why not bring some allies on board who know what it’s like to suffer.
2 Likes
Rowling is a troll who’s chosen the worst possible time to punch down on people.
1 Like
I don’t think it’s exactly that. Her line is more of a “separate but equal” one.
Is the old confusion between sex and gender which for some reason is so hard for people to understand, even though it is a very simply concept.
If I’ve not been misled she also the only person to go from being a billionaire to not being a billionaire because she gave so much money away. And as far as I know it didn’t go to a garbage “foundation” that is still under her total control.
Nice
Giving huge amounts away secretly without a foundation with your name emblazoned all over it is the nuts.
Had a conversation class on a video covering the ongoing water crisis. I was asking about the economic implications of the situation.
And of course in the class, there’s a fucking anarcho-capitalist who had limited qualms about buying water to sell to others for a profit. Basically, the plot of Quantum of Solace. Once I heard him mention the non-aggression principle in his acknowledgement of being an A/Cist, I immediately knew he was listening to Stefan Molyneux. Of course, the irony is that buying massive amounts of available water to sell for a profit is a violation of the NAP that he brought up.
Had to show some serious discipline in not calling him out for it as the other students likely didn’t know what A/Cism is, it would be off-topic, and would basically involve two people discussing this while the rest pretend to care. But I suspect that my facial expression probably gave how I felt away to all.
Thing is that I had stupid opinions as a teenager too. I used to think JNCO jeans and a bowl cut were cool. You know, we all make misakes.
1 Like
I like to refuse to accept the NAP as axiomatic when arguing with an ACer.
Well it’s not like you’re trolling them. NAP is objectively a stinking pile of bullshit.
Anybody who has had to deal with real shit in their lives knows that A/Cism is a delusion shared by people who are privileged enough to be shielded from the harshness of reality. It’s why A/Cism is more popular among teenagers and young adults than any other group.
Strategy for arguing with an anarchocapitalist:
-
Ask them how it is that anyone can own land, since land is not the product of anyone’s labor and certain types of land are in short supply, such that taking ownership of it decreases what is available for others.
-
Use the time thus gained to run away and do something more productive.
6 Likes