# J K Rowling and the trans furore **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [June 16, 2020, 6:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/j-k-rowling-and-the-trans-furore/855795 "2020-06-16T18:05:08Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 200
**Author:** ![filmore](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/7993a0/32.png) [@filmore](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/filmore)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2020, 11:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/j-k-rowling-and-the-trans-furore/855795/3986 "2020-09-23T23:03:58Z")
> [@Banquet\_Bear](#): > > …I can’t answer this question. But what I can say is that the photo that monstro linked to **isn’t** how Danielle currently presents, that she started hormone treatment in April, that the BLM photo was taken in 2017, and all of this is easily discoverable with just a few seconds on **google**. I don’t know why monstro chose to link to a misleading set of images to try and make a point. But that does appear to be par-for-the-course here. It should be clear that transitioning to female traits is no longer an expectation to be trans. Danielle could have stayed as she was and still been a transwoman. It’s clear that transwomen can have beards now. It’s logical to assume that transwomen in the future will demonstrate the whole range of characteristics from 100% feminine to 100% masculine. So even if Danielle herself wouldn’t have gone into any bathrooms when she had a beard, that’s not necessarily the case for all transwomen or transwomen of the future. I think we’ll need to start considering that even a 100% sincere transwoman is going to look and act exactly like a 100% masculine cisman (e.g. exactly like Paul Bunyan). I’m not sure that things like self-id really matter if there is no effort to conform to gender norms of appearance or behavior. What does it matter if someone like Paul Bunyan gets a cert that says she’s a woman, but she doesn’t change a single thing about her from before she was trans? If she goes into the women’s locker/rest room, she’s going to look like a very masculine, genetically XY, male. I think we need a more detailed requirements for entering traditionally female-only spaces if being a transwoman doesn’t really imply anything about how much the person fits in with typical woman characteristics and behaviors. ---
**Author:** ![Banquet\_Bear](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/banquet_bear/32/373_2.png) [@Banquet\_Bear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Banquet_Bear)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2020, 11:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/j-k-rowling-and-the-trans-furore/855795/3987 "2020-09-23T23:12:34Z")
> [@Novelty\_Bobble](#): > > In the case of a gender declaration, what could one be shown to have lied about? …I don’t get the question. When you sign a declaration, you assert that everything you have said is true. If something isn’t true, that probably means you lied. So what could one be shown to have lied about? Whatever it is they signed on the declaration. My questions to you remain. Self-ID with a statutory declaration is the system in Argentina, Denmark, Ireland, Malta and Norway. What risks are those countries taking? What evidence is there that people are amending their gender in those countries with fraudulent intent? What problem are you trying to solve by making the process more adversarial than this? ---
**Author:** ![Banquet\_Bear](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/banquet_bear/32/373_2.png) [@Banquet\_Bear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Banquet_Bear)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2020, 11:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/j-k-rowling-and-the-trans-furore/855795/3988 "2020-09-23T23:22:17Z")
> [@filmore](#): > > I think we need a more detailed requirements for entering traditionally female-only spaces if being a transwoman doesn’t really imply anything about how much the person fits in with typical woman characteristics and behaviors. …this really has nothing to do with my post. monstro posted a link to a misleading photo and then practically dared me to “call her TERF.” If people are going to play those sorts of games with me I’m gonna call them out. The actual debate over bathrooms has been done to death in this thread and I have zero interest in going over it again. ---
**Author:** ![monstro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ba9def/32.png) [@monstro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/monstro)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2020, 11:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/j-k-rowling-and-the-trans-furore/855795/3989 "2020-09-23T23:33:46Z")
> [@Banquet\_Bear](#): > > monstro posted a link to a misleading photo and then practically dared me to “call her TERF. Every time I think that may be reasonable and fair, you say something shitty like this and I remember I can’t trust you. We’ve posted numerous examples of masculine transwomen in this thread. You can act like they’re all a hoax, but I don’t think you want to sound like Donald Trump. ---
**Author:** ![Banquet\_Bear](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/banquet_bear/32/373_2.png) [@Banquet\_Bear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Banquet_Bear)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2020, 11:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/j-k-rowling-and-the-trans-furore/855795/3990 "2020-09-23T23:44:22Z")
> [@monstro](#): > > Every time I think that may be reasonable and fair, you say something shitty like this and I remember I can’t trust you. > [@monstro](#): > > Is BB et al. going to find it acceptable if women call for help when they spot someone like [this](https://www.famousbirthdays.com/people/danielle-muscato.html) using the women’s restroom? Or will that be considered TERFy, a denial of human rights, and thus very very bad? …why did you call me out like that? Why link to that misleading picture, and why present a false dichotomy? There was a good faith way you could have engaged me there. You didn’t have to add that second sentence. ---
**Author:** ![monstro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ba9def/32.png) [@monstro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/monstro)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2020, 11:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/j-k-rowling-and-the-trans-furore/855795/3991 "2020-09-23T23:47:48Z")
I asked that question _sincerely_. I was asking in good faith, not to play “gotcha”! Dammit, I’m trying to figure out what y’all want. What y’all will find acceptable and what y’all will flip out over. Instead of fighting me, can you just answer the question so I can understand where y’all are coming from? Shit! Why can’t you just answer the fucking question without accusing me of daring you? ---
**Author:** ![Banquet\_Bear](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/banquet_bear/32/373_2.png) [@Banquet\_Bear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Banquet_Bear)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2020, 11:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/j-k-rowling-and-the-trans-furore/855795/3992 "2020-09-23T23:51:20Z")
> [@monstro](#): > > I asked that question _sincerely_ . I was asking in good faith, not to play “gotcha”! Dammit, I’m trying to figure out what y’all want. What y’all will find acceptable and what y’all will flip out over. Instead of fighting me, can you just answer the question so I can understand where y’all are coming from? …I actually answered the question. No I won’t judge you. I won’t think you are bad. I won’t think you are TERFy. I don’t think its a denial of human rights. I don’t think it would be very very bad. If you feel unsafe: then call for help. I’ve already said all of this. I’ve just said it again. Does that answer your question? ---
**Author:** ![monstro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ba9def/32.png) [@monstro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/monstro)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2020, 12:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/j-k-rowling-and-the-trans-furore/855795/3993 "2020-09-24T00:12:34Z")
[https://labblog.uofmhealth.org/rounds/youth-transgender-people-should-use-bathroom-theyre-most-comfortable](https://labblog.uofmhealth.org/rounds/youth-transgender-people-should-use-bathroom-theyre-most-comfortable) So it seems like young folks aren’t like the old school robots who would prefer masculine transwomen stay away from women’s spaces. Which I don’t find surprising at all. Young folks think telling the butch lesbian transwomen to stay out of the women’s restroom is TERFy and bigoted. Why wouldn’t they think this? They are being taught that gender affirmation is a human right. They are also being raised on Karen memes, so they have in their mind that women are a privileged group comprised of people who complain too damn much. Young folks don’t see anything wrong with ciswomen being creeped out, because no one is out here protesting on behalf of ciswomen and their feelings. Ciswomen aren’t cool right now. They are anti-cool. Young folks can’t foresee how ciswomen will be resigned to accepting all males, dangerous or no, into their spaces if all transwomen are entitled to use women’s spaces. Probably because young folks don’t get that not everyone is like @Banquet_Bear. If a woman screams and accuses a male of being a scary pervert without irrefutable proof in hand, people aren’t going to come to their aid. Not if it means they will be accused of enabling a transphobe and potentially getting blasted on social media. So most people will side with the male and vilify the female, which will cause females to stay embarrassed and silent and resigned to their victimization. Just like what happens in 99% of spaces on this planet. Young people don’t know this because they haven’t lived very long. Older people don’t have an excuse, though. I’m not trying to be melodramatic. I’m just trying to let people know that we aren’t just talking about pronouns and social permission to wear skirts. Thanks for answering my question, @Banquet_Bear. ---
**Author:** ![YWTF](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/d07c76/32.png) [@YWTF](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/YWTF)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2020, 12:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/j-k-rowling-and-the-trans-furore/855795/3994 "2020-09-24T00:52:21Z")
> [@Odesio](#): > > We used to have a poster, Ban the State I think, who would sometimes go on tirades about restrooms segregated by sex. Something about them being oppressive and unnecessary. Sounds like someone who would be willing to say and do anything to get what he felt entitled to. A person feeling oppressed because they can’t be in the vicinity of partially undressed women will never NOT raise red flags for me. ---
**Author:** ![Biffster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/biffster/32/339_2.png) [@Biffster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Biffster)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2020, 2:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/j-k-rowling-and-the-trans-furore/855795/3995 "2020-09-24T02:54:13Z")
> [@Banquet\_Bear](#): > > …I don’t get the question. When you sign a declaration, you assert that everything you have said is true. If something isn’t true, that probably means you lied. So what could one be shown to have lied about? Whatever it is they signed on the declaration. So how are the authorities going to check to see if someone has lied? Strip search? A fully intact cismale could claim to be a woman and have the documentation to prove it. How will a declaration help in that case? ---
**Author:** ![Banquet\_Bear](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/banquet_bear/32/373_2.png) [@Banquet\_Bear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Banquet_Bear)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2020, 3:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/j-k-rowling-and-the-trans-furore/855795/3996 "2020-09-24T03:24:38Z")
> [@Biffster](#): > > So how are the authorities going to check to see if someone has lied? Strip search? A fully intact cismale could claim to be a woman and have the documentation to prove it. How will a declaration help in that case? …the same way they did (unfortunately too late) with Karen White. They determined there was “smattering of evidence in this case that the defendants approach to transition has been less than committed” and that she used her “transgender persona to put herself in contact with vulnerable persons.” The thing is if you have a statutory declaration when the very few edge cases happen then there is a way that those cases can be examined. The key is to interject **before** putting the predator into the same environment as their targets, and not after. Nobody wants another Karen White to have the ability to prey on vulnerable people. But there isn’t **any** reason to treat every transgender person as if they are a potential Karen White. ---
**Author:** ![Summerday](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/22d042/32.png) [@Summerday](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Summerday)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2020, 4:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/j-k-rowling-and-the-trans-furore/855795/3997 "2020-09-24T04:35:58Z")
> [@YWTF](#): > > Why does gender identity (which lives in the mind) necessitate people undressing and sheltering with people of the opposite sex (which is a condition of the body)? What hardship arises when Alex Drummond is asked to pee in the room reserved for people with penises? No one is under the impression that Alex doesn’t have a penis, so she’s not outing herself by using this space. It also goes into sports as well. Why does something in the mind require competing against women and girls when sports are all about the physical body and the physical body has not been altered? ---
**Author:** ![Summerday](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/22d042/32.png) [@Summerday](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Summerday)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2020, 4:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/j-k-rowling-and-the-trans-furore/855795/3998 "2020-09-24T04:47:29Z")
> [@monstro](#): > > So it seems like young folks aren’t like the old school robots who would prefer masculine transwomen stay away from women’s spaces. I wish they had asked about locker rooms and sports. I think that the bathroom is the area where most people are least concerned, but somehow it gets the most attention. It would have been really interesting to see how people that age feel about trans people not making any changes to their appearance and using the locker room of their choice. ---
**Author:** ![Biffster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/biffster/32/339_2.png) [@Biffster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Biffster)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2020, 4:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/j-k-rowling-and-the-trans-furore/855795/3999 "2020-09-24T04:50:41Z")
> [@Banquet\_Bear](#): > > Nobody wants another Karen White to have the ability to prey on vulnerable people. But there isn’t **any** reason to treat every transgender person as if they are a potential Karen White. That’s all well and good, but you also can’t harass someone that hasn’t actually committed a crime yet. It seems like we would have to wait for sexual assaults to happen first before we can challenge somebody’s gender declaration. I certainly wouldn’t want anyone I know to have to be the sacrificial lamb. That’s the thing: how can we truly know someone’s intentions? A trans woman changing in the woman’s change room may be fine or they may be a threat, even if they have no intention of doing any harm. Whose rights should come first? The other women who feel they have to surrender their safe spaces, or the transgendered person whose not being made to feel welcome in their chosen environment? It’s not an easy issue. ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2020, 5:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/j-k-rowling-and-the-trans-furore/855795/4000 "2020-09-24T05:29:03Z")
> [@monstro](#): > > Ruth Bader Ginsberg is the first woman in American history to lie in state at the US Capitol. And folks seriously think women should just sit back quietly and watch “woman” be turned into a meaningless category so that less than 1% of the population will be happy? I don’t think trying to posthumously co-opt Ruth Bader Ginsburg (not Ginsberg) for the anti-trans-rights side of this debate is going to be as persuasive as you seem to imagine. Especially considering that in one of her last Supreme Court cases, Harris v. EEOC, Ginsburg emphatically came down on the opposite side from the “gender critical” advocates. [Here’s the amicus curiae brief filed in favor of the transgender-employee-firing petitioner in Harris by the “gender critical” radical feminist group Women’s Liberation Front](https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/18/18-107/112909/20190820130044873_WoLF%20Amicus%20Harris%20v%20EEOC%20as%20filed.pdf), whose rhetoric will sound extremely familiar from numerous posts in this thread: > [@](#): > > WoLF’s interest in this case stems from its interest in protecting the safety and privacy of women and girls and preserving women’s sex-based civil rights. Those rights have been threatened by recent court decisions and agency policies that embrace the vague concept of “gender identity” in a manner that overrides statutory and Constitutional protections that are based explicitly on “sex” […] > > Legally redefining “female” as anyone who claims to be female results in the erasure of female people as a class. If, as a matter of law, anyone can be a woman, then no one is a woman, and sex-based protections in the law have no meaning whatsoever. However, the majority of the justices, including Ginsburg, did not find these arguments compelling, and instead decided in favor of the respondent (who was represented by the ACLU, btw). They determined that the Title VII prohibition of discrimination on the basis of sex prohibits discrimination on the basis of transgender status. Does that make the late RBG an “Aunt Lydia”? She certainly wasn’t the “gender critical” ideologue that radical feminist groups like WoLF [were hoping she’d turn out to be](https://thehill.com/opinion/civil-rights/464325-harris-v-eeoc-and-the-womens-rights-legacy-of-ruth-bader-ginsburg): > [@](#): > > What is a woman? In oral arguments scheduled for today, the Supreme Court soon will consider this question. > > In _[R.G. and G.R. Harris Funeral Homes v. EEOC and Stephens](https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/r-g-g-r-harris-funeral-homes-inc-v-equal-opportunity-employment-commission/)_ , a man named Anthony Stephens, who worked at a funeral home, decided that he is a woman and took the name Aimee. > > The word “sex” does not equate to some vague, ill-defined concept of “gender identity.” Women have been discriminated against for thousands of years because we are biologically women, not because of “identity.” > > WoLF is in this fight this because we care about the rights, privacy and safety of women and girls, as does Supreme Court Associate Justice [Ruth Bader Ginsburg](https://thehill.com/people/ruth-ginsburg). We hope that she will side with us. Justice Ginsburg long has argued that women deserve justice under the law, on the basis of sex. She knows what a woman is […] Well, to the dismay of WoLF and their far-right evangelical bedfellows in transphobia, Ginsburg and her colleagues in the Court majority recognized that rights, privacy, safety and justice for women did not require denying the rights of transgender women or other transgender/nonbinary people. ---
**Author:** ![Banquet\_Bear](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/banquet_bear/32/373_2.png) [@Banquet\_Bear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Banquet_Bear)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2020, 5:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/j-k-rowling-and-the-trans-furore/855795/4001 "2020-09-24T05:56:18Z")
> [@Biffster](#): > > That’s all well and good, but you also can’t harass someone that hasn’t actually committed a crime yet. …yep. Lets not harass transgender people for crimes they haven’t committed yet. I’m good with that. Would you prefer we treat all transgender people as potential criminals? > [@Biffster](#): > > It seems like we would have to wait for sexual assaults to happen first before we can challenge somebody’s gender declaration. It seems to be working fine in Argentina, Denmark, Ireland, Malta and Norway. What would you suggest these countries do differently? What problems has it caused? > [@Biffster](#): > > A trans woman changing in the woman’s change room may be fine or they may be a threat, even if they have no intention of doing any harm. A trans women changing in the women’s change room is **almost** absolutely not going to be a threat. The statistics from a wide variety of sources says this. Changing your name (in many places) needs nothing more than a statutory declaration. The fact that a statistically small number of people will change their names for fraudulent reasons is not a compelling reason to change that. The same goes for self-ID IMHO. > [@](#): > > Whose rights should come first? I’ll point you right back at the slogan that some people don’t like. Trans women are women. It isn’t just a slogan. Its a paradigm. If you want to understand the other side of the argument then its fundamental you understand that salient point. > [@](#): > > The other women who feel they have to surrender their safe spaces, or the transgendered person whose not being made to feel welcome in their chosen environment? **It’s not an easy issue.** You are conflating a couple of issues here. Do you want to talk about actual safety, or perceived safety? Because actual safety is an easy issue here. The amount of bathroom crimes committed by transgender people are [vanishingly small](https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/politics/2018/09/12/study-refutes-link-between-restroom-crime-and-transgender-access/5am4LMI1IHecGvJTW4MBqN/story.html). There is no compelling public safety reason to stop transgender people using the bathroom of their chosen gender. The perception of safety though? Sure. That isn’t an easy issue. And its that **perception** of safety that is really the issue at play in this thread. ---
**Author:** ![Novelty\_Bobble](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/a3d4f5/32.png) [@Novelty\_Bobble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Novelty_Bobble)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2020, 6:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/j-k-rowling-and-the-trans-furore/855795/4002 "2020-09-24T06:55:36Z")
> [@Banquet\_Bear](#): > > …I don’t get the question. When you sign a declaration, you assert that everything you have said is true. If something isn’t true, that probably means you lied. So what could one be shown to have lied about? Whatever it is they signed on the declaration. Badly worded question on my part, I meant _how_ could someone be shown to have lied? By what criteria would that lying be judged with regards to gender identity? > [@](#): > > My questions to you remain. Self-ID with a statutory declaration is the system in Argentina, Denmark, Ireland, Malta and Norway. What risks are those countries taking? What evidence is there that people are amending their gender in those countries with fraudulent intent? What problem are you trying to solve by making the process more adversarial than this? If that is the system they have then there is an obligation for people to pass some sort of criteria or run the risk of legal action yes? There is some form of gatekeeping in place yes? If so, that is not the the concept of self-identification that is being suggested by some advocacy groups. A concept that pushes for no criteria at all and would allow for no legal scrutiny of a person’s fradulent or non-serious gender statement. That’s the direction of travel that some are rightfully concerned about. For those countries above I’m guessing that you’d be against removing the possibility of legal ramifications that they have in place? If so, you are against the same proposed system that is under discussion. You can’t claim there is no problem about a proposed ID system whilst giving examples from a different system that works. ---
**Author:** ![monstro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ba9def/32.png) [@monstro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/monstro)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2020, 9:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/j-k-rowling-and-the-trans-furore/855795/4003 "2020-09-24T09:54:04Z")
I totally agree. I think young people more than any other group are prone to think that gender is no big deal–that it is all about what clothing one wears and how they style their hair and how they speak. They aren’t likely to think about the third rails of gender, like the lopsidedness of sexual crimes between males and females or the protections and entitlements that women have fought for to level imbalances. Like sports leagues reserved for females. So when the questions are always focused on restrooms, it trivializes the issue and encourages respondents to only think about the silliness of bathroom bills. And I’m totally serious about the harm of Karen memes. Yesterday I did a google search on “transwomen and women’s restrooms” and I kept coming across blog posts and articles blasting “Karens”. People can say that men can be called Karens or that the “Karen” apellation is reserved for a small subset of women. But when you see how it is being used, it is very hard not to come away thinking it is being used to silence any outspoken ciswoman who has an opinion that isn’t 100% supportive of prevailing winds. You’d think that feminists of all people would be sensitive to this and not be encouraging it. And yet I’m not seeing that at all. It’s disturbing. ---
**Author:** ![monstro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ba9def/32.png) [@monstro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/monstro)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2020, 10:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/j-k-rowling-and-the-trans-furore/855795/4004 "2020-09-24T10:16:14Z")
> [@Kimstu](#): > > I don’t think trying to posthumously co-opt Ruth Bader Ginsburg (not Ginsberg) for the anti-trans-rights side of this debate is going to be as persuasive as you seem to imagine. I’m not co-opting RBG. And I’m not anti-trans rights. I’m anti-let’s-do-absolutely-everything-trans-folks-want-even-when-it-could-harm-others. You can continue painting me as a transphobe as much as you want, but I’m never going to agree with this characterization. I do know this about RBG. She was a fan of logic and reason more than appeasement and being a well-behaved woman. That seems to be what you want ciswomen to be in this discourse. You want us to shut up and repeat all the catchy slogans and not ask questions that could make males feel uncomfortable by forcing them to confront our biological and social realities. You want us to be courteous and kind but not rational and self-preserving. You are OK with the power of “woman” and “female” being degraded just so a handful of people will have optimal self-esteem. I just can’t with that, @Kimstu. I want everyone to have the right to fair housing, employment, education, and law enforcement. I don’t want some people to have the right to optimal self-esteem while the rest of us are sacrificed. I get that you don’t think that’s what is going down, but I’m seeing evidence that it is. I can point to your post about sports as an example of this. “Let’s put ciswomen in the inferior category so that males will have even more opportunity than they have now and they won’t have to suffer any indiginity…and no, being called inferior isn’t an indignity because everyone already knows ciswomen are inferior athletes.” No. NO! This is neither courteous nor kind. It’s BULLSHIT. It frightens me that this would be your plan to address the hurt feelings of trans athletes. This is an Aunt Lydia-type of solution. Not a feminist solution. So I don’t think RBG would be on your side of this discussion. RBG would not want to dismantle something that empowers females. I believe she’d be in favor of something that leaves the protections of females untouched while creating separate opportunities for transwomen. We’re both in support of trans rights. We’re just looking at rights very differently. One of us wants to go all in on TWAW. The other thinks going all in on anything is dangerous. ---
**Author:** ![DemonTree](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/demontree/32/8646_2.png) [@DemonTree](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DemonTree)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2020, 10:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/j-k-rowling-and-the-trans-furore/855795/4005 "2020-09-24T10:21:35Z")
In Ireland you have to sign a statutory declaration that states: I do solemnly and sincerely declare that I (i) have a settled and solemn intention to live in the preferred gender of male/female (delete as appropriate) for the rest of my life, (ii) understand the consequences of the application, and (iii) make this application of my own free will. I don’t agree that’s nothing. It would at least put off people who wanted to change their gender as a joke, as sometimes happens with people changing their name by deed poll. It’s not entirely obvious what living in the preferred gender would consist of, in order to prosecute someone for making a false declaration, though. And I think this sort of statutory declaration is what the trans lobby in the UK wants here. As for whether it’s caused any problems, there have been some undesirable consequences, which ought to have been considered before passing the laws: > **[Irish trans sex-offender moved to women's prison despite not having surgery](https://www.irishmirror.ie/news/irish-news/male-born-transgender-sex-offender-20051834.amp)** > > The inmate was born male but is now recognised as female under the Gender Recognition Act 2015 [https://argentinatoday.org/2019/04/28/cordoba-preso-usa-la-ley-de-identidad-de-genero-para-estar-encerrado-con-mujeres/](https://argentinatoday.org/2019/04/28/cordoba-preso-usa-la-ley-de-identidad-de-genero-para-estar-encerrado-con-mujeres/) As for bathrooms, I don’t think any of those countries have laws on who can use them, so a legal sex change is unlikely to make much difference. I think social attitudes are more of an issue there and should continue to be; I wouldn’t support a ‘bathroom bill’. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/j-k-rowling-and-the-trans-furore/855795.md?page=199) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/j-k-rowling-and-the-trans-furore/855795.md?page=201)