# 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:** 22
**Author:** ![Riemann](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/riemann/32/3133_2.png) [@Riemann](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Riemann)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2020, 10:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/j-k-rowling-and-the-trans-furore/855795/422 "2020-06-27T22:50:19Z")
> [@monstro](#): > > But you seem to be still saying there’s a biological reality to gender. It just isn’t tied to organs. The biological reality of gender identity resides in the organ inside your skull. ---
**Author:** ![Riemann](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/riemann/32/3133_2.png) [@Riemann](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Riemann)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2020, 10:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/j-k-rowling-and-the-trans-furore/855795/423 "2020-06-27T22:56:52Z")
> [@YWTF](#): > > Notice how far in we are in this discussion and still, no one has offered a workable definition for “woman” that covers both adult human females and trans women. I answered the question at post 409. Or read the Wikipedia article on gender identity I linked to, it’s not like I’m advocating some weird radical position here. ---
**Author:** ![Riemann](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/riemann/32/3133_2.png) [@Riemann](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Riemann)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2020, 11:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/j-k-rowling-and-the-trans-furore/855795/424 "2020-06-27T23:02:56Z")
> [@DemonTree](#): > > You said earlier you can learn about someone’s mental state by talking to them. You can also learn about their personality, interests, inclinations… things that would be indicators of their hypothetical brain sex. I could believe someone is genuinely convinced they are a woman, and also think they don’t talk or act like someone with a female brain. Sure, but can we use standard terminology? “Hypothetical brain sex”, the internal sense of self, is called **gender identity**. We don’t all have to concede that it’s real to use the correct term. Behaviors and presentation are called **gender expression**. Just as gender identity is not always congruent with the sex organs and chromosomes at birth, gender expression is not always consistent with the conventional presentation for a given gender identity in a given society. But the latter is uncontroversial - that’s really nothing more than saying that not all girls like to dress and act in the same was a typical girl in a given society. That in itself does not negate their gender identity. ---
**Author:** ![YWTF](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/d07c76/32.png) [@YWTF](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/YWTF)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2020, 11:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/j-k-rowling-and-the-trans-furore/855795/425 "2020-06-27T23:10:51Z")
> What you notice is a rejection of your position that a pure black-and-white definition of “woman” exists What I’m noticing is that “woman” is being treated like a clown car identity so that adult human females can no longer efficiently communicate about their needs and interests as a disadvantaged sex class. What I’m noticing is a bunch of privileged men policing the terms women want to reserve for themselves, just so that a subset of men can appropriate their identity and redefine what womanhood really means. What I’m noticing is a bunch of misogyny masquerading as wokeness. I’m not alone in seeing what is happening, and I fear what lies ahead. This is literally killing the progressive movement. It is very disappointing. ---
**Author:** ![monstro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ba9def/32.png) [@monstro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/monstro)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2020, 11:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/j-k-rowling-and-the-trans-furore/855795/426 "2020-06-27T23:17:49Z")
> [@Riemann](#): > > What is your definition of “wrong” here, and why are you seeking to demonstrate that someone’s subjective experience is “wrong”? Da fuck? I haven’t said anyone feelings are wrong. In fact, I said it I don’t think it’s even possible to do so. A feeling can be neither right or wrong. It just is. Why are you disagreeing with me over something so facile? ---
**Author:** ![monstro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ba9def/32.png) [@monstro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/monstro)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2020, 11:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/j-k-rowling-and-the-trans-furore/855795/427 "2020-06-27T23:19:49Z")
> [@Riemann](#): > > If you’re going toward the attempted _reductio ad absurdum_ of “I identify as a giraffe” or something - well, if somebody genuinely believed that, I would have no hesitation in saying that they are mistaken, because building a giraffe brain requires giraffe genes and a giraffe womb. That’s the critical point here - it is perfectly biologically plausible that somebody who looks like a human male at birth _really does_ have a female human brain. There is no slippery slope here. I see you’ve intentionally dodged my question about whether there are 58 genders and 58 mental states. I’ll take that to mean you don’t think those are “real”. The only “real” things–in your view–are female brains and male brains. It almost sounds like you’re in agreement with JK Rowling. ---
**Author:** ![Riemann](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/riemann/32/3133_2.png) [@Riemann](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Riemann)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2020, 11:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/j-k-rowling-and-the-trans-furore/855795/428 "2020-06-27T23:20:38Z")
> [@monstro](#): > > I haven’t said anyone feelings are wrong. In fact, I said it I don’t think it’s even possible to do so. A feeling can be neither right or wrong. It just is. Why are you disagreeing with me over something so facile? I thought it was pretty clear that I simply didn’t understand what point you were making, and I was asking what exactly you meant, and its relevance. ---
**Author:** ![YWTF](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/d07c76/32.png) [@YWTF](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/YWTF)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2020, 11:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/j-k-rowling-and-the-trans-furore/855795/429 "2020-06-27T23:22:29Z")
**Riemann** , _this_ is your definition of a woman? > If I understand your question correctly - the definition of a female gender identity would be a mental configuration that includes sexually dimorphic aspects that are _typically_ associated with a cis woman. This is not a workable definition because it is self-referential. It is essentially “a person is a woman if they have mental configuration that matches a woman”. Never mind you still have told us what kind of mental configuration women have. From a biologists standpoint - I think the likely model would be that brains are sexually dimporphic to some degree, just as bodies are sexually dimorphic. And that some people develop quite literally with a typically “female” brain structure in a male body. With the caveat that I doubt this can be pinned down to something simple, there’s huge diversity and complexity in all aspect of human personality. [/quote] ---
**Author:** ![monstro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ba9def/32.png) [@monstro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/monstro)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2020, 11:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/j-k-rowling-and-the-trans-furore/855795/430 "2020-06-27T23:22:48Z")
> [@Riemann](#): > > I thought it was pretty clear that I simply didn’t understand what point you were making, and I was asking what exactly you meant, and its relevance. You have an odd way of asking for clarification. ---
**Author:** ![Riemann](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/riemann/32/3133_2.png) [@Riemann](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Riemann)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2020, 11:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/j-k-rowling-and-the-trans-furore/855795/431 "2020-06-27T23:22:54Z")
> [@monstro](#): > > I see you’ve intentionally dodged my question about whether there are 58 genders and 58 mental states. I’ll take that to mean you don’t think those are “real”. The only “real” things–in your view–are female brains and male brains. I have no idea about the specific 58 genders trope, but I have made clear: > [@Riemann](#): > > the subjective internal sense of who you are as male or female ( **I won’t keep qualifying this - but “or nonbinary, fluid, etc” is always implied** ) ---
**Author:** ![Riemann](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/riemann/32/3133_2.png) [@Riemann](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Riemann)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2020, 11:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/j-k-rowling-and-the-trans-furore/855795/432 "2020-06-27T23:24:52Z")
> [@YWTF](#): > > This is not a workable definition because it is self-referential. It is essentially “a person is a woman if they have mental configuration that matches a woman”. No, it’s not self-referential at all. The definition assumes that brains are sexually dimorphic. A cis woman has both female sex organs and a female brain. The definition simply says that someone _without_ female sex organs can have a similarly female brain. ---
**Author:** ![monstro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ba9def/32.png) [@monstro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/monstro)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2020, 11:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/j-k-rowling-and-the-trans-furore/855795/433 "2020-06-27T23:33:15Z")
> [@Riemann](#): > > I have no idea about the specific 58 genders trope It’s weird you dismiss this so easily when it’s the thing that is sticking in so many people’s craw and making them pushback against gender ideology. If we were only talking about folks with gender dysphoria or folks who were significantly gender non-conforming from an early age, this thread wouldn’t be a bajillion pages long (or however they quantify posts in Discord land). JK Rowling’s controversial “sex is real” remark is in direct opposition to this “trope”. Whether you think it is worthy of discussion or not, the 58 gender trope is a logical extension of divorcing gender from sex. I’m guessing the two of us are much more in agreement about this topic than you are thinking we are. But there are a lot of folks here who cosign the nonbinary concept and feel like “female” and ‘male’ are not any more real than any other gender box we might want to conceive of. This is not some extreme obscure thing I made up to score points in a message board. ---
**Author:** ![YWTF](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/d07c76/32.png) [@YWTF](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/YWTF)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2020, 11:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/j-k-rowling-and-the-trans-furore/855795/434 "2020-06-27T23:48:19Z")
> [@Riemann](#): > > No, it’s not self-referential at all. The definition assumes that brains are sexually dimorphic. A cis woman has both female sex organs and a female brain. The definition simply says that someone _without_ female sex organs can have a similarly female brain. You can’t have a definition that assumes something that is purely speculative (trans women have the same brains as women) and expect that to be taken seriously. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2020, 11:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/j-k-rowling-and-the-trans-furore/855795/435 "2020-06-27T23:52:53Z")
> [@YWTF](#): > > You can’t have a definition that assumes something that is purely speculative (trans women have the same brains as women) and expect that to be taken seriously. Except it’s not purely speculative, there’s actual evidence that this is the case. ---
**Author:** ![Riemann](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/riemann/32/3133_2.png) [@Riemann](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Riemann)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2020, 11:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/j-k-rowling-and-the-trans-furore/855795/436 "2020-06-27T23:54:15Z")
> [@monstro](#): > > It’s weird you dismiss this so easily I’m not dismissing it, I just don’t have enough knowledge about the specific details of the diversity of gender identity to comment on it. > [@monstro](#): > > it’s the thing that is sticking in so many people’s craw and making them pushback against gender ideology. If we were only talking about folks with gender dysphoria or folks who were significantly gender non-conforming from an early age, this thread wouldn’t be a bajillion pages long You’re really claiming that everyone in this debate is equally accepting of trans women’s right to be treated as women? And it’s something else that’s the real problem? > [@monstro](#): > > JK Rowling’s controversial “sex is real” remark is in direct opposition to this “trope” The problem with the “sex is real” comment is that it’s implies some level of denial that it’s **gender identity** , and not sex organs, that make you a “real” woman. It’s denying the reality and significance of gender identity **at all** , not its diversity. Sex (meaning sex organs) is both real and strongly bimodal - very few exceptions. But that isn’t what determines your gender identity. Since your gender identity resides in your brain, and brains are complex and diverse, I see nothing remarkable or unexpected about the fact that there might be a wide variety of distinguishable less common gender identities. ---
**Author:** ![YWTF](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/d07c76/32.png) [@YWTF](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/YWTF)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2020, 12:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/j-k-rowling-and-the-trans-furore/855795/437 "2020-06-28T00:18:51Z")
> Except it’s not purely speculative, there’s actual evidence that this is the case. There is no evidence that trans women have female sexed brains such that a neurologist looking at their brains could reliably guess their gender identity. And even if there was a percentage of trans women who have such brains, there is no test that would be able to differentiate them from cross-dressing men who “wrongly“ consider themselves trans. ---
**Author:** ![Riemann](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/riemann/32/3133_2.png) [@Riemann](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Riemann)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2020, 12:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/j-k-rowling-and-the-trans-furore/855795/438 "2020-06-28T00:23:59Z")
> [@YWTF](#): > > You can’t have a definition that assumes something that is purely speculative (trans women have the same brains as women) and expect that to be taken seriously. You claimed to be a scientist, so you’ll know how the scientific process works. Old model: what’s between your legs =\> all there is to say about gender Anomalous data that break the old model: widespread observation that a significant minority of people in all cultures are trans. So now we need a refined model. I have suggested a hypothesis - which simply assumes that trans people are telling the truth about their state of mind, and which is scientifically perfectly plausible. So I’m not just pulling random ideas out of thin air - I’m seeking to _explain_ something scientifically. There may not be strong evidence supporting my hypothesis, but as MIller says, there is some. And if you want to dismiss it, it’s not sufficient to say that there’s not much evidence - you have to come up with a _better_ hypothesis that accounts for all the observations. And so far as I can discern, your competing hypothesis is what? That trans women who say they want to be recognized as women have some secret misogynistic agenda to infiltrate the ranks of “real” women and destroy the feminist movement from within? I mean, all I can say is that if you’re right I admire trans women’s commitment to this lifelong subterfuge. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2020, 12:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/j-k-rowling-and-the-trans-furore/855795/439 "2020-06-28T00:30:28Z")
> [@monstro](#): > > If we were only talking about folks with gender dysphoria or folks who were significantly gender non-conforming from an early age, this thread wouldn’t be a bajillion pages long (or however they quantify posts in Discord land). Just based on this thread, there seems to be a lot of opposition to the idea of any trans person’s gender identity having any value whatsoever. It certainly does not appear that **YWTF** position - which apparently now includes “support for trans rights is misogyny” - allows for the recognition of the groups you mentioned. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2020, 12:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/j-k-rowling-and-the-trans-furore/855795/440 "2020-06-28T00:32:51Z")
> [@YWTF](#): > > There is no evidence that trans women have female sexed brains such that a neurologist looking at their brains could reliably guess their gender identity. You said the suggestion was purely speculative. This is not true. There is evidence that trans people’s brains structurally resemble the brains of the gender with which they identify. Switching your argument to, “We can’t use it as a diagnostic” is moving the goalposts. ---
**Author:** ![monstro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ba9def/32.png) [@monstro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/monstro)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2020, 12:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/j-k-rowling-and-the-trans-furore/855795/441 "2020-06-28T00:48:51Z")
> [@Miller](#): > > Just based on this thread, there seems to be a lot of opposition to the idea of any trans person’s gender identity having any value whatsoever. It certainly does not appear that **YWTF** position - which apparently now includes “support for trans rights is misogyny” - allows for the recognition of the groups you mentioned. Maybe if someone on “your” side of the discussion would push back on the “all gender identities that we can possibly can conceive of are equally valid and equally real” concept that has seeped into the discourse, YWTF might not be digging in her heels so much about the biological realness of “woman”. Maybe I’m wrong. YWTF have disagreed on stuff before and I’m not her mind-reader. I have to admit that some of her ideas are bothersome to me, which means we just have one more thing we will not be discussing the next time we see each other. But it does seem to me that a belief that posits that anyone who claims woman IS woman is just as extreme of a position as the one she is taking. If you can call her position “transphobic”, why can’t she call that position “misogynstic”? She has laid out a compelling argument for why women might be harmed by that idea, just as you and others have laid out a case for why it is hurtful to deny folks their gender identity. I know when someone says “fuck biology!” as caverlierly as you did in a conversation in which a woman expresses the importance of her female biology to her identity, my “misogyny”-dar pinges. Just like it pings when I hear “chestfeeding”. It’s easy to say “fuck biology” when you aren’t being sent constant reminders, in subtle and not-so-subtle ways, that your biology is different than the norm. I’m going to have to go on estrogen blockers soon. For the next five fucking years. I really wish I could say “fuck biology” and not care about what’s going to happen when I don’t have the hormone that has been washing over me for the past 31 years, helping me to be the person I know myself to be. But I can’t. I can’t deny the realness of estrogen to my daily existence. I’m fucking terrified how my body AND mind is going to be altered without this precious chemical. I’m "meh’ about my gender, but I really don’t want to be a male. I don’t want to have male-like features. I want to continue being me–monstro. And that self-concept is tied to my body, to my biology. So while I don’t agree with YWTF on everything, I am sympathetic to where she is coming from. “Fuck biology” indeed. Maybe one day I’ll understand what that means, but right now I don’t. The discussion is fraught with landmines on both sides. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/j-k-rowling-and-the-trans-furore/855795.md?page=21) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/j-k-rowling-and-the-trans-furore/855795.md?page=23)