Absolutely and that goes even more for those who do.
I generally have a positive opinion of JK Rowling, but as a general principle I still don’t feel that this holds. In the world of work one often encounters powerful people who are bullies, yet wield power over other people’s careers. They stay at the top, often in part due to misguided allegiance from those whom they have favoured in the past.
I feel rather sorry for transgender people in all of this. The few that I have met, are mostly just getting on quietly with their lives with a minimum of fuss. One or two others… weren’t. Being caught in the middle of other people’s culture wars does nobody any favours. I’m often baffled when we are talking about something unrelated on this forum and suddenly transgender issues come up.
Not being a woman like JK Rowland I cannot have any idea how a woman might feel in terms of how threatened they might feel if an obvious transgender person enters a rest room when they are alone in there.
I also cannot possibly know how a woman born a woman feels when faced with a woman born a man. But as a woman born a woman IMO JK Rowland has every right to pass comment on how she and other women feel without being attacked or cancelled.
On the other hand if I as a man born a man was standing at a urinal doing my thing and a man born a woman came in and stood at the urinal next to me, would I feel threatened? The answer is no, I couldn’t care less.Should I be speaking out? I don’t think so.
Does that make one of us right and the other wrong? Should either of us be artacked, threatened or cancelled? Is one of us woke and the other not? If so is it me or is it JK Rowland.?
IMO all views should be listened to with respect even if at the end you agree to differ.
gallois wrote:
Not being a woman like JK Rowland I cannot have any idea how a woman might feel in terms of how threatened they might feel if an obvious transgender person enters a rest room when they are alone in there.
Very badly. Just ask my girlfriend, who was assaulted by a couple of transgender men in a women’s bathroom (she didn’t get hurt and got away). Letting men – and 99% of transgender ‘women’ are men, meaning they did not have their penis removed – into women’s bathrooms is absurd woke madness.
Transgender or cross-dressing?
kwlf wrote:
Transgender or cross-dressing?
Transgender, AFAIK. In any case, these things happen all the time. JK Rowland is to be applauded to call out this whole madness that erodes women’s hard-won rights.
JK Rowland is to be applauded to call out this whole madness that erodes women’s hard-won rights.
The name is Rowling . Other than that, absolutely. Imho her books do include quite some criticism on society, very much to the point too. The attacks agai st her are ludicrous.
At least she appears to be in good company. Some wokiea now ask for Shakespeare to be banned as school.material as his writings portray abuse of black people as well as an antiquated gender role. GIve me a f….g break.
Where books burn, people are next.
172driver wrote:
Very badly. Just ask my girlfriend, who was assaulted by a couple of transgender men in a women’s bathroom
You do mean transgender women?
Mooney_Driver wrote:
Some wokiea now ask for Shakespeare to be banned as school.material
I don’t see the problem. People are entitled to whatever opinion they want as far as I’m concerned. We have to distinguish between thought and action. There is only one way to do that, and that is using laws. Besides, Shakespeare is hard to read 
Difficult language and It was made for the theater, and best enjoyed in the theater. In Norway we don’r read Shakespeare in schools, but Ibsen. Same thing though, hard to read, and made for the theater. In the theater his plays are superb though. You really need actors to interpret the roles IMO, or most of it is lost Maybe we should burn theaters also, it has been done.
Anyway, I have never heard about these “new woke movement”, but it sounds like some Pol Pot – ish thing. Extreme marxism or perhaps similar to some extreme religious sect. Fanaticism isn’t a new thing though.
If the books of plays of Shakespeare and Ibsen were banned, how would actors learn their parts.
Yes actors do interpret Shakespearean characters (as do directors). But they often have different takes on the meaning behind the words. Also the way the lines are delivered can change. Kenneth Branagh for instance makes his Henry V much more modern up to date than Olivier’s. But then again Olivier delivered his Henry V over half a century before Branagh so it might have seemed more up to date then.
I agree with @Mooney_Driver the mass burning of books is always a portent of despotism and history shows us it is often the prelude to genocide.
I find it bizarre also that a cute cuddly much loved cartoon figure (as seen by most of the world) should be banned because some people think that their president (in this case China) looks a bit like the character ie Winnie the Pooh.
What next can people find offensive and governments must protect their public from.?😃
Ps My bad. Of course it is JK Rowling and not Rowland.
LeSving wrote:
Extreme marxism or perhaps similar to some extreme religious sect.
It has nothing to do with either marxism or religion. With his emphasis on material facts, I’m pretty sure Marx would turn in his grave.
