LawTalkers  

Go Back   LawTalkers

» Site Navigation
 > FAQ
» Online Users: 213
0 members and 213 guests
No Members online
Most users ever online was 9,654, 05-18-2025 at 04:16 AM.
View Single Post
Old 10-07-2024, 09:15 AM   #2765
sebastian_dangerfield
Moderator
 
sebastian_dangerfield's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Monty Capuletti's gazebo
Posts: 26,231
Re: Deeply Unfunny People

Quote:
Originally Posted by Adder View Post
I'm not sure assaulting and blacklisting young actresses was entirely within the scope of his personal life, and I do try to be mindful of where I am sending resources, but yes. It does mean I'd prefer to get the kids Harry Potter books from the library over the bookstore.
I don't see the issue with Rowling. She defines women narrowly. She picks fights with trans activists.

This issue touches .005% of humanity and we talk about it like it's the most pressing issue on the planet. The right loves to prattle on about men swimming with women, and phantom fears of sexual assault in the bathroom by trans people. The left acts like if one doesn't buy their novel and dubious quasi-scientific arguments on the matter, one is akin a guard at Dachau.

Give me a fucking break.

Are trans women actually women? I don't know. I also don't think the issue will ever be solved because people who are deeply invested in these things have views that long ago left the planes of logic and science and there's just no point trying to litigate this stuff. The best one can say is, "Who cares? Why not just be tolerant? If the chic science (really anthropology) on the subject is rubbish, what's the big deal?" Again, it's .005% of people.

I do think people born biological males should not be competing in women's sports. That one we can litigate because there's simply no counter, save perhaps the argument, "Well, if a biological male is smaller, on par in terms of strength with a woman, he's technically on even footing, so he should be able to compete." That argument is persuasive. It's also rarer than being struck by lightning twice in an afternoon. (Similarly, women with skill adequate to compete with males should be allowed to do so. If Serena Williams could beat 70% of male tennis players, which I'll bet she could, there ought to be a mixed-sex league where she could do so.)

Rowling is entitled to her view, and she's entitled to call out what she sees as bullshit. And one is entitled to refute her or boycott her if he likes. But of all the considerations that might enter my head when I walk into a bookstore, an author's joinders within the "trans controversies," as incoherent as these "debates" (really, political wedges used by the parties and activists on both sides to manipulate the credulous) about trans issues are, are about as significant to me as the author's diet.

Personally, I'm of the belief Rowling was slumming it to even get involved in such a debate. She's taking bait on which a person at her level should better sense than to bite.
__________________
All is for the best in the best of all possible worlds.
sebastian_dangerfield is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.0.1

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:35 AM.