Main Edition
US
FR
The launch of a sexual assault support centre for women is always good news but, when it is the brainchild of J.K. Rowling, it is very big news. Especially given the feminist philanthropist and world famous author has smartly taken pre-emptive steps to outwit her detractors.
Rowling has funded and designed a new, women-only sexual violence support service, Beira’s Place, which opens today. “I founded Beira’s Place to provide what I believe is currently an unmet need for women in the Lothians area,” the author said this weekend. “As a survivor of sexual assault myself, I know how important it is that survivors have the option of women-centred and women-delivered care at such a vulnerable time. Beira’s Place will offer an increase in capacity for services in the area and will, I hope, enable more women to process and recover from their trauma.”
Situated in the heart of Edinburgh, it is a service for women who have been subjected to men’s violence. It is named after the Scottish goddess of Winter, as Rowling explained: “Beira rules over the dark part of the year, handing over to her sister, Bride, when summer comes again. Beira represents female wisdom, power, and regeneration. Hers is a strength that endures during the difficult times, but her myth contains the promise that they will not last for ever.”
It has taken a year of hard work by Rowling and her team to get it off the ground, and I was delighted to be invited to the top-secret launch on Saturday alongside the crème de la crème of Scottish feminists and many other supporters. Today is the first that anyone, aside from those who have had some kind of involvement in the project, will hear about Beira’s Place.
The board, which includes Rowling, is comprised of experts with a lifelong commitment to ending men’s violence towards women and girls. They include former prison governor and LGB rights campaigner Rhona Hotchkiss, previous Scottish Labour leader Johann Lamont, GP Margaret McCartney, and Susan Smith who is director of For Women Scotland. Its CEO is Isabelle Kerr, a veteran of the Rape Crisis movement.
Beira’s Place is strictly female-only, as defined by section 212 of the Equality Act which states that a woman is a “female of any age”. If you are a natal women aged 16 and over, reside in the Lothians and have experienced sexual violence or abuse at any time in your life, a free and confidential service is now there for you.
The service is funded solely by Rowling and is not set up as a charity, which means trans activists won’t be able to petition the Charities Commission to close it down.
Rowling understands why women need single-sex services following rape and sexual assault. As she wrote on her blog in June 2020: “I refuse to bow down to a movement that I believe is doing demonstrable harm in seeking to erode ‘woman’ as a political and biological class and offering cover to predators like few before it.”
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeFantastic news. But please please PLEASE stop using the invented nonsense word “transwoman”. It means nothing, with or without a space.
Language was how men started stripping women of their human rights, and language perpetuates their predatory behaviour.
Men who identify as transgender is perfectly polite and rational, as well as being accurate.
Most men who identify as transgender have had absolutely no surgery and do not take hormones. The few who do are still not women.
It’s incredibly important that we use honest, reality based language.
Not to mention “natal woman”…
And the vomitous slur “cis” can go too. Not that anybody normal ever uses “cis”. Whereas “transwoman” is sometimes used by decent, rational people – and it should not be.
Indeed. I have a cervix, I don’t require a prefix, thanks.
Indeed. I have a cervix, I don’t require a prefix, thanks.
I favour “actual woman”.
But only if the society has the courage to utter the definition of the word. We don’t have that courage here in the U.S.
My definition of “woman” is “the adult human producer of large immotile gametes”.
Two X chromosomes. Can’t be changed.
An interesting question: how would you classify the following two anomalies?
i. Adult human with XX chromosomes who produces and emits small motile gametes.
ii. Adult human with XY chromosomes who produces and carries large immotile gametes.
According to my definition i is male and ii is female. According to your definition it’s the other way round.
I don’t feel strongly that my definition is better than yours. Either will do just as well, save for answering questions like the one above.
This is a very rare translocation of the SRY gene complex normally found on the Y chromosome onto an X. This can happen during meiosis, the type of cell division used to produce gametes in both sexes. Nature occasionally makes mistakes. There is a type of Down’s syndrome where the extra chromosome 21 is attached to chromosome 15 so it looks like the normal 46 chromosomes but the extra DNA is still there. And there are also DSDs, continually cited by transactivists to suggest sex is a spectrum. Which it isn’t!!
Thanks, that was interesting, although I have no background in biology and don’t know what “DSD” means.
Disorder of Sex Development, previously labelled Intersex.
These are divided into disorders which affect those with a Y chromosome (males) and those without (females).
(There are also Variations in Sex Characteristics (VSC) or Diverse Sex Development which do not rely on chromosomal abnormality.)
Disorder of Sex Development, previously labelled Intersex.
These are divided into disorders which affect those with a Y chromosome (males) and those without (females).
(There are also Variations in Sex Characteristics (VSC) or Diverse Sex Development which do not rely on chromosomal abnormality.)
Thanks, that was interesting, although I have no background in biology and don’t know what “DSD” means.
If the sex organs descend and produce swimmers, it’s a man. If not, it’s a woman.
Better to leave Lia Thomas out of this discussion, I think.
William.
William.
Outies vs. Innies.
I think that puts you on my side in my friendly dispute with Jeff Cunningham.
Better to leave Lia Thomas out of this discussion, I think.
Outies vs. Innies.
I think that puts you on my side in my friendly dispute with Jeff Cunningham.
For anybody who has any questions about the reality that human sex is binary, there are some great videos on this site which address any and all questions, including disorders of sexual development.
https://www.youtube.com/@ParadoxInstitute
Just for fun, I do not think looking for a precise and complete definition makes sense, particularly when you get into chromosomal anomalies. For instance, how would either classification deal with 1) a person with a single X chromosome and no Y chromosome. 2) a person with XX in some cells, and XY in other cells. 3) a person that produces no gametes at all?
I think something more pragmatic is needed. In reality humans come in only two models, but individuals can be quite different from the typical specimen for either model. Anyway, I’ll give you mine:
People who at some point in their lives can get pregnant without medical help are female, and people who can produce fertile sperm are male. There is no historical case of anyone who can do both.
For people who can do neither, you measure all relevant characteristics (chromosomes, historical and current hormone levels, internal and external organs, bone and brain structure, …) of the entire population, and plot them on a very large 26-dimensional piece of paper (or put them into a statistics program). You colour known females red and known males blue. That gives you two clear and reasonably well-separated clusters, one red and one blue. The black points will also separate in more or less the same clusters, and in most cases you can see pretty clearly which cluster each point belongs to. Where it is not obvious you can do some kind of mathematical analysis and come up with a discrimination function that privileges some differences over others, but at some point you will be left with a small number of people where it is not completely obvious where they should go. Those are then intersex / don’t know, and you have to accept some flexibility in which group they are allowed to join. Note that they are *not* a separate sex, because those points do not form a cluster on your plot, they are just a thin penumbra in between the two clusters.
The two groups, male and female, are perfectly clearly defined, whatever activists say, even if there are a few cases that cannot be clearly classified. It is just that reality is not quite as clearcut as language is. After all we have no problem in dividing vehicles into cars, boats, etc. even though there is such a thing a a DUKW.
Thank you. That really worked for me
Thank you. That really worked for me
I would classify them as anomalies and leave it at that. The (mis)use of intersex people to support the laughable idea of a sexual spectrum — which doesn’t apply to trans people anyway as they claim it’s due to a supposed “gender identity” — is as farfetched as saying because there are some people born with 6 toes, there is a spectrum of the number of toes people can be born with.
The fact that you consider these situations as “anomalies” means that they are not particularly relevant in defining a class of living creatures. I don’t think biological groups are defined by the “anomalies,” mutations or other deviations from the norm. A bird born without one wing is still a bird and an octopus with a birth defect that gives it only four arms is still an octopus.
I think you recognize this when you indicate that you don’t feel strongly that either definition is better.
Anomalies – just as you said. What percentage of the population are you talking about? About it’s got a decimal and at least a zero or two before the first non zero digit as a percentage. There’s also XYY and a few other broken reproductive outcomes. They really have no bearing on how to define sex.
This is a very rare translocation of the SRY gene complex normally found on the Y chromosome onto an X. This can happen during meiosis, the type of cell division used to produce gametes in both sexes. Nature occasionally makes mistakes. There is a type of Down’s syndrome where the extra chromosome 21 is attached to chromosome 15 so it looks like the normal 46 chromosomes but the extra DNA is still there. And there are also DSDs, continually cited by transactivists to suggest sex is a spectrum. Which it isn’t!!
If the sex organs descend and produce swimmers, it’s a man. If not, it’s a woman.
For anybody who has any questions about the reality that human sex is binary, there are some great videos on this site which address any and all questions, including disorders of sexual development.
https://www.youtube.com/@ParadoxInstitute
Just for fun, I do not think looking for a precise and complete definition makes sense, particularly when you get into chromosomal anomalies. For instance, how would either classification deal with 1) a person with a single X chromosome and no Y chromosome. 2) a person with XX in some cells, and XY in other cells. 3) a person that produces no gametes at all?
I think something more pragmatic is needed. In reality humans come in only two models, but individuals can be quite different from the typical specimen for either model. Anyway, I’ll give you mine:
People who at some point in their lives can get pregnant without medical help are female, and people who can produce fertile sperm are male. There is no historical case of anyone who can do both.
For people who can do neither, you measure all relevant characteristics (chromosomes, historical and current hormone levels, internal and external organs, bone and brain structure, …) of the entire population, and plot them on a very large 26-dimensional piece of paper (or put them into a statistics program). You colour known females red and known males blue. That gives you two clear and reasonably well-separated clusters, one red and one blue. The black points will also separate in more or less the same clusters, and in most cases you can see pretty clearly which cluster each point belongs to. Where it is not obvious you can do some kind of mathematical analysis and come up with a discrimination function that privileges some differences over others, but at some point you will be left with a small number of people where it is not completely obvious where they should go. Those are then intersex / don’t know, and you have to accept some flexibility in which group they are allowed to join. Note that they are *not* a separate sex, because those points do not form a cluster on your plot, they are just a thin penumbra in between the two clusters.
The two groups, male and female, are perfectly clearly defined, whatever activists say, even if there are a few cases that cannot be clearly classified. It is just that reality is not quite as clearcut as language is. After all we have no problem in dividing vehicles into cars, boats, etc. even though there is such a thing a a DUKW.
I would classify them as anomalies and leave it at that. The (mis)use of intersex people to support the laughable idea of a sexual spectrum — which doesn’t apply to trans people anyway as they claim it’s due to a supposed “gender identity” — is as farfetched as saying because there are some people born with 6 toes, there is a spectrum of the number of toes people can be born with.
The fact that you consider these situations as “anomalies” means that they are not particularly relevant in defining a class of living creatures. I don’t think biological groups are defined by the “anomalies,” mutations or other deviations from the norm. A bird born without one wing is still a bird and an octopus with a birth defect that gives it only four arms is still an octopus.
I think you recognize this when you indicate that you don’t feel strongly that either definition is better.
Anomalies – just as you said. What percentage of the population are you talking about? About it’s got a decimal and at least a zero or two before the first non zero digit as a percentage. There’s also XYY and a few other broken reproductive outcomes. They really have no bearing on how to define sex.
An interesting question: how would you classify the following two anomalies?
i. Adult human with XX chromosomes who produces and emits small motile gametes.
ii. Adult human with XY chromosomes who produces and carries large immotile gametes.
According to my definition i is male and ii is female. According to your definition it’s the other way round.
I don’t feel strongly that my definition is better than yours. Either will do just as well, save for answering questions like the one above.
I would also include those who have had to have their ovaries removed because of eg cancer. One is no less a woman if one has had to have invasive surgery due to illness, just as one is no more a woman because of elective surgery.
Two X chromosomes. Can’t be changed.
I would also include those who have had to have their ovaries removed because of eg cancer. One is no less a woman if one has had to have invasive surgery due to illness, just as one is no more a woman because of elective surgery.
Thanks to wokeness, the work of the devil. If you secular atheists can come up with a better word, have at it.
My definition of “woman” is “the adult human producer of large immotile gametes”.
Thanks to wokeness, the work of the devil. If you secular atheists can come up with a better word, have at it.
Just ‘woman’.
That’s redundant. There is no other kind.
But only if the society has the courage to utter the definition of the word. We don’t have that courage here in the U.S.
Just ‘woman’.
That’s redundant. There is no other kind.
Indeed – “natal women”, “cis-gender” and all that other sloblock
And the vomitous slur “cis” can go too. Not that anybody normal ever uses “cis”. Whereas “transwoman” is sometimes used by decent, rational people – and it should not be.
I favour “actual woman”.
Indeed – “natal women”, “cis-gender” and all that other sloblock
I agree with you totally, except that I have spent 74 years on this planet without, to my knowledge, treating anyone with disrespect, a view which is echoed by almost every man of my acquaintance. Beware of stereotypes, but otherwise, more power to your elbow, Lynn
As you know, it is indeed men who are stripping women of their sex based human rights, with the help of some handmaidens.”Men” cannot be a stereotype, it is a sex class.
If I said scientists are working on curing cancer you would never – under any circumstances – argue that I meant all scientists.
Just as you fully understood the comment to mean predatory men.
If you’re not one of those violent, rapist predatory men who are assaulting women in rape shelters, prisons, toilets, raping women in NHS wards, stealing their sports and demanding access to their sex based spaces as well as denying them hospital care if they protest about men washing their private parts, that’s great.
But please, do waste your time trying to tone police women who are terrified for their human rights, safety and dignity, because that’s what matters at this juncture. Your choice to pretend you thought I was referring to you.
https://grahamlinehan.substack.com/
https://transcrimeuk.com/
“But please, do waste your time trying to tone police women”
You mean “don’t”. Apologies for mansplaining, but I thought you’d like to have this drawn to your attention.
Edit. Sorry, I didn’t pick up on the intended sarcasm.
It wasn’t mansplaining, as you are incorrect. Oh, wait…
I meant it most sincerely.
It wasn’t mansplaining, as you are incorrect. Oh, wait…
I meant it most sincerely.
I think you do not have logic on your side, here.
If you say that ‘scientists are working on curing cancer’ you imply that curing cancer is part of a a project that all scientists share. Which is fair enough. When you say that ‘men’ are stripping women of their human rights, you are also saying that all men share the blame – which is misleading.
If I were to say that ‘women’ are using sex to get ahead, and using demands for gender equality to get power and promotion that they could not get on individual merit – would you take it for granted that I obviously meant ‘some women’? Or would you ask me politely to put things differently?
‘If you say that ‘scientists are working on curing cancer’ you imply that curing cancer is part of a a project that all scientists share.’
No, wrong. It neither means nor suggests ALL scientists.
The phrase associates ‘curing cancer’ with scientists as a group. Because we know how many different things scientists are actually working on we do not conclude that it means ‘all scientists’, but we still associate it with all scientists. Try ‘scientists are overpaid’, ‘scientists have not got a clue’, or ‘scientists are b****rds’. Or, for that matter, ‘people named Lewis are total idiots’ (just as an example). Still say that ‘men are stripping women of their human rights’ does not reflect on all men?
The phrase associates ‘curing cancer’ with scientists as a group. Because we know how many different things scientists are actually working on we do not conclude that it means ‘all scientists’, but we still associate it with all scientists. Try ‘scientists are overpaid’, ‘scientists have not got a clue’, or ‘scientists are b****rds’. Or, for that matter, ‘people named Lewis are total idiots’ (just as an example). Still say that ‘men are stripping women of their human rights’ does not reflect on all men?
She is, obviously, referring to men who believe they are women, also referred to as ‘Trans’ men. Those men. Clearly identified. But, the real conversation is getting off-topic with this digression.
I agree that this digression goes off topic – but it hits on another quite important one – it is important to avoid stereotyping – after all stereotyping “men” and “women” is what has led to this madness of “gender” obsession.
I agree that this digression goes off topic – but it hits on another quite important one – it is important to avoid stereotyping – after all stereotyping “men” and “women” is what has led to this madness of “gender” obsession.
Interesting that several men have flocked to this page to invent offence at absolutely nothing.
PS – you’re babbling and pretending not to understand the concept that you understand. Sealions never get to direct me, or converse with me.
Please feel free to continue. The conversation is over.
Thanks for saying ‘several’ . . . I jest
Thanks for saying ‘several’ . . . I jest
That’s nonsense. There is no implication that “all scientists” are part of the curing cancer project, just as there is no implication that all men are trying to strip women of their human rights. Anyway, these sort of semantic critiques are just unworthy distractions.
No, I wouldn’t, because I know it doesn’t apply to me. That’s a difference between men and women – we don’t automatically think everything is about me.
‘If you say that ‘scientists are working on curing cancer’ you imply that curing cancer is part of a a project that all scientists share.’
No, wrong. It neither means nor suggests ALL scientists.
She is, obviously, referring to men who believe they are women, also referred to as ‘Trans’ men. Those men. Clearly identified. But, the real conversation is getting off-topic with this digression.
Interesting that several men have flocked to this page to invent offence at absolutely nothing.
PS – you’re babbling and pretending not to understand the concept that you understand. Sealions never get to direct me, or converse with me.
Please feel free to continue. The conversation is over.
That’s nonsense. There is no implication that “all scientists” are part of the curing cancer project, just as there is no implication that all men are trying to strip women of their human rights. Anyway, these sort of semantic critiques are just unworthy distractions.
No, I wouldn’t, because I know it doesn’t apply to me. That’s a difference between men and women – we don’t automatically think everything is about me.
Lynn, thank you for the link. I looked up the 2021 and 2022 lists of the latter site and what struck me forcibly is most of the crime was the behavior of Paedophiles. I know nothing of the subject but I assume a repeated characteristic of Paedophiles, particularly online is to pretend they are something other than an adult male. Because of policing policy today, they have to record these particular people as transgendered (because they say they are) and that leads them into female prisons, bonkers. The actual physical profiles were a real eye-opener. Lunatics and asylums spring to mind.
It’s pretty horrifying how many crimes have already been carried out by men pretending to be women – and even boys pretending to be girls, and how this is just ignored.
I too was very innocent of all these facts until a couple of years ago, when I noticed that Twitter was removing likes from this famous tweet.
https://mobile.twitter.com/jk_rowling/status/1207646162813100033 – my guess is that this tweet would have at least a million likes by now without Twitter interference.
Once you start looking into these matters, you very quickly find substantial evidence that men who identify as women are harming many women and children throughout the world.
Because women commit so few sex crimes, stats are also now skewed by the number of men who claim, after being arrested, to be women.
I remember the claims of “This never happens” and yet it has happened thousands of times. Decent men don’t want to be within a hundred yards of women and children’s spaces.
The reality is that only predatory or unhinged men want access to women and children’s spaces.
Good news re the Loudon County principal who was responsible for girls being assaulted by predatory boys at his school. He’s been sacked and the boy has been charged with kidnapping and assault.
https://edition.cnn.com/2022/12/08/us/virginia-school-superintendent-fired-report-sexual-assaults/index.html
And parents are taking legal action against the school which has been protecting the fetishist teacher with the giant plastic breasts
https://www.insidehalton.com/news-story/10806891-oakville-high-school-parents-taking-legal-action-against-halton-district-school-board/
And with Musk insisting on free speech on Twitter, I see hashtags trending everyday such as #womanace #sexnotgender #adulthumanfemale
The reality is that nearly everyone agrees that nobody changes sex, it took an incredibly brave woman – Joanne Rowling – to start the ball rolling.
It is not a controversial stance that men are not women and that nobody changes sex – but it has been painted as such by the media, crimes have been hidden, stats have been tweaked, and the truth has been heavily suppressed. Yet still they cannot force us to ignore the evidence of material reality.
And by suppressing rational speech so heavily for years, and amplifying transgenderists, Twitter helped to shape policies which have had a real effect on real vulnerable women and children.
People think if they don’t have a Twitter account they are not affected by Twitter. The reality is that 80 percent of journalists use Twitter as a news source. https://www.prdaily.com/report-83-of-journalists-use-twitter-but-most-still-want-email-pitches/
I’d like to see the men who caused the hounding and abuse of JK attacks on JK Rowling to be amplified and the quashing of the majority voices which supported her to be held accountable.
Anyway, I’m rambling, apologies. I am glad you found the link useful.
If they recorded the crimes as committed by transgendered persons it wouldn’t be so bad. Instead, male crime is being reported and recorded as committed by women.
It was this which first alerted me to what was happening with gender ideology; I noticed (over the course of a few months) several UK press reports of women committing sexual offences against children. Historically this has been a rare incidence and I tried to investigate why women were suddenly doing this. I found one report which revealed the truth in one case – the perpetrator was a trans identifying man.
This led me to transcrimes and Graham Linehan where the full truth of what was happening was laid bare.
It’s pretty horrifying how many crimes have already been carried out by men pretending to be women – and even boys pretending to be girls, and how this is just ignored.
I too was very innocent of all these facts until a couple of years ago, when I noticed that Twitter was removing likes from this famous tweet.
https://mobile.twitter.com/jk_rowling/status/1207646162813100033 – my guess is that this tweet would have at least a million likes by now without Twitter interference.
Once you start looking into these matters, you very quickly find substantial evidence that men who identify as women are harming many women and children throughout the world.
Because women commit so few sex crimes, stats are also now skewed by the number of men who claim, after being arrested, to be women.
I remember the claims of “This never happens” and yet it has happened thousands of times. Decent men don’t want to be within a hundred yards of women and children’s spaces.
The reality is that only predatory or unhinged men want access to women and children’s spaces.
Good news re the Loudon County principal who was responsible for girls being assaulted by predatory boys at his school. He’s been sacked and the boy has been charged with kidnapping and assault.
https://edition.cnn.com/2022/12/08/us/virginia-school-superintendent-fired-report-sexual-assaults/index.html
And parents are taking legal action against the school which has been protecting the fetishist teacher with the giant plastic breasts
https://www.insidehalton.com/news-story/10806891-oakville-high-school-parents-taking-legal-action-against-halton-district-school-board/
And with Musk insisting on free speech on Twitter, I see hashtags trending everyday such as #womanace #sexnotgender #adulthumanfemale
The reality is that nearly everyone agrees that nobody changes sex, it took an incredibly brave woman – Joanne Rowling – to start the ball rolling.
It is not a controversial stance that men are not women and that nobody changes sex – but it has been painted as such by the media, crimes have been hidden, stats have been tweaked, and the truth has been heavily suppressed. Yet still they cannot force us to ignore the evidence of material reality.
And by suppressing rational speech so heavily for years, and amplifying transgenderists, Twitter helped to shape policies which have had a real effect on real vulnerable women and children.
People think if they don’t have a Twitter account they are not affected by Twitter. The reality is that 80 percent of journalists use Twitter as a news source. https://www.prdaily.com/report-83-of-journalists-use-twitter-but-most-still-want-email-pitches/
I’d like to see the men who caused the hounding and abuse of JK attacks on JK Rowling to be amplified and the quashing of the majority voices which supported her to be held accountable.
Anyway, I’m rambling, apologies. I am glad you found the link useful.
If they recorded the crimes as committed by transgendered persons it wouldn’t be so bad. Instead, male crime is being reported and recorded as committed by women.
It was this which first alerted me to what was happening with gender ideology; I noticed (over the course of a few months) several UK press reports of women committing sexual offences against children. Historically this has been a rare incidence and I tried to investigate why women were suddenly doing this. I found one report which revealed the truth in one case – the perpetrator was a trans identifying man.
This led me to transcrimes and Graham Linehan where the full truth of what was happening was laid bare.
My God, that transcrime site is an eye opener. What a weapon in the fight against the activists that claim that it’s only ‘isolated’ ‘trans’ individuals that carry out attacks.
“But please, do waste your time trying to tone police women”
You mean “don’t”. Apologies for mansplaining, but I thought you’d like to have this drawn to your attention.
Edit. Sorry, I didn’t pick up on the intended sarcasm.
I think you do not have logic on your side, here.
If you say that ‘scientists are working on curing cancer’ you imply that curing cancer is part of a a project that all scientists share. Which is fair enough. When you say that ‘men’ are stripping women of their human rights, you are also saying that all men share the blame – which is misleading.
If I were to say that ‘women’ are using sex to get ahead, and using demands for gender equality to get power and promotion that they could not get on individual merit – would you take it for granted that I obviously meant ‘some women’? Or would you ask me politely to put things differently?
Lynn, thank you for the link. I looked up the 2021 and 2022 lists of the latter site and what struck me forcibly is most of the crime was the behavior of Paedophiles. I know nothing of the subject but I assume a repeated characteristic of Paedophiles, particularly online is to pretend they are something other than an adult male. Because of policing policy today, they have to record these particular people as transgendered (because they say they are) and that leads them into female prisons, bonkers. The actual physical profiles were a real eye-opener. Lunatics and asylums spring to mind.
My God, that transcrime site is an eye opener. What a weapon in the fight against the activists that claim that it’s only ‘isolated’ ‘trans’ individuals that carry out attacks.
Only 65 here, and I reserve respect for people I know who have earned it. I also assume a presumption of deserving respect until strangers prove otherwise. A Biden or Hillary sticker is proof they do not deserve respect.
Interesting attitude. Personally I respect people who are sincere, can produce coherent arguments, and face up to discussion with people who do not agree with them. People who limit their respect to those who agree with them – not so much.
Interesting attitude. Personally I respect people who are sincere, can produce coherent arguments, and face up to discussion with people who do not agree with them. People who limit their respect to those who agree with them – not so much.
As you know, it is indeed men who are stripping women of their sex based human rights, with the help of some handmaidens.”Men” cannot be a stereotype, it is a sex class.
If I said scientists are working on curing cancer you would never – under any circumstances – argue that I meant all scientists.
Just as you fully understood the comment to mean predatory men.
If you’re not one of those violent, rapist predatory men who are assaulting women in rape shelters, prisons, toilets, raping women in NHS wards, stealing their sports and demanding access to their sex based spaces as well as denying them hospital care if they protest about men washing their private parts, that’s great.
But please, do waste your time trying to tone police women who are terrified for their human rights, safety and dignity, because that’s what matters at this juncture. Your choice to pretend you thought I was referring to you.
https://grahamlinehan.substack.com/
https://transcrimeuk.com/
Only 65 here, and I reserve respect for people I know who have earned it. I also assume a presumption of deserving respect until strangers prove otherwise. A Biden or Hillary sticker is proof they do not deserve respect.
“men started stripping women of their human rights”
The main problem here appears to be Nicola Sturgeon… voted into office by the women of Scotland.
Read the Glinner Substack. It is filled with years of abusive, violent predatory men raping women, assaulting children, stealing their human rights, dignity, safety, sports and even their right to personal care.
Nobody said there weren’t handmaidens assisting them. But I am not afraid of being raped and assaulted in an NHS ward by Nicola Sturgeon. Though she should be investigated for her part in helping men to strip women and children of their rights, dignity and safety.
https://grahamlinehan.substack.com/
You can also look at transcrimes UK for hundreds more violent, predatory men assaulting women and children and hiding being being “transgender” to do so. https://transcrimeuk.com/
No, it’s men who have been doing this. And yes, women have been assisting them. But it’s still men who I’m afraid of raping little girls in toilets.
f I said scientists are working on curing cancer you would never – under any circumstances – argue that I meant all scientists.
Just as you fully understood the comment to mean predatory men.
But please, do waste your time trying to tone police women who are terrified for their human rights, safety and dignity.
‘Tone’… uh?
When men turn up and tell women how to speak because they have decided women aren’t being nice enough and their hurty feelings matter more than facts, that is often referred to as tone policing.
When men pretend not to understand what women mean, that is often called sealioning.
I never heard of “sealioning” before, but I think it is a good description of the hoarse day- and night-long arguments of that species we experienced during a long weekend at an Oregon seaport town. They lay on the rocks near a rotting wharf and went on and on and on, nothing ever resolved so far as we could perceive. Luckily, we had a noise machine turned to high.
Not to be difficult, well maybe a bit, if men cannot understand what women mean then it must be true that women cannot understand what men mean. And that leaves us where exactly?
But of course, as a woman, Lynn Just Lynn is immune from accusations of tone policing or sealioning.
And this is what you come onto a board discussing men pretending to be women assaulting women? You should be ashamed.
What are you talking about?
What are you talking about?
And this is what you come onto a board discussing men pretending to be women assaulting women? You should be ashamed.
I never heard of “sealioning” before, but I think it is a good description of the hoarse day- and night-long arguments of that species we experienced during a long weekend at an Oregon seaport town. They lay on the rocks near a rotting wharf and went on and on and on, nothing ever resolved so far as we could perceive. Luckily, we had a noise machine turned to high.
Not to be difficult, well maybe a bit, if men cannot understand what women mean then it must be true that women cannot understand what men mean. And that leaves us where exactly?
But of course, as a woman, Lynn Just Lynn is immune from accusations of tone policing or sealioning.
When men turn up and tell women how to speak because they have decided women aren’t being nice enough and their hurty feelings matter more than facts, that is often referred to as tone policing.
When men pretend not to understand what women mean, that is often called sealioning.
I will grant you that statistics show men are more violent and criminal if you grant me that statistics also show men are also more competent and successful. The thing about comparing men and women, for anyone who’s looked at the data, is that men are more variable. “Fatter tails” as they say in statistics: more men are morons and criminals than women. More men are rocket scientists and CEOs than women. Where the radical feminists lose all credibility is they want to cherry pick only the data that suits their superiority myth, or put another way, “heads we win, tails you lose”.
I’m not a feminist. Too many feminists think prostitution is eMpOwErInG,the term has been destroyed.
Your irrelevant babbling aside, it is always a bit depressing how incensed men become when women simply won’t kowtow to their hurty feelings. A bit embarrassing for your better behaved counterparts.
The conversation is now over.
Well someone’s prowling the comment sections with their ‘hurry feelings’ – that’s for sure!
Not her. I don’t blame her a bit for being pissed off at these stupid distractions from a very serious issue being discussed here. You, on the other hand…..
Not her. I don’t blame her a bit for being pissed off at these stupid distractions from a very serious issue being discussed here. You, on the other hand…..
Let ’em be. They’re eminently ignorable.
Well someone’s prowling the comment sections with their ‘hurry feelings’ – that’s for sure!
Let ’em be. They’re eminently ignorable.
You may be correct regarding the different shaped distribution curves. It’s also completely irrelevant to the subject under discussion.
What is the point you’re trying to make? That it’s OK to have violent male perverts pretending to be women because more men are rocket scientists and brain surgeons?
The point is prejudice. Women like this commenter are constantly slandering all men on the basis of those at the bottom of the distribution curve. I think if you read a few more of this poster’s vitriolic attacks against the men on this page you might appreciate the point a bit better.
please stop with the BS. are you derailing this conversation on purpose, or are you just thick and entitled?
please stop with the BS. are you derailing this conversation on purpose, or are you just thick and entitled?
LOL
The point is prejudice. Women like this commenter are constantly slandering all men on the basis of those at the bottom of the distribution curve. I think if you read a few more of this poster’s vitriolic attacks against the men on this page you might appreciate the point a bit better.
LOL
“if you grant me that statistics also show men are also more competent and successful.”
By what measure are men more competent and even more so, by what measure are men more “successful”? How are you defining successful?
Give it a rest. This is not the time or place for this sort of BS. The issue is not what “radical feminists” do or don’t do. It’s about pretend women and the damage they’re inflicting on real women. Stop the distractions. This is shameful behaviour.
I’m not a feminist. Too many feminists think prostitution is eMpOwErInG,the term has been destroyed.
Your irrelevant babbling aside, it is always a bit depressing how incensed men become when women simply won’t kowtow to their hurty feelings. A bit embarrassing for your better behaved counterparts.
The conversation is now over.
You may be correct regarding the different shaped distribution curves. It’s also completely irrelevant to the subject under discussion.
What is the point you’re trying to make? That it’s OK to have violent male perverts pretending to be women because more men are rocket scientists and brain surgeons?
“if you grant me that statistics also show men are also more competent and successful.”
By what measure are men more competent and even more so, by what measure are men more “successful”? How are you defining successful?
Give it a rest. This is not the time or place for this sort of BS. The issue is not what “radical feminists” do or don’t do. It’s about pretend women and the damage they’re inflicting on real women. Stop the distractions. This is shameful behaviour.
True, but let’s try another thought exercise: if I said black men are thugs you would never – under any circumstances – argue that I meant all black men.
And if I said “women are making irrational arguments”, our feminist friends would never – under any circumstance – argue that I meant all women.
Cut the crap.
Cut the crap.
Imagine prowling around comment sections trying and failing to score points against women and pretending not to get it.
Men like you do your decent counterparts no favours at all.
The conversation is now over.
If you can’t handle reasoned debate you have no business posting online. You’re almost as bad as the transgender activists who shout others down. A pox on both your houses.
There’s nothing reasoned about derailing a serious discussion with this sort of bullsh*t.
There’s nothing reasoned about derailing a serious discussion with this sort of bullsh*t.
If you can’t handle reasoned debate you have no business posting online. You’re almost as bad as the transgender activists who shout others down. A pox on both your houses.
And if I said “women are making irrational arguments”, our feminist friends would never – under any circumstance – argue that I meant all women.
Imagine prowling around comment sections trying and failing to score points against women and pretending not to get it.
Men like you do your decent counterparts no favours at all.
The conversation is now over.
‘Tone’… uh?
I will grant you that statistics show men are more violent and criminal if you grant me that statistics also show men are also more competent and successful. The thing about comparing men and women, for anyone who’s looked at the data, is that men are more variable. “Fatter tails” as they say in statistics: more men are morons and criminals than women. More men are rocket scientists and CEOs than women. Where the radical feminists lose all credibility is they want to cherry pick only the data that suits their superiority myth, or put another way, “heads we win, tails you lose”.
True, but let’s try another thought exercise: if I said black men are thugs you would never – under any circumstances – argue that I meant all black men.
Go to universities. Look who heads up and staffs their equity offices. Look who chooses to sit on their equity committees. Look at all the feminist professors attacking ‘Terfs.’ This phenomenon has been driven by women – mostly upper middle class white women.
I provided evidence, believe what you like, material reality will never alter your misogyny. The conversation is now over.
shut up and let the appropriate conversation continue. unbelievable. I don’t speak for anyone but myself, but I am so sorry the women here have to endure this garbage.
I provided evidence, believe what you like, material reality will never alter your misogyny. The conversation is now over.
shut up and let the appropriate conversation continue. unbelievable. I don’t speak for anyone but myself, but I am so sorry the women here have to endure this garbage.
Read the Glinner Substack. It is filled with years of abusive, violent predatory men raping women, assaulting children, stealing their human rights, dignity, safety, sports and even their right to personal care.
Nobody said there weren’t handmaidens assisting them. But I am not afraid of being raped and assaulted in an NHS ward by Nicola Sturgeon. Though she should be investigated for her part in helping men to strip women and children of their rights, dignity and safety.
https://grahamlinehan.substack.com/
You can also look at transcrimes UK for hundreds more violent, predatory men assaulting women and children and hiding being being “transgender” to do so. https://transcrimeuk.com/
No, it’s men who have been doing this. And yes, women have been assisting them. But it’s still men who I’m afraid of raping little girls in toilets.
f I said scientists are working on curing cancer you would never – under any circumstances – argue that I meant all scientists.
Just as you fully understood the comment to mean predatory men.
But please, do waste your time trying to tone police women who are terrified for their human rights, safety and dignity.
Go to universities. Look who heads up and staffs their equity offices. Look who chooses to sit on their equity committees. Look at all the feminist professors attacking ‘Terfs.’ This phenomenon has been driven by women – mostly upper middle class white women.
It does not help your cause to perpetuate the myth of a distinction between sex and gender.
This is meaningless and not directed at anything I wrote.
“This is meaningless and not directed at anything I wrote.”
My comment was a reply to your first post, where you refer to ‘transgender’, so it plainly is directed at your comment. Furthermore, people were formerly always referred to as transsexuals when they transitioned from their birth sex. It is the introduction of the myth of gender which has obfuscated matters to a great degree.
This is meaningless and not directed at anything I wrote. Do you have a point, or a question? If so make it clearly and respond only to what I said, not what you interpreted, believed or wished I had said.
You are an obsessive avoider of argument contrary to yours. You used the word transgender in your first comment. The word is meaningless. As you yourself acknowledge, there are two sexes, male and female. A problem arises when, preponderantly in your example, a male wishes to be regarded as a female. In the past, such men who underwent surgery to appear woman-like were always referred to as transsexual. I agree that you cannot change your sex, but such men do their best to appear as a female. The word “gender” is an obfuscation. The Gender Recognition Act is an abomination because it is not policed. The Act states that a man who wishes to be regarded as female must desire to present as a woman for the rest of his life. Plainly that excludes any lawful possibility of retaining male genitalia. A so-called transwoman with a p***s is already breaking the law before he gets anywhere near women-only spaces, such as refuges for abused women. No-one in charge of such spaces should grant refuge there to anyone who has male genitalia. Any male who retains his genitalia while pretending he is female has plainly, and in law, failed actually to transition at all.
You are an obsessive avoider of argument contrary to yours. You used the word transgender in your first comment. The word is meaningless. As you yourself acknowledge, there are two sexes, male and female. A problem arises when, preponderantly in your example, a male wishes to be regarded as a female. In the past, such men who underwent surgery to appear woman-like were always referred to as transsexual. I agree that you cannot change your sex, but such men do their best to appear as a female. The word “gender” is an obfuscation. The Gender Recognition Act is an abomination because it is not policed. The Act states that a man who wishes to be regarded as female must desire to present as a woman for the rest of his life. Plainly that excludes any lawful possibility of retaining male genitalia. A so-called transwoman with a p***s is already breaking the law before he gets anywhere near women-only spaces, such as refuges for abused women. No-one in charge of such spaces should grant refuge there to anyone who has male genitalia. Any male who retains his genitalia while pretending he is female has plainly, and in law, failed actually to transition at all.
You cannot “transition from your birth sex”. Sex in mammals and birds is determined at fertilisation and encoded in every cell. So-called “sex-change” surgeries are cosmetic to try and look like the ideal person of the opposite sex. They fail, miserably, and certainly don’t stop these men behaving very much as the worst men do. And yet their crimes are recorded as being committed by women!!! No wonder we’re angry!!!
‘Transition from your birth sex’ was used as shorthand to refer to mutilating operations which a) sterilise men, removing their genitalia and giving them an artificial vagina, or b) sterilise women by removing their reproductive organs and giving them an artificial p***s. Thus sexual activity by such people is an inadequate reverse of what happens between normal men and women. As noted in my previous post, a male who simply claims to be a female, retains his p***s and wears dresses to access female-only spaces is breaking the law. This is why gender is a deliberately destructive concept. Such a male may well claim he has changed his gender, and the Gender Recognition Act by its title tends to support that view. All the same, the Act does not allow any man with male genitalia to claim that he is female. Self-evidently no such man is actually living as a woman.
‘Transition from your birth sex’ was used as shorthand to refer to mutilating operations which a) sterilise men, removing their genitalia and giving them an artificial vagina, or b) sterilise women by removing their reproductive organs and giving them an artificial p***s. Thus sexual activity by such people is an inadequate reverse of what happens between normal men and women. As noted in my previous post, a male who simply claims to be a female, retains his p***s and wears dresses to access female-only spaces is breaking the law. This is why gender is a deliberately destructive concept. Such a male may well claim he has changed his gender, and the Gender Recognition Act by its title tends to support that view. All the same, the Act does not allow any man with male genitalia to claim that he is female. Self-evidently no such man is actually living as a woman.
Another stupid distraction.
This is meaningless and not directed at anything I wrote. Do you have a point, or a question? If so make it clearly and respond only to what I said, not what you interpreted, believed or wished I had said.
You cannot “transition from your birth sex”. Sex in mammals and birds is determined at fertilisation and encoded in every cell. So-called “sex-change” surgeries are cosmetic to try and look like the ideal person of the opposite sex. They fail, miserably, and certainly don’t stop these men behaving very much as the worst men do. And yet their crimes are recorded as being committed by women!!! No wonder we’re angry!!!
Another stupid distraction.
“This is meaningless and not directed at anything I wrote.”
My comment was a reply to your first post, where you refer to ‘transgender’, so it plainly is directed at your comment. Furthermore, people were formerly always referred to as transsexuals when they transitioned from their birth sex. It is the introduction of the myth of gender which has obfuscated matters to a great degree.
This is meaningless and not directed at anything I wrote.
I favour “transvestite”.
Different word. There are men who enjoy wearing woman’s clothing while still considering themselves as sexually male.
So can’t we just go back to the innocent days of Danny La Rue? The only difference between transvestites then and transsexuals now is that these days the transvestites are encouraged to physically mutilate themselves by activists.
Womanface is always insulting and creepy, including Danny La Rue – although to be fair he never pretended to be a woman and if some adults find that kind of thing entertaining, fair enough.
And almost no men ever actually have any surgery or hormone treatment. The majority of men claiming to be women are fully intact males, including the ones who are in prisons with females and who are demanding access to rape shelters
https://fairplayforwomen.com/p***s/
Again, transvestites and transgenders are not the same thing. Cross *dressing* does not necessarily mean that the person thinks or even wants to be considered as one of the opposite sex.
Womanface is always insulting and creepy, including Danny La Rue – although to be fair he never pretended to be a woman and if some adults find that kind of thing entertaining, fair enough.
And almost no men ever actually have any surgery or hormone treatment. The majority of men claiming to be women are fully intact males, including the ones who are in prisons with females and who are demanding access to rape shelters
https://fairplayforwomen.com/p***s/
Again, transvestites and transgenders are not the same thing. Cross *dressing* does not necessarily mean that the person thinks or even wants to be considered as one of the opposite sex.
It’s not relevant what men consider themselves, only what they are.
Transgender men could all be considered to be cross dressers. The opposite is not true. Not all cross dressers are transgender, nor do many of them even desire to be. I’m simply making a linguistic point in mixed up definitions. All A are B does not mean that all B are A.
Transgender men could all be considered to be cross dressers. The opposite is not true. Not all cross dressers are transgender, nor do many of them even desire to be. I’m simply making a linguistic point in mixed up definitions. All A are B does not mean that all B are A.
So can’t we just go back to the innocent days of Danny La Rue? The only difference between transvestites then and transsexuals now is that these days the transvestites are encouraged to physically mutilate themselves by activists.
It’s not relevant what men consider themselves, only what they are.
Different word. There are men who enjoy wearing woman’s clothing while still considering themselves as sexually male.
Sadly gender ideology has robbed language of useful meaning. Very effectively, so ‘men’ meaning people with penises and ‘women’ meaning people with vaginas is no longer true so qualifications have to be made which makes communication confusing.
This was purposeful. This is what Orwell and Philip k d**k tried to explain. The first mantra of transactivists was ‘transwomen are women’ for that very purpose, and to demonise and humiliate and silence any one who disagreed.
To say that men weren’t women was enough to get the author of father Ted cancelled. The musical banned.
Rowling has made sure that there is a sanctuary for women that is p***s free, As rape is defined by the action of a p***s you would have thought that it wouldn’t have been so difficult.
It just shows what a mad time we are in so stop being pedantic and concentrate on the reality that gender ideology harms females that’s the beginning and end of it.
Indeed. However, the majority of people only ever use the words men and women, male and female. Nobody actually talks the way the cult has tried to instruct people to talk, outside some very specific areas.
Despite a very well funded, orchestrated and organised campaign against rational language, they have failed. We all know what women and men are. I suggest we all – including the author of this otherwise excellent piece – stop pretending this invented language matters and use the language we all understand.
It’s incredibly freeing.
You are right about the majority of people. However, and tragically enough, there are numerous political figures here, and a now Supreme Court Justice in the US, who cravenly refuse to define ‘woman’ as what we all know the word to mean. Thus what you describe as a failure is by no means total, but it should be in discourse between rational adults.
And it is now taught in uk schools that transwomen are women
And it is now taught in uk schools that transwomen are women
You are right about the majority of people. However, and tragically enough, there are numerous political figures here, and a now Supreme Court Justice in the US, who cravenly refuse to define ‘woman’ as what we all know the word to mean. Thus what you describe as a failure is by no means total, but it should be in discourse between rational adults.
Indeed. However, the majority of people only ever use the words men and women, male and female. Nobody actually talks the way the cult has tried to instruct people to talk, outside some very specific areas.
Despite a very well funded, orchestrated and organised campaign against rational language, they have failed. We all know what women and men are. I suggest we all – including the author of this otherwise excellent piece – stop pretending this invented language matters and use the language we all understand.
It’s incredibly freeing.
Let’s take the ultimate violence- murder.
Per the link below roughly 90% of murderers are men. Roughly 30% of the murdered are women. In a nation with 33.7m males, assuming one murderer per murder (which probably overestimates), 0.0018% of UK males are murderous and men are 3x more at risk from them than women.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/1221306/homicides-in-england-and-wales-by-gender/
Why always this relentless gender war? Would it not be more sensible for men and women to get together to figure out what makes a tiny minority of the population murderers, or rapists or just thugs, and how to stop them getting that way or deter and punish those that do?
Given the already existing evidence of trans men assaulting women in prisons, toilets and hospitals, against their tiny numbers I suspect the %ages of trans men we should worry about are significantly higher than 0.0018%
Why indeed do men lie about violence and rape against women by men? Why indeed do men murder, rape, beat, bash and batter women and children in such horrifying numbers, then become enraged when this is pointed out?
If we knew the answers to those questions, perhaps women and children wouldn’t need rape shelters to flee men and men could stop prowling comment sections babbling misogynistic nonsense.
As you have nothing to add, our conversation is over.
A standard response of the woke. Utterly fail to engage with the point made, have a bit of a rant, flounce off in a huff.
Don’t forget the part where you imply everyone who disagrees with you is a rapist murderer! That’s the coup de grace!
huffy indeed, how many times must one state ” our/this conversation is OVER”, (my emphasis added) yet continue to engage?
Oh shut up. She isn’t woke, and the “point” made has nothing to do with what’s being discussed.
Don’t forget the part where you imply everyone who disagrees with you is a rapist murderer! That’s the coup de grace!
huffy indeed, how many times must one state ” our/this conversation is OVER”, (my emphasis added) yet continue to engage?
Oh shut up. She isn’t woke, and the “point” made has nothing to do with what’s being discussed.
A standard response of the woke. Utterly fail to engage with the point made, have a bit of a rant, flounce off in a huff.
Martin, you are illustrating the confusing capture of language here! Transmen are FEMALE!! Transwomen are male or as I prefer to say transwomen are men. Not any kind of woman. Half of all the trans-identifying men in prison are sex offenders, rapists and killers of women and children. This is why the public mostly don’t quite understand the problem, it’s capture of language and hence thought.
Why indeed do men lie about violence and rape against women by men? Why indeed do men murder, rape, beat, bash and batter women and children in such horrifying numbers, then become enraged when this is pointed out?
If we knew the answers to those questions, perhaps women and children wouldn’t need rape shelters to flee men and men could stop prowling comment sections babbling misogynistic nonsense.
As you have nothing to add, our conversation is over.
Martin, you are illustrating the confusing capture of language here! Transmen are FEMALE!! Transwomen are male or as I prefer to say transwomen are men. Not any kind of woman. Half of all the trans-identifying men in prison are sex offenders, rapists and killers of women and children. This is why the public mostly don’t quite understand the problem, it’s capture of language and hence thought.
Thank you for the lecture, Lynn. There are such things as editors, style guides, house style, that kind of thing. Then there is a necessary compromise every now and again. If I (and the handful of other feminists that have been speaking out about the trans madness since before 2015) hadn’t been willing to make slight compromises over the 18 years I have personally been involved in this battle, we may not be where we are now. Of course I agree with you that terminology, and I’ve written lots about it, but perhaps just going in straight away with what feels like quite mean-spirited criticism it’s not the best approach to change hearts and minds? Thank you for reading anyway, Julie
It’s a genuine pity you’re hostile to fair, honest, rational, measured, correct and polite concerns, considering the incredible importance of using rational and correct language.
I am delighted that my comment has once again brought such a hugely important topic to the forefront.
I will always advocate for correct and rational speech over compelled speech.
Good piece, apart from the incorrect use of language.
Appreciate you writing it anyway.
Lynn, Julie makes a good point. She didn’t come across as hostile to discussion but since you raise the word, surely toning down the relentless hostility is always a good idea.
Well, if you will not listen to Julie Bindel you will certainly not listen to me. But few people will pay attention to your arguments, let alone let themselves be convinced, as long as your posts come across as hostile, self-righteous, closed-minded, and hyper-biased. Julie Bindel can be aggressive and one-sided too, but people listen to her and respect her, even if they disagree, because she does not talk as if her opponents already ought to accept that she was right. If you really care for fair, honest, rational, measured, correct and polite concerns you could do worse than trying to learn from Julie Bindel.
Rasmus…. I agree with you. The world will surely be turning violently upside down very soon and I suggest that we all duck!
Rasmus…. I agree with you. The world will surely be turning violently upside down very soon and I suggest that we all duck!
Lynn, Julie makes a good point. She didn’t come across as hostile to discussion but since you raise the word, surely toning down the relentless hostility is always a good idea.
Well, if you will not listen to Julie Bindel you will certainly not listen to me. But few people will pay attention to your arguments, let alone let themselves be convinced, as long as your posts come across as hostile, self-righteous, closed-minded, and hyper-biased. Julie Bindel can be aggressive and one-sided too, but people listen to her and respect her, even if they disagree, because she does not talk as if her opponents already ought to accept that she was right. If you really care for fair, honest, rational, measured, correct and polite concerns you could do worse than trying to learn from Julie Bindel.
It’s a genuine pity you’re hostile to fair, honest, rational, measured, correct and polite concerns, considering the incredible importance of using rational and correct language.
I am delighted that my comment has once again brought such a hugely important topic to the forefront.
I will always advocate for correct and rational speech over compelled speech.
Good piece, apart from the incorrect use of language.
Appreciate you writing it anyway.
Better still is just ‘gender dysphoric men’
Men who identify as transgender are often AGP, NPD, BPD and many other types of mentally ill. There is no definition of “trans”. Better to always just say men who identify as transgender as that covers those who are genuinely dysmorphic and otherwise mentally ill as well as the predators pretending to be.
Men who identify as transgender are often AGP, NPD, BPD and many other types of mentally ill. There is no definition of “trans”. Better to always just say men who identify as transgender as that covers those who are genuinely dysmorphic and otherwise mentally ill as well as the predators pretending to be.
A man who portrays as though he were not a man, but a woman, should be called … a trans man. A Trans woman is coherent when it refers to a woman who wishes to portray herself as though she was male or at least masculine.
In its current meaning, ‘Trans woman’ referring to a man, is incoherent.
Too confusing, as is all the language around transgenderism.
Additionally it is deeply offensive to refer to men as women in any context.
Men who identify as transgender is clear and concise and cannot be mistaken.
I think your formulation suffers from the same ambiguity, given current usage. Maybe XY-trans would do it.
.
There has just been a disastrous judgment by Lady Haldane in the Court of Session, which found that Scottish government guidance that extends the definition of “woman” to transgender women with a gender recognition certificate (GRC) is lawful. She held that for the purposes of the 2010 Act, sex “is not limited to biological or birth sex, but includes those in possession of a GRC”. I cannot for the life of me understand why the Scottish judiciary is so insistent upon supporting the rights of a tiny minority of those born male at the expense of all women. It makes no sense, either juridically or in terms of the common weal. To adopt your word, this judgment is vomitous.
I think your formulation suffers from the same ambiguity, given current usage. Maybe XY-trans would do it.
.
There has just been a disastrous judgment by Lady Haldane in the Court of Session, which found that Scottish government guidance that extends the definition of “woman” to transgender women with a gender recognition certificate (GRC) is lawful. She held that for the purposes of the 2010 Act, sex “is not limited to biological or birth sex, but includes those in possession of a GRC”. I cannot for the life of me understand why the Scottish judiciary is so insistent upon supporting the rights of a tiny minority of those born male at the expense of all women. It makes no sense, either juridically or in terms of the common weal. To adopt your word, this judgment is vomitous.
Too confusing, as is all the language around transgenderism.
Additionally it is deeply offensive to refer to men as women in any context.
Men who identify as transgender is clear and concise and cannot be mistaken.
.
Many who identify with one of those letters object to being lumped in with all the others, especially with the “TQ”. That acronym should be shortened to simply “TQ” because that is who is really being represented by it.
Indeed, queer theory was written by paedophiles trying to normalise children being groomed.
Alphabet soups force teaming with LGB people while promoting transing of children and attacks on women has set back societal acceptance of same sex attracted people by decades.
Indeed, queer theory was written by paedophiles trying to normalise children being groomed.
Alphabet soups force teaming with LGB people while promoting transing of children and attacks on women has set back societal acceptance of same sex attracted people by decades.
Many who identify with one of those letters object to being lumped in with all the others, especially with the “TQ”. That acronym should be shortened to simply “TQ” because that is who is really being represented by it.
Fully agree …..the term ‘a woman’ needs no adjective of prefix. It is like ‘the sky’, everyone knows what it means.
There is no need to compromise on any aspect of trans ideology as it is simply magical thinking.
I like the use of, ‘woman’. It has been used since women were first invented and has stood the test of time. Well, until the drooling halfwits got into the act.
“language was how men started stripping women of their human rights”
Is this a “touche” comment?
I thought “men” used physical force to do that?
Not to mention “natal woman”…
I agree with you totally, except that I have spent 74 years on this planet without, to my knowledge, treating anyone with disrespect, a view which is echoed by almost every man of my acquaintance. Beware of stereotypes, but otherwise, more power to your elbow, Lynn
“men started stripping women of their human rights”
The main problem here appears to be Nicola Sturgeon… voted into office by the women of Scotland.
It does not help your cause to perpetuate the myth of a distinction between sex and gender.
I favour “transvestite”.
Sadly gender ideology has robbed language of useful meaning. Very effectively, so ‘men’ meaning people with penises and ‘women’ meaning people with vaginas is no longer true so qualifications have to be made which makes communication confusing.
This was purposeful. This is what Orwell and Philip k d**k tried to explain. The first mantra of transactivists was ‘transwomen are women’ for that very purpose, and to demonise and humiliate and silence any one who disagreed.
To say that men weren’t women was enough to get the author of father Ted cancelled. The musical banned.
Rowling has made sure that there is a sanctuary for women that is p***s free, As rape is defined by the action of a p***s you would have thought that it wouldn’t have been so difficult.
It just shows what a mad time we are in so stop being pedantic and concentrate on the reality that gender ideology harms females that’s the beginning and end of it.
Let’s take the ultimate violence- murder.
Per the link below roughly 90% of murderers are men. Roughly 30% of the murdered are women. In a nation with 33.7m males, assuming one murderer per murder (which probably overestimates), 0.0018% of UK males are murderous and men are 3x more at risk from them than women.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/1221306/homicides-in-england-and-wales-by-gender/
Why always this relentless gender war? Would it not be more sensible for men and women to get together to figure out what makes a tiny minority of the population murderers, or rapists or just thugs, and how to stop them getting that way or deter and punish those that do?
Given the already existing evidence of trans men assaulting women in prisons, toilets and hospitals, against their tiny numbers I suspect the %ages of trans men we should worry about are significantly higher than 0.0018%
Thank you for the lecture, Lynn. There are such things as editors, style guides, house style, that kind of thing. Then there is a necessary compromise every now and again. If I (and the handful of other feminists that have been speaking out about the trans madness since before 2015) hadn’t been willing to make slight compromises over the 18 years I have personally been involved in this battle, we may not be where we are now. Of course I agree with you that terminology, and I’ve written lots about it, but perhaps just going in straight away with what feels like quite mean-spirited criticism it’s not the best approach to change hearts and minds? Thank you for reading anyway, Julie
Better still is just ‘gender dysphoric men’
A man who portrays as though he were not a man, but a woman, should be called … a trans man. A Trans woman is coherent when it refers to a woman who wishes to portray herself as though she was male or at least masculine.
In its current meaning, ‘Trans woman’ referring to a man, is incoherent.
.
Fully agree …..the term ‘a woman’ needs no adjective of prefix. It is like ‘the sky’, everyone knows what it means.
There is no need to compromise on any aspect of trans ideology as it is simply magical thinking.
I like the use of, ‘woman’. It has been used since women were first invented and has stood the test of time. Well, until the drooling halfwits got into the act.
“language was how men started stripping women of their human rights”
Is this a “touche” comment?
I thought “men” used physical force to do that?
Fantastic news. But please please PLEASE stop using the invented nonsense word “transwoman”. It means nothing, with or without a space.
Language was how men started stripping women of their human rights, and language perpetuates their predatory behaviour.
Men who identify as transgender is perfectly polite and rational, as well as being accurate.
Most men who identify as transgender have had absolutely no surgery and do not take hormones. The few who do are still not women.
It’s incredibly important that we use honest, reality based language.
Good on her!
Clever too – not a charity so can’t be attacked legally.
It’ll be interesting whether celebrities (looking at you Emma Watson and your Potter costars) that support the child abuse of Mermaids and condemn Rowling as a transphobe will condemn a service for helping vulnerable women, run by and for women.
In fact they should approach these woke celebrities for a supportive comment!
It turns out that Watson – who actively campaigned for the disgraced “Mermaids”, is also on the board of Balenciaga. Some very odd connections going on there.
It turns out that Watson – who actively campaigned for the disgraced “Mermaids”, is also on the board of Balenciaga. Some very odd connections going on there.
Clever too – not a charity so can’t be attacked legally.
It’ll be interesting whether celebrities (looking at you Emma Watson and your Potter costars) that support the child abuse of Mermaids and condemn Rowling as a transphobe will condemn a service for helping vulnerable women, run by and for women.
In fact they should approach these woke celebrities for a supportive comment!
Good on her!
A fantastic move by JKR and others but equally a stain on civic Scotland that it was needed in the first place. All because Nicola ‘feminist to her fingertips’ Sturgeon has allowed the capture of women’s services by men’s rights activists under the camouflage of “progress”.
I think it’s a bit of a stretch to blame this all on “men’s rights activists”. Fairly certain that a huge majority of men support what JKR is doing here. This isn’t about men vs women – it’s about a small minority of people trying to force their agenda on the rest of us.
It’s just sad that she’s having to reinvent the wheel here due to the nonsense and confused thinking of recent years.
‘Trans’ rights activists are virtually all men who hate women. The fact that some men don’t hate women doesn’t change that.
You may be right (it’s a subject of very little interest to me). They don’t represent men though.
I don’t think calling trans activists “men’s rights activists” is meant to imply that they speak for or represent all men.
Except there are actual men’s rights activists like myself who advocate for men who don’t share the views of trans rights activists. This conflation appears intentional
I agree that there should be more recognition of a right to occupy dialectical space on the part of men’s rights activists voicing legitimate male concerns without resorting to the excesses of critical racist theory and alphabet b0110cks.
Yet here you are, arguing about irrelevancies on a page dedicated to women seeking protection from being raped and assaulted.
I agree that there should be more recognition of a right to occupy dialectical space on the part of men’s rights activists voicing legitimate male concerns without resorting to the excesses of critical racist theory and alphabet b0110cks.
Yet here you are, arguing about irrelevancies on a page dedicated to women seeking protection from being raped and assaulted.
Trans activists don’t represent men at all. They represent people who somehow consider themselves women. More important, their ideology is the logical conclusion of wokism–which is an ideology that explicitly condemns men per se. No man who seriously cares about equal rights for men and women would ever call himself either work or trans.
Trans activists represent an ill-educated, ill-mannered, and frankly sinister subset of the set of men who somehow consider themselves women. I agree with the rest of your comment.
Trans activists represent an ill-educated, ill-mannered, and frankly sinister subset of the set of men who somehow consider themselves women. I agree with the rest of your comment.
Except there are actual men’s rights activists like myself who advocate for men who don’t share the views of trans rights activists. This conflation appears intentional
Trans activists don’t represent men at all. They represent people who somehow consider themselves women. More important, their ideology is the logical conclusion of wokism–which is an ideology that explicitly condemns men per se. No man who seriously cares about equal rights for men and women would ever call himself either work or trans.
Possibly because you have a p***s and not a vagina. Empathy and imagination required.
Is anybody else staggered by the fact that Unherd allows the word ‘vagina’, but puts asterisks in the word pee niss?
Is anybody else staggered by the fact that Unherd allows the word ‘vagina’, but puts asterisks in the word pee niss?
I don’t think calling trans activists “men’s rights activists” is meant to imply that they speak for or represent all men.
Possibly because you have a p***s and not a vagina. Empathy and imagination required.
And the feminist activist who wrote this piece is a women who hates men.
t*t-for-tat
*Breast for tat
Possibly not the moment for facetiousness. I was just trying to help W.Shaw round his moderation problem.
Possibly not the moment for facetiousness. I was just trying to help W.Shaw round his moderation problem.
i can’t believe you just added something you obviously know nothing about to this conversation. Why do you digress from the topic to attack the person who is actually DOING something AND making a strong statement on the issue at the same time?
While I dons’t share William Shaw’s sentiment, I do understand it. The composer of this article writes from a feminist theoretical framework in which men, even those who could quite well be sympathetic to her causes, are always cast as the villain. Not only that, but it also further exacerbates the very problems she is describing.
I suspect if you spend most of your time fighting for prostituted women and women who have been sexually abused and killed by men it will obviously affect your perception of the male sex. Although a lot of so-called normal men don’t always come across well either!
I suspect if you spend most of your time fighting for prostituted women and women who have been sexually abused and killed by men it will obviously affect your perception of the male sex. Although a lot of so-called normal men don’t always come across well either!
While I dons’t share William Shaw’s sentiment, I do understand it. The composer of this article writes from a feminist theoretical framework in which men, even those who could quite well be sympathetic to her causes, are always cast as the villain. Not only that, but it also further exacerbates the very problems she is describing.
*Breast for tat
i can’t believe you just added something you obviously know nothing about to this conversation. Why do you digress from the topic to attack the person who is actually DOING something AND making a strong statement on the issue at the same time?
You may be right (it’s a subject of very little interest to me). They don’t represent men though.
And the feminist activist who wrote this piece is a women who hates men.
t*t-for-tat
Just tolerate their man-hating as an inevitable consequence of the traumas these women have suffered. They deserve our sympathy, even when they are being petulant and toxic. If they want to think a few AGPs getting off are part of an elaborate male conspiracy then let them. Rowling should be applauded in any event.
Fortunately, there is no man hating on this page to tolerate. However, it is true that women, as a sex class, certainly do deserve compassion from those men who aren’t predatory, violent rapists, even if those men are being petulant and toxic.
As you are aware, transgenderism is a worldwide cult, well funded and has been pushed relentlessly by extremely wealthy men for many years. As you know there are now thousands of examples of women and children being assaulted by men under the transgenderism umbrella.
As you are aware, Queer theory was written by a paedophile to try to normalise the destruction of all boundaries and has been incorporated into laws in every Western country over the last few years.
https://transcrimeuk.com/
https://www.realityslaststand.com/p/queer-theory-aims-to-normalize-pedophilia
https://grahamlinehan.substack.com/
And as you are aware, Elon Musk has uncovered a vicious nest of paedophilia protection by the previous trust and safety employees.
https://twitter.com/elizableu/status/1600352217000660992
Fortunately, there is no man hating on this page to tolerate. However, it is true that women, as a sex class, certainly do deserve compassion from those men who aren’t predatory, violent rapists, even if those men are being petulant and toxic.
As you are aware, transgenderism is a worldwide cult, well funded and has been pushed relentlessly by extremely wealthy men for many years. As you know there are now thousands of examples of women and children being assaulted by men under the transgenderism umbrella.
As you are aware, Queer theory was written by a paedophile to try to normalise the destruction of all boundaries and has been incorporated into laws in every Western country over the last few years.
https://transcrimeuk.com/
https://www.realityslaststand.com/p/queer-theory-aims-to-normalize-pedophilia
https://grahamlinehan.substack.com/
And as you are aware, Elon Musk has uncovered a vicious nest of paedophilia protection by the previous trust and safety employees.
https://twitter.com/elizableu/status/1600352217000660992
‘Trans’ rights activists are virtually all men who hate women. The fact that some men don’t hate women doesn’t change that.
Just tolerate their man-hating as an inevitable consequence of the traumas these women have suffered. They deserve our sympathy, even when they are being petulant and toxic. If they want to think a few AGPs getting off are part of an elaborate male conspiracy then let them. Rowling should be applauded in any event.
…
Nicola, the chief handmaiden for men’s wants activists in Scotland, was only following on from the years of abuse of women and children which has been encouraged in America, Canada and many more countries.
It is a worldwide campaign, organised and deliberate and run by wealthy men who seek to “queer” the world. And queer theory, written by a paedophile, is all about breaking down all boundaries and normality in societies. In the end, the aim was always to get at vulnerable women – and perhaps more importantly, vulnerable children.
https://www.realityslaststand.com/p/queer-theory-aims-to-normalize-pedophilia
https://transcrimeuk.com/
https://grahamlinehan.substack.com/
you repeatedly refer to female ‘trans-allies’ as ‘handmaidens’. It’s as if you want to deny these often powerful and vocal women their ‘agency’ by using a belittling term (with sexist overtones) as if we are living in a Margaret Atwood novel. Your slavish adherence to feminist ideology, with its bs notion of ‘patriarchy’, seems to be preventing you from seeing the reality – namely that most men are your potential allies in your struggle against a ‘woke’ enemy of misguided women and narcissists
You’re babbling. Nothing you have said is relevant to my comment.
You’re babbling. Nothing you have said is relevant to my comment.
Feminism gave birth to transgenderism. This really shouldn’t come as a shock. For decades feminists have been lauding themselves as the stronger, wiser, and fairer sex. Once theses ideas started being transmitted in education and the media, it was only a matter of time before some men would begin to wish they that they had been born women. Much like when women started to don men’s apparel like trousers and suits, now men are doing the same with women’s clothing.
Women are now in the same position men were during the rise of feminism. I’m sure there were men then who, just as outraged as you are now, complained about the other sex invading their spaces.
I’m afraid transgenderism, at least its political incarnation, is feminism’s Grendel. In this case unfortunately, there was no Beowulf to slay it before it turned on its mother.
You’re babbling. Nothing you have said is relevant to my comment.
No these trans-identifying men are in the grip of the fetish autogynephilia. If you think they really want to be seen as women just look at the sluttish clothes they wear, clothes no normal woman over the age of 30 would wear!!! And many appear to live in utter squalor judging by the pictures they post!!!
You’re babbling. Nothing you have said is relevant to my comment.
No these trans-identifying men are in the grip of the fetish autogynephilia. If you think they really want to be seen as women just look at the sluttish clothes they wear, clothes no normal woman over the age of 30 would wear!!! And many appear to live in utter squalor judging by the pictures they post!!!
you repeatedly refer to female ‘trans-allies’ as ‘handmaidens’. It’s as if you want to deny these often powerful and vocal women their ‘agency’ by using a belittling term (with sexist overtones) as if we are living in a Margaret Atwood novel. Your slavish adherence to feminist ideology, with its bs notion of ‘patriarchy’, seems to be preventing you from seeing the reality – namely that most men are your potential allies in your struggle against a ‘woke’ enemy of misguided women and narcissists
Feminism gave birth to transgenderism. This really shouldn’t come as a shock. For decades feminists have been lauding themselves as the stronger, wiser, and fairer sex. Once theses ideas started being transmitted in education and the media, it was only a matter of time before some men would begin to wish they that they had been born women. Much like when women started to don men’s apparel like trousers and suits, now men are doing the same with women’s clothing.
Women are now in the same position men were during the rise of feminism. I’m sure there were men then who, just as outraged as you are now, complained about the other sex invading their spaces.
I’m afraid transgenderism, at least its political incarnation, is feminism’s Grendel. In this case unfortunately, there was no Beowulf to slay it before it turned on its mother.
Absolute nonsense. I’m an MRA and I’m in contact with many, none of us would seek any “capture of women’s services”. What on earth would lead you to think we might, other than the insane utterances of radical feminists?
MIke Buchanan
JUSTICE FOR MEN & BOYS
http://j4mb.org.uk
Please explain “the capture of women’s services by men’s rights activists “.
Examples?
I think it’s a bit of a stretch to blame this all on “men’s rights activists”. Fairly certain that a huge majority of men support what JKR is doing here. This isn’t about men vs women – it’s about a small minority of people trying to force their agenda on the rest of us.
It’s just sad that she’s having to reinvent the wheel here due to the nonsense and confused thinking of recent years.
…
Nicola, the chief handmaiden for men’s wants activists in Scotland, was only following on from the years of abuse of women and children which has been encouraged in America, Canada and many more countries.
It is a worldwide campaign, organised and deliberate and run by wealthy men who seek to “queer” the world. And queer theory, written by a paedophile, is all about breaking down all boundaries and normality in societies. In the end, the aim was always to get at vulnerable women – and perhaps more importantly, vulnerable children.
https://www.realityslaststand.com/p/queer-theory-aims-to-normalize-pedophilia
https://transcrimeuk.com/
https://grahamlinehan.substack.com/
Absolute nonsense. I’m an MRA and I’m in contact with many, none of us would seek any “capture of women’s services”. What on earth would lead you to think we might, other than the insane utterances of radical feminists?
MIke Buchanan
JUSTICE FOR MEN & BOYS
http://j4mb.org.uk
Please explain “the capture of women’s services by men’s rights activists “.
Examples?
A fantastic move by JKR and others but equally a stain on civic Scotland that it was needed in the first place. All because Nicola ‘feminist to her fingertips’ Sturgeon has allowed the capture of women’s services by men’s rights activists under the camouflage of “progress”.
Julie, I am a (male) fan of yours and JK and I have blazing rows about this with the younger females in my family (so far the young males less so). I would guess 90% of men support this, so please don’t cut us out. we are fathers and brothers and the majority of us are not violent or predatory. most of us care deeply about the protection of women (and, by this, I don’t mean subjugation). please please take much more care with your language. some of this is deeply offensive to non violent men. surely some of you have experience of men you can trust
I am a woman with a husband and four adult sons. (My daughter has five sons),so I live in a thoroughly male dominated world. Every man of my acquaintance would sincerely applaud this move. It takes the tiniest bit of empathy to see that truly damaged, abused women deserve safe spaces, where the prospect of bullying and even rape is completely off the table. It seems insane that such provision has to be defended while privileged university students demand “safe spaces” where they are insulated from unpleasant facts and opinions. What ever happened to “ large men in dresses with their parts fully functioning can do more than break my bones but names will never hurt me” ?
I hope someone steps up for the nursing mother’s groups too. The need is not nearly so heartbreaking but it is real. Some day people will realize these men are bullies with weird fetishes who want access to damaged, vulnerable women, they are not victims. They are the men to fear.
I didn’t say anything that conflicts with what you are saying. in fact I agree with everything you said….when I said “dont cut us out” I meant don’t treat the majority of men…I hope your husband and sons included …. as the enemy…I think there is more support among men for what JK is doing than there is among women. the young women I know do not support JK. I am asking Julie not to generalise about men. I feel you may have misinterpreted me(?). did you think I meant don’t cut men out of these shelters? if so please be reassured this was the opposite of what I meant!!
A thousand apologies, I left out the words” I agree with everything you said”. I am new to this and it is easier to reply than to start anew…of course I agree with you, I was simply saying “me too” in my usual awkward way. I realized it right after I hit the post button but didn’t think it was a big deal, I am a bona fide “aspie” if that explains anything.
reply very fully accepted from another “aspie”
reply very fully accepted from another “aspie”
A thousand apologies, I left out the words” I agree with everything you said”. I am new to this and it is easier to reply than to start anew…of course I agree with you, I was simply saying “me too” in my usual awkward way. I realized it right after I hit the post button but didn’t think it was a big deal, I am a bona fide “aspie” if that explains anything.
I didn’t say anything that conflicts with what you are saying. in fact I agree with everything you said….when I said “dont cut us out” I meant don’t treat the majority of men…I hope your husband and sons included …. as the enemy…I think there is more support among men for what JK is doing than there is among women. the young women I know do not support JK. I am asking Julie not to generalise about men. I feel you may have misinterpreted me(?). did you think I meant don’t cut men out of these shelters? if so please be reassured this was the opposite of what I meant!!
Surely you see the logic? Most violence against women is committed by men, therefore violence against women is an inherently male trait (and as the author does you can call it “male violence”). Most importantly, all men must bear the shame. That logical construct may be the very definition of prejudice, so do take care not to apply it toward the wrong people!
I spent several years teaching logic to undergraduates during my PhD. The argument from
(i) Most violence against women is committed by men, therefore violence against women is an inherently male trait
to
(ii) All men must bear the shame of male violence against women
is invalid. The conclusion doesn’t follow from the premise.
Not sure if you missed the nuance, but that was not my argument – that was my construction of the feminist position. I was stating it in terms that made the invalidity of the argument more obvious. Perhaps you are just agreeing with me- maybe I’m missing the irony myself. As a professor of logic, the fact that you opened your analysis with an appeal to your own authority (a classic logical fallacy) does not inspire confidence in today’s schools. I got my philosophy degree in the 80s where I didn’t once hear a professor argue that he was correct because he was the professor.
Firstly I’m not a professor of logic, I just taught it for several years while I was doing my PhD.
Secondly, you mentioned logic, so I thought I had better mention my own credentials in this respect.
Thirdly, the status of argument from authority qua fallacy is somewhat controversial in cases where the expertise or (at least in my case) competence of the supposed authority is not in question (unless you think I’m lying). Although some would say that all claims to authority should be disregarded, others contend that scientific understanding could not be enhanced without reposing at least some trust in expertise – otherwise we would just find ourselves going over the same ground all the time.
I’m not going to engage in pompous credentialism with you, but do not make the mistake of assuming with no evidence that you are more educated. What I most objected to was not that you appealed to your own authority, but that you didn’t actually explain the invalidity of the argument you were attacking. You simply declared it invalid. (And missed the entire point of my post – the textbook logical fallacy is actually contained within what you describe as premise number 1). But that’s the problem – your own authority was your ONLY argument. And I will be the first to admit that such fallacies are highly effective in places such as this – cold logic will get you nothing but downvotes among the radical feminists.
Dear God guys. Your beginning to sound like the Judean Popular Front
Maybe HE does. I’m with the Peoples Front of Judea.
Romanes eunt domus!
Romanes eunt domus!
Maybe HE does. I’m with the Peoples Front of Judea.
“What I most objected to was not that you appealed to your own authority, but that you didn’t actually explain the invalidity of the argument you were attacking.”
This is patently not true. Your response to me explicitly and exclusively focuses on the accusation that I argued from authority fallaciously.
Sorry- I should have said “what I most object to” and not “objected” – I understand why you thought that was a claim about what had been said, and why you might jump on it to score yourself a point. But once again your main argument is based upon a misinterpretation.
Sorry- I should have said “what I most object to” and not “objected” – I understand why you thought that was a claim about what had been said, and why you might jump on it to score yourself a point. But once again your main argument is based upon a misinterpretation.
Dear God guys. Your beginning to sound like the Judean Popular Front
“What I most objected to was not that you appealed to your own authority, but that you didn’t actually explain the invalidity of the argument you were attacking.”
This is patently not true. Your response to me explicitly and exclusively focuses on the accusation that I argued from authority fallaciously.
I’m not going to engage in pompous credentialism with you, but do not make the mistake of assuming with no evidence that you are more educated. What I most objected to was not that you appealed to your own authority, but that you didn’t actually explain the invalidity of the argument you were attacking. You simply declared it invalid. (And missed the entire point of my post – the textbook logical fallacy is actually contained within what you describe as premise number 1). But that’s the problem – your own authority was your ONLY argument. And I will be the first to admit that such fallacies are highly effective in places such as this – cold logic will get you nothing but downvotes among the radical feminists.
Firstly I’m not a professor of logic, I just taught it for several years while I was doing my PhD.
Secondly, you mentioned logic, so I thought I had better mention my own credentials in this respect.
Thirdly, the status of argument from authority qua fallacy is somewhat controversial in cases where the expertise or (at least in my case) competence of the supposed authority is not in question (unless you think I’m lying). Although some would say that all claims to authority should be disregarded, others contend that scientific understanding could not be enhanced without reposing at least some trust in expertise – otherwise we would just find ourselves going over the same ground all the time.
You could simply add:
(i)a – all men share responsibility for inherently male traits
..and the conclusion follows. It obviously depends on how you interpret the term ‘inherently’, the term ‘responsibility’ and the term ‘share’, but we can offer all of that up to the shade of CEM Joad, or indeed that of AJ Ayer.
Not sure if you missed the nuance, but that was not my argument – that was my construction of the feminist position. I was stating it in terms that made the invalidity of the argument more obvious. Perhaps you are just agreeing with me- maybe I’m missing the irony myself. As a professor of logic, the fact that you opened your analysis with an appeal to your own authority (a classic logical fallacy) does not inspire confidence in today’s schools. I got my philosophy degree in the 80s where I didn’t once hear a professor argue that he was correct because he was the professor.
You could simply add:
(i)a – all men share responsibility for inherently male traits
..and the conclusion follows. It obviously depends on how you interpret the term ‘inherently’, the term ‘responsibility’ and the term ‘share’, but we can offer all of that up to the shade of CEM Joad, or indeed that of AJ Ayer.
I spent several years teaching logic to undergraduates during my PhD. The argument from
(i) Most violence against women is committed by men, therefore violence against women is an inherently male trait
to
(ii) All men must bear the shame of male violence against women
is invalid. The conclusion doesn’t follow from the premise.
There is nothing.on this page that is offensive to men who are not violent, predatory rapists.
Just as when we say “scientists are seeking a cure for cancer” everyone knows we do not mean all scientists, so men who are not predatory, abusive rapists are always aware that they are not being discussed when the crimes of their sex class are discussed
When we say women need protection from male violence, nobody ever thinks we mean every single woman alive.
When we say “Violent predatory men are being assisted by women to destroy women’s human rights and children’s bodies” nobody ever believes we mean all women – or all men.
Did you catch that Patrick? We took offence, therefore we are ‘violent, predatory rapists’! By taking offence we have revealed our criminality. D’oh!
The only person assuming all men are violent predatory rapists is – apparently – you.
And forced teaming is a huge red flag.
You don’t like to take responsibility for your words do you? You literally said to a poster who had taken offence that nothing was offensive to anyone who is not a “violent predatory rapist”. That’s a direct implication that he’s a violent predatory rapist. You do understand words don’t you? Or is it just accountability you have a problem with?
You don’t like to take responsibility for your words do you? You literally said to a poster who had taken offence that nothing was offensive to anyone who is not a “violent predatory rapist”. That’s a direct implication that he’s a violent predatory rapist. You do understand words don’t you? Or is it just accountability you have a problem with?
The only person assuming all men are violent predatory rapists is – apparently – you.
And forced teaming is a huge red flag.
I attempted to respond to the implication made by this post about what sort of people take offence to statements in this article. Censored for calling it out?? Starting to question my unherd subscription again. Consider me silenced. Getting awfully ‘herdy’.
Look at that – I got ‘uncensored’!
Of all the things that didn’t happen, this also didn’t happen the most.
Of all the sense you didn’t make …
Of all the sense you didn’t make …
Look at that – I got ‘uncensored’!
Of all the things that didn’t happen, this also didn’t happen the most.
the last thing I want to do is detract from the main message that JK’s centre and her more general stand is wonderful and brave. perhaps I am not justified in raising it here but I don’t like terms like “male violence against women” because the insertion of the word “male” doesn’t add anything useful and involves explicit discrimination against men. Male attributes are an important factor along with other things but this does not make the crimes “male” in a general sense. these are societal problems and males in general are no more culpable than females. We must celebrate, now the absurdity of the trans demands have caused a very powerful group to take a stand. the hope must be that they then reflect on the part they played in the “re-education” of the young and the way this has come back haunt them. it is not men that give power to trans activists, it is the young. progressive activists of every persuasion have played with the heads of the young before they are ready and this has been very deliberate, because it easy to colonise an unformed mind. I hear 16 year olds spouting mantras, including ideological feminist versions of history, with the empty uniformity of stepford wives.
Grudgingly!
Did you catch that Patrick? We took offence, therefore we are ‘violent, predatory rapists’! By taking offence we have revealed our criminality. D’oh!
I attempted to respond to the implication made by this post about what sort of people take offence to statements in this article. Censored for calling it out?? Starting to question my unherd subscription again. Consider me silenced. Getting awfully ‘herdy’.
the last thing I want to do is detract from the main message that JK’s centre and her more general stand is wonderful and brave. perhaps I am not justified in raising it here but I don’t like terms like “male violence against women” because the insertion of the word “male” doesn’t add anything useful and involves explicit discrimination against men. Male attributes are an important factor along with other things but this does not make the crimes “male” in a general sense. these are societal problems and males in general are no more culpable than females. We must celebrate, now the absurdity of the trans demands have caused a very powerful group to take a stand. the hope must be that they then reflect on the part they played in the “re-education” of the young and the way this has come back haunt them. it is not men that give power to trans activists, it is the young. progressive activists of every persuasion have played with the heads of the young before they are ready and this has been very deliberate, because it easy to colonise an unformed mind. I hear 16 year olds spouting mantras, including ideological feminist versions of history, with the empty uniformity of stepford wives.
Grudgingly!
I am a woman with a husband and four adult sons. (My daughter has five sons),so I live in a thoroughly male dominated world. Every man of my acquaintance would sincerely applaud this move. It takes the tiniest bit of empathy to see that truly damaged, abused women deserve safe spaces, where the prospect of bullying and even rape is completely off the table. It seems insane that such provision has to be defended while privileged university students demand “safe spaces” where they are insulated from unpleasant facts and opinions. What ever happened to “ large men in dresses with their parts fully functioning can do more than break my bones but names will never hurt me” ?
I hope someone steps up for the nursing mother’s groups too. The need is not nearly so heartbreaking but it is real. Some day people will realize these men are bullies with weird fetishes who want access to damaged, vulnerable women, they are not victims. They are the men to fear.
Surely you see the logic? Most violence against women is committed by men, therefore violence against women is an inherently male trait (and as the author does you can call it “male violence”). Most importantly, all men must bear the shame. That logical construct may be the very definition of prejudice, so do take care not to apply it toward the wrong people!
There is nothing.on this page that is offensive to men who are not violent, predatory rapists.
Just as when we say “scientists are seeking a cure for cancer” everyone knows we do not mean all scientists, so men who are not predatory, abusive rapists are always aware that they are not being discussed when the crimes of their sex class are discussed
When we say women need protection from male violence, nobody ever thinks we mean every single woman alive.
When we say “Violent predatory men are being assisted by women to destroy women’s human rights and children’s bodies” nobody ever believes we mean all women – or all men.
Julie, I am a (male) fan of yours and JK and I have blazing rows about this with the younger females in my family (so far the young males less so). I would guess 90% of men support this, so please don’t cut us out. we are fathers and brothers and the majority of us are not violent or predatory. most of us care deeply about the protection of women (and, by this, I don’t mean subjugation). please please take much more care with your language. some of this is deeply offensive to non violent men. surely some of you have experience of men you can trust
To the editor: must you use the term “natal woman”? Won’t “woman” do just fine?
Is this, Natal, a feminist acceptable counterpunch to the term ‘cis’ ?
Women shouldn’t have to define themselves so that they stand out from ‘non’ women, it should be so totally opposite that it isn’t even a ‘thing’.
True. And literally everybody I have ever spoken to just says men and women. It’s only when governments and organisations are trying to impose the hate speech of transgenderism on women that this stumbling nonsense is even ever mentioned. There are men and there are women. No need for slurs, prefixes and silliness. Let’s just use rational language, the language the extremely well organised and aggressive transgender cult tried and failed to destroy.
In all honesty I don’t think so, but I could be wrong.
True. And literally everybody I have ever spoken to just says men and women. It’s only when governments and organisations are trying to impose the hate speech of transgenderism on women that this stumbling nonsense is even ever mentioned. There are men and there are women. No need for slurs, prefixes and silliness. Let’s just use rational language, the language the extremely well organised and aggressive transgender cult tried and failed to destroy.
In all honesty I don’t think so, but I could be wrong.
Is this, Natal, a feminist acceptable counterpunch to the term ‘cis’ ?
Women shouldn’t have to define themselves so that they stand out from ‘non’ women, it should be so totally opposite that it isn’t even a ‘thing’.
To the editor: must you use the term “natal woman”? Won’t “woman” do just fine?
I stand 100% behind Rowling…
I often wear a t shirt bearing the legend “I stand with J.K.Rowling”. Back in April I evicted my woke lodger for shouting at me for wearing it, which I think may have enhanced her understanding of the phrase, beloved among the woke, “words have consequences”.
I often wear a t shirt bearing the legend “I stand with J.K.Rowling”. Back in April I evicted my woke lodger for shouting at me for wearing it, which I think may have enhanced her understanding of the phrase, beloved among the woke, “words have consequences”.
I stand 100% behind Rowling…
Fantastic news.
Fantastic news.
Delighted this has happened. Disgusted that it was necessary in the first place because of reality-denying ideologues. Women deserve better. Congratulations to JKR and all the strong women who made Beira’s Place possible and very best wishes for the future.
Delighted this has happened. Disgusted that it was necessary in the first place because of reality-denying ideologues. Women deserve better. Congratulations to JKR and all the strong women who made Beira’s Place possible and very best wishes for the future.
Well done JK Rowling!
Well done JK Rowling!
JK Rowling has a lot of power. She is able to mobilise women who want to fight this ideology. Perhaps she could do more to unify us and lead this.
JK Rowling has a lot of power. She is able to mobilise women who want to fight this ideology. Perhaps she could do more to unify us and lead this.
Good for JKR. She’s done it again. So great to see someone with her money put it to good use again. Such a great example to all.
Good for JKR. She’s done it again. So great to see someone with her money put it to good use again. Such a great example to all.
excellent news and a very worthwhile stance to take.
excellent news and a very worthwhile stance to take.
Good for Rowling.
We have replaced common sense with fanatical ideology.
Lot of that going around.
In this case, its women, real women, that are paying the price.
But this kind of over the top fanaticism based on cherry picked, sloppy and biased science is the same kind of thing going on with global warming with insane climate policies that are going to harm everyone.
Good for Rowling.
We have replaced common sense with fanatical ideology.
Lot of that going around.
In this case, its women, real women, that are paying the price.
But this kind of over the top fanaticism based on cherry picked, sloppy and biased science is the same kind of thing going on with global warming with insane climate policies that are going to harm everyone.
We never need to say not all men – everyone already knows this.
But it’s a clear indicator that a man is a predator when he wants access to women and children’s spaces.
Good men stay out of women’s spaces. And predatory men stand out in women’s spaces.
We never need to say not all men – everyone already knows this.
But it’s a clear indicator that a man is a predator when he wants access to women and children’s spaces.
Good men stay out of women’s spaces. And predatory men stand out in women’s spaces.
It is about time a REAL Feminist did something that hits at the gut of this indefensible, predatory movement to push men into women’s spaces. I have been wondering where all the ‘famous’ feminists are on this issue. Where are you Gloria, Jane, Madonna, Ono, Atwood, Walker et all? With the number of assaults rising as indicated, Sturgeon should be pushing legislation to keep men OUT of women’s prisons; she is an ideologue and foolish. Men are men and women are women. Everyone else who is playing gender games and dress- up as an adult is delusional. A man does not belong in women’s shelters, sports, locker rooms, washrooms, retreats, spas, safe houses or prisons. When this conversation comes up I am always perfectly clear on this and the recipients of my opinion often tell me they agree but don’t push back as I do. However, I enjoy free speech and debate. Time to push back on this ‘Trans’ movement before these men do more damage to girls and women. Good job J.K.Rowling. You are my hero.
She is wonderful. I wish she’d run for political office. I don’t blame her one bit for not doing so, she has done enough for women and children far more than most. But I selfishly wish she would.
She is wonderful. I wish she’d run for political office. I don’t blame her one bit for not doing so, she has done enough for women and children far more than most. But I selfishly wish she would.
It is about time a REAL Feminist did something that hits at the gut of this indefensible, predatory movement to push men into women’s spaces. I have been wondering where all the ‘famous’ feminists are on this issue. Where are you Gloria, Jane, Madonna, Ono, Atwood, Walker et all? With the number of assaults rising as indicated, Sturgeon should be pushing legislation to keep men OUT of women’s prisons; she is an ideologue and foolish. Men are men and women are women. Everyone else who is playing gender games and dress- up as an adult is delusional. A man does not belong in women’s shelters, sports, locker rooms, washrooms, retreats, spas, safe houses or prisons. When this conversation comes up I am always perfectly clear on this and the recipients of my opinion often tell me they agree but don’t push back as I do. However, I enjoy free speech and debate. Time to push back on this ‘Trans’ movement before these men do more damage to girls and women. Good job J.K.Rowling. You are my hero.
A good point made re actual existing services. Gay men and the trans community have dozens of dedicated charities ( funded by tax/payers and private patrons) . Support groups,social groups,clubs – they are not short of money or patronage. Unlike women (often w children in tow) fleeing domestic or sexual violence or survivors of same. They do not have access to the same level of support. Not even in the schools their children are whisked off to from age dot – no parent support groups. No spaces for mothers groups facilitated by the State. They are being defunded in Ireland and England. Same policy. Trans people have also always been a very big part of the gay social scene where so many women coming to services have no social life outside the home or funds for it. The idea that trans m to f people can dictate to this group in society is shameful. They are perfectly safe in their LGBTQIA+ universe.
I would add they are also not short of jobs , access to universities , mortgages, loans, holidays and a certain exclusivity in the way women who have only a gov funded rape crisis centre to turn to for at best skeleton services. They dont have to prove their narrative like a raped girl or woman must. An assertive trans person can make a final pronouncement that they are what they say they are and claim reconstructive surgery while girls die of cervical cancer jobs in the most intimate of female services previously reserved for women at lower pay rates than their male counterparts. Etc! Wear a dress if you want. Be feminine if it is your nature. Cant wait to see the pay grade wars start when all our jobs in female services are occupied by trans m to f people. Will they do the job for what a woman has had to accept in order to get that job. Not likely.
Trans people have always been, at most, a decidedly peripheral aspect of the gay social scene, and the part which they played in the ultimately successful campaign for gay equality was, at a generous estimate, negligible.
I would add they are also not short of jobs , access to universities , mortgages, loans, holidays and a certain exclusivity in the way women who have only a gov funded rape crisis centre to turn to for at best skeleton services. They dont have to prove their narrative like a raped girl or woman must. An assertive trans person can make a final pronouncement that they are what they say they are and claim reconstructive surgery while girls die of cervical cancer jobs in the most intimate of female services previously reserved for women at lower pay rates than their male counterparts. Etc! Wear a dress if you want. Be feminine if it is your nature. Cant wait to see the pay grade wars start when all our jobs in female services are occupied by trans m to f people. Will they do the job for what a woman has had to accept in order to get that job. Not likely.
Trans people have always been, at most, a decidedly peripheral aspect of the gay social scene, and the part which they played in the ultimately successful campaign for gay equality was, at a generous estimate, negligible.
A good point made re actual existing services. Gay men and the trans community have dozens of dedicated charities ( funded by tax/payers and private patrons) . Support groups,social groups,clubs – they are not short of money or patronage. Unlike women (often w children in tow) fleeing domestic or sexual violence or survivors of same. They do not have access to the same level of support. Not even in the schools their children are whisked off to from age dot – no parent support groups. No spaces for mothers groups facilitated by the State. They are being defunded in Ireland and England. Same policy. Trans people have also always been a very big part of the gay social scene where so many women coming to services have no social life outside the home or funds for it. The idea that trans m to f people can dictate to this group in society is shameful. They are perfectly safe in their LGBTQIA+ universe.
Bravo, for JK.
However many ‘good’ points Julie makes, and she often produces interesting stuff, I just can’t get over the feeling of a barely concealed misandry in her writing, which ‘unfortunately’ colours my judgement of what she says.
Bravo, for JK.
However many ‘good’ points Julie makes, and she often produces interesting stuff, I just can’t get over the feeling of a barely concealed misandry in her writing, which ‘unfortunately’ colours my judgement of what she says.
“I have spoken to many women who were instantly aware of the presence of a male in sexual assault centres, however well those men think they pass as women.”
Frame it! Women are the final authority on who qualifies as a woman.
Bravo, J.K. Rowling! I have no doubt many women will benefit from your courage and generosity, nor do I doubt that most men will applaud you. It may seem ironic to make this point here, but the truth is that the vast majority of men do not think well of men who mistreat women. I think women in general know this: normally, the confidence they feel that they’re safe in men’s company is not misplaced. There’s a reason why convicted sexual offenders have to be segregated from other prison inmates, if they’re to survive their incarceration; and an actual rapist who’s caught in the act by a group of other men is highly unlikely to emerge from the experience unscathed. All men whose opinion you’d ever have reason to care about hope that women whose trust has been betrayed to such an extent that they feel compelled to take refuge at Beira’s Place remain a minority.
“I have spoken to many women who were instantly aware of the presence of a male in sexual assault centres, however well those men think they pass as women.”
Frame it! Women are the final authority on who qualifies as a woman.
Bravo, J.K. Rowling! I have no doubt many women will benefit from your courage and generosity, nor do I doubt that most men will applaud you. It may seem ironic to make this point here, but the truth is that the vast majority of men do not think well of men who mistreat women. I think women in general know this: normally, the confidence they feel that they’re safe in men’s company is not misplaced. There’s a reason why convicted sexual offenders have to be segregated from other prison inmates, if they’re to survive their incarceration; and an actual rapist who’s caught in the act by a group of other men is highly unlikely to emerge from the experience unscathed. All men whose opinion you’d ever have reason to care about hope that women whose trust has been betrayed to such an extent that they feel compelled to take refuge at Beira’s Place remain a minority.
Amazing! Congratulations to JK Rowling and the women of Scotland!
Unfortunately most of Sturgeon’s support comes from women who see her as a “Joan of Arc” character. She has successfully tied her tenure to women’s historic grievance about their natural role in the survival of the species. She may be a monster but she is an extremely cunning monster.
Unfortunately most of Sturgeon’s support comes from women who see her as a “Joan of Arc” character. She has successfully tied her tenure to women’s historic grievance about their natural role in the survival of the species. She may be a monster but she is an extremely cunning monster.
Amazing! Congratulations to JK Rowling and the women of Scotland!
This is such good news but it’s also a real shame that it’s necessary.
This is such good news but it’s also a real shame that it’s necessary.
“If someone had told me five years ago that the launch of a service for female-only sexual assault survivors would be inevitably contentious, I would have laughed.“
If someone would have told me 10 years ago that the same people who fought for the redefinition of marriage would be fighting against the redefinition of woman, I would have laughed.
It’s true that many decent people were happy enough to allow same sex couples to get married, and that deeply misogynistic laws were slid into society under cover using same sex marriage as a Trojan horse.
It is also true that some conservative people warned of the slippery slope and were ignored, when they should not have been.
But considering that thousands of girls have had double mastectomies and are taking harmful wrong sex hormones which will sterilise them, cause vaginal atrophy, heart issues bone issues and more, and considering women and children have been raped and assaulted by men in women’s prisons, wards, rape shelters, toilets, changing rooms and more, and considering that at least one woman was denied life saving surgery for refusing to go along with compelled speech and the religion of pronouns and had to fight for her tight not to have a man wash her private parts, and considering that women have had their sports accomplishments and jobs stolen, and considering the mental health of an entire generation has been deeply harmed by the deeply homophobic and misgoynistic cult of gendered souls – it seems somewhat churlish to sneer and say I told you so at this juncture.
Decent, empathetic and compassionate people have indeed been roundly punished for being tricked into standing up for homosexual rights by use of laws that were coopted by sly misogynistic anti women’s human rights activists. I’m not sure why you think that’s a laughing matter.
It’s quite obvious that I don’t believe its a laughing matter. You can dismount your high horse now.
It’s quite obvious that I don’t believe its a laughing matter. You can dismount your high horse now.
It’s true that many decent people were happy enough to allow same sex couples to get married, and that deeply misogynistic laws were slid into society under cover using same sex marriage as a Trojan horse.
It is also true that some conservative people warned of the slippery slope and were ignored, when they should not have been.
But considering that thousands of girls have had double mastectomies and are taking harmful wrong sex hormones which will sterilise them, cause vaginal atrophy, heart issues bone issues and more, and considering women and children have been raped and assaulted by men in women’s prisons, wards, rape shelters, toilets, changing rooms and more, and considering that at least one woman was denied life saving surgery for refusing to go along with compelled speech and the religion of pronouns and had to fight for her tight not to have a man wash her private parts, and considering that women have had their sports accomplishments and jobs stolen, and considering the mental health of an entire generation has been deeply harmed by the deeply homophobic and misgoynistic cult of gendered souls – it seems somewhat churlish to sneer and say I told you so at this juncture.
Decent, empathetic and compassionate people have indeed been roundly punished for being tricked into standing up for homosexual rights by use of laws that were coopted by sly misogynistic anti women’s human rights activists. I’m not sure why you think that’s a laughing matter.
“If someone had told me five years ago that the launch of a service for female-only sexual assault survivors would be inevitably contentious, I would have laughed.“
If someone would have told me 10 years ago that the same people who fought for the redefinition of marriage would be fighting against the redefinition of woman, I would have laughed.
Good for her! “Woman” means something, and women have a right to a place to feel safe from men – including the sort who claim to be women so they can prey upon them.
Good for her! “Woman” means something, and women have a right to a place to feel safe from men – including the sort who claim to be women so they can prey upon them.
I can understand why the U.S. has so many woke idiots. But I always viewed Scotland as a cold, stern country with frugal, no nonsense citizens. So where do these idiots come from who deny biology?
I can understand why the U.S. has so many woke idiots. But I always viewed Scotland as a cold, stern country with frugal, no nonsense citizens. So where do these idiots come from who deny biology?
I note a post which questioned why Unherd gives a platform to Julie Bindel has been removed.
Among other replies, i suggested Unherd’s platform for Julie was providing for some very important debates in a civilsed fashion, which wouldn’t happen on other social media platforms, and not least the views of males which i think are very important in this matter.
Also, i haven’t seen the new centre set up in Edinburgh by JKR mentioned elsewhere, so the provision of that as a straightforward news item is valuable in its own right.
Edit: i now see it’s been reinstated – oh come on Unherd, get these technical/editorial glitches sorted, it’s becoming tiresome.
Lots of posts disappearing and reappearing in this thread. I bet the discussions in the back room about who to censor and why are as heated as the discussion itself!
Lots of posts disappearing and reappearing in this thread. I bet the discussions in the back room about who to censor and why are as heated as the discussion itself!
I note a post which questioned why Unherd gives a platform to Julie Bindel has been removed.
Among other replies, i suggested Unherd’s platform for Julie was providing for some very important debates in a civilsed fashion, which wouldn’t happen on other social media platforms, and not least the views of males which i think are very important in this matter.
Also, i haven’t seen the new centre set up in Edinburgh by JKR mentioned elsewhere, so the provision of that as a straightforward news item is valuable in its own right.
Edit: i now see it’s been reinstated – oh come on Unherd, get these technical/editorial glitches sorted, it’s becoming tiresome.
“Police figures show that between 2018/19 and 2021/22, instances of rape against women have increased by 25%.”
Wuhan Flu lockdowns incarcerated them with their rapists.
“Police figures show that between 2018/19 and 2021/22, instances of rape against women have increased by 25%.”
Wuhan Flu lockdowns incarcerated them with their rapists.
Trans people are only .003% of the human population, but the media echoing chamber leads us to believe it is much, much higher. Remove the clothes of an empress and if you see a p***s, he belongs in the men’s room. They are not as open and accepting there as seems to be the case in the ladies room.Noses will be punched for starters. One understands Nicola Sturgeon’s gay husband is a beard and she has a French girlfriend. Would this be a factor in her bizarre beliefs?
Nicola Sturgeon’s gay husband is a beard and she has a French girlfriend
Where is the evidence for this, and I don’t mean Twitter hashtags. Even if it were true – so what? I’m no fan of Ms Sturgeon, but provided her private life is not a security risk or causes her to be involved in corruption then it is no business of the general public.
Nicola Sturgeon’s gay husband is a beard and she has a French girlfriend
Where is the evidence for this, and I don’t mean Twitter hashtags. Even if it were true – so what? I’m no fan of Ms Sturgeon, but provided her private life is not a security risk or causes her to be involved in corruption then it is no business of the general public.
Trans people are only .003% of the human population, but the media echoing chamber leads us to believe it is much, much higher. Remove the clothes of an empress and if you see a p***s, he belongs in the men’s room. They are not as open and accepting there as seems to be the case in the ladies room.Noses will be punched for starters. One understands Nicola Sturgeon’s gay husband is a beard and she has a French girlfriend. Would this be a factor in her bizarre beliefs?
Good on her!!! It’s outrageous this new centre is already being discriminated against by the prevailing ‘authorities’ as the centre doesn’t have charity status. Apparently, this had to been done as a pre-emptive move to ‘legally’ deny aiding and assisting men pretending to be women. Rowlings does indeed take ‘the hit’ on this one. ~ How silly & unfair it has all become! ~ Women invariably end up ‘carrying the load’ for male transgressions, figuratively & literally.
Good on her!!! It’s outrageous this new centre is already being discriminated against by the prevailing ‘authorities’ as the centre doesn’t have charity status. Apparently, this had to been done as a pre-emptive move to ‘legally’ deny aiding and assisting men pretending to be women. Rowlings does indeed take ‘the hit’ on this one. ~ How silly & unfair it has all become! ~ Women invariably end up ‘carrying the load’ for male transgressions, figuratively & literally.
I am very grateful to JK Rowling for doing this.
Its horrific enough that these services are needed, nevermind that they are now exposed to predators who are able to play a system created naively and dare I say with a pinch of (now) pigheadedness).
I hope women’s rights are retained and enhanced, but sadly I feel my daughter will grow up in a world where I will have to leave the country of our birth to protect her (and her brother) from it and it’s now unremitting leader.
Gender pay gaps are still being closed and we’re already onto something else that will take away from women. Well played society!
I am very grateful to JK Rowling for doing this.
Its horrific enough that these services are needed, nevermind that they are now exposed to predators who are able to play a system created naively and dare I say with a pinch of (now) pigheadedness).
I hope women’s rights are retained and enhanced, but sadly I feel my daughter will grow up in a world where I will have to leave the country of our birth to protect her (and her brother) from it and it’s now unremitting leader.
Gender pay gaps are still being closed and we’re already onto something else that will take away from women. Well played society!
Campaigning against violence (whoever the victim may be) is like campaigning against sin. We are all against wickedness, but it is silly to think that it can be eliminated while human nature continues in its flawed state. Having said that, all credit and support due to JK Rowling and others providing services to help female victims.
Campaigning against violence (whoever the victim may be) is like campaigning against sin. We are all against wickedness, but it is silly to think that it can be eliminated while human nature continues in its flawed state. Having said that, all credit and support due to JK Rowling and others providing services to help female victims.
I am an American, so I don’t know all the ins and outs of the problems in Scotland. But I can’t help wondering if there is the same kind of problem that is seen in northern England of Muslim men grooming and sexually assaulting teenage girls, sometimes sharing them with other men, going on for years — and if Beira’s Place would reach out to such victimized girls and women.
I am an American, so I don’t know all the ins and outs of the problems in Scotland. But I can’t help wondering if there is the same kind of problem that is seen in northern England of Muslim men grooming and sexually assaulting teenage girls, sometimes sharing them with other men, going on for years — and if Beira’s Place would reach out to such victimized girls and women.
Fair play – this one will be tough for the wokies to practise their usual cultist, performative outrage on.
Fair play – this one will be tough for the wokies to practise their usual cultist, performative outrage on.
A comment, posted below, by Jame Gordon, got me thinking (about something I hadn’t even considered before. Maybe Julie could enlighten me / us ?).
Is there sexual abuse /assault within the lesbian community (while I readily agree it might be an old fashioned stereotype, I can certainly see a potential, given a dynamic between ‘butch’ and the ‘other’ (?) ‘types’ of lesbian) and if so, where do they go ? Do rape crisis centres, and support centres,‘discriminate’ on who they employ, other than ‘Just not men’ ?
Why not go and find an article on that issue, or write one?
Lynn, both you and I, know that Julie would, for reasons that are far to obvious to mention (not least of which is that she can actual form a coherent sentence), a far better job than I. I ‘now’ loath the expression ‘Lived experience’, but in this case It is more than apt, with regards to Julie.
But if the topic matters to you, then it would serve you better to do the research on it, and present that research. We all have limited time resources and must write about the things that matter to us, personally, rather than asking others to derail their current topic on our behalf.
But if the topic matters to you, then it would serve you better to do the research on it, and present that research. We all have limited time resources and must write about the things that matter to us, personally, rather than asking others to derail their current topic on our behalf.
Lynn, both you and I, know that Julie would, for reasons that are far to obvious to mention (not least of which is that she can actual form a coherent sentence), a far better job than I. I ‘now’ loath the expression ‘Lived experience’, but in this case It is more than apt, with regards to Julie.
I know a bouncer called Fabian. One evening when I was having a pint in my local, Fabian was off-duty and enjoying a game of pool with a woman. About ten minutes into their game, the woman’s lesbian partner arrived, got into a jealous rage, and violently assaulted a nonplussed Fabian. I don’t know whether she was generally violent towards her girlfriend as well as pool-playing bouncers, but it wouldn’t surprise me.
I do have the figures somewhere, but if I recall correctly, the ONS figures show that the highest percentage incidence of domestic violence within the cohort of households occurs in lesbian households, followed by gay households, followed by heterosexual households.
.
Why not go and find an article on that issue, or write one?
I know a bouncer called Fabian. One evening when I was having a pint in my local, Fabian was off-duty and enjoying a game of pool with a woman. About ten minutes into their game, the woman’s lesbian partner arrived, got into a jealous rage, and violently assaulted a nonplussed Fabian. I don’t know whether she was generally violent towards her girlfriend as well as pool-playing bouncers, but it wouldn’t surprise me.
I do have the figures somewhere, but if I recall correctly, the ONS figures show that the highest percentage incidence of domestic violence within the cohort of households occurs in lesbian households, followed by gay households, followed by heterosexual households.
.
A comment, posted below, by Jame Gordon, got me thinking (about something I hadn’t even considered before. Maybe Julie could enlighten me / us ?).
Is there sexual abuse /assault within the lesbian community (while I readily agree it might be an old fashioned stereotype, I can certainly see a potential, given a dynamic between ‘butch’ and the ‘other’ (?) ‘types’ of lesbian) and if so, where do they go ? Do rape crisis centres, and support centres,‘discriminate’ on who they employ, other than ‘Just not men’ ?
I welcome this, but wonder.
Having had ‘no-platforming’, cancelling, the removal of single-sex spaces, demonstrations and disruptions used against Feminists in recent years by the Trans-rights extremists, will this new Feminist revolution go back to using those same tactics again, against any man trying to introduce men’s groups in universities, or men-only spaces, as the Feminists did for two decades, until their tactics were turned on them?
.
P.S. You can find Bindel’s enlightened own views from only seven years ago on inclusivity and equality here, at the RadFem collective:-
‘All Men Are Rapists and Should Be Put in Prison Then Shot’https://www.dailywire.com/news/feminist-journalist-all-men-are-rapists-and-should-amanda-prestigiacomo
I think that’s parody windup.
I think that’s parody windup.
P.S. You can find Bindel’s enlightened own views from only seven years ago on inclusivity and equality here, at the RadFem collective:-
‘All Men Are Rapists and Should Be Put in Prison Then Shot’https://www.dailywire.com/news/feminist-journalist-all-men-are-rapists-and-should-amanda-prestigiacomo
I welcome this, but wonder.
Having had ‘no-platforming’, cancelling, the removal of single-sex spaces, demonstrations and disruptions used against Feminists in recent years by the Trans-rights extremists, will this new Feminist revolution go back to using those same tactics again, against any man trying to introduce men’s groups in universities, or men-only spaces, as the Feminists did for two decades, until their tactics were turned on them?
.
Mss Sturgeon and her coterie have a huge following amongst women here. To them she is a feminist heroine and all the evidence to the contrary is immediately jettisoned.
This phenomenon is the first large scale attempt to demonise masculinity for political and financial interests. Women in Scotland now control most of the levers of power and even in family life, many fathers and husbands have been consigned to the bin, jobless and cowed by wokery they have become an embarrassing irrelevance.
This all ties into the Trans debate and why it is supported by so many women here; they have been conditioned by our devolved “government” to believe that traditional views on sexuality and family life have been a cunning plot by males to subjugate women and this has been tied to basic human biology……..a war to be fought by women against nature.
Mss Sturgeon and her coterie have a huge following amongst women here. To them she is a feminist heroine and all the evidence to the contrary is immediately jettisoned.
This phenomenon is the first large scale attempt to demonise masculinity for political and financial interests. Women in Scotland now control most of the levers of power and even in family life, many fathers and husbands have been consigned to the bin, jobless and cowed by wokery they have become an embarrassing irrelevance.
This all ties into the Trans debate and why it is supported by so many women here; they have been conditioned by our devolved “government” to believe that traditional views on sexuality and family life have been a cunning plot by males to subjugate women and this has been tied to basic human biology……..a war to be fought by women against nature.
Perhaps someone can explain to me why this Sturgeon law has the majority support among MSPs when the Scottish people are so against it. I’m utterly baffled.
Perhaps someone can explain to me why this Sturgeon law has the majority support among MSPs when the Scottish people are so against it. I’m utterly baffled.
Has anyone else had this? I use Norton. Woke virus protection now?
Dangerous Webpage Blocked
You attempted to access:
https://beirasplace.org.uk/
This is a known dangerous webpage. It is highly recommended that you do NOT visit this page.
I use Norton and just accessed the site. I assume they have now fixed their issues.
I think Mr Mitchell may have been indulging in a little irony? :0)
I think Mr Mitchell may have been indulging in a little irony? :0)
I use Norton and just accessed the site. I assume they have now fixed their issues.
Has anyone else had this? I use Norton. Woke virus protection now?
Dangerous Webpage Blocked
You attempted to access:
https://beirasplace.org.uk/
This is a known dangerous webpage. It is highly recommended that you do NOT visit this page.
.
.
hurrah for jk rowling. we have self identification as law here in new zealand meaning human rights and basic reality have been flushed down the toilet.
hurrah for jk rowling. we have self identification as law here in new zealand meaning human rights and basic reality have been flushed down the toilet.
Well my goodness! Joanne Rowling certainly puts her money where her mouth is! She deserves the greatest respect. Not sure how I missed this one two months ago, but better late than never.
Well my goodness! Joanne Rowling certainly puts her money where her mouth is! She deserves the greatest respect. Not sure how I missed this one two months ago, but better late than never.
Whilst “several” wish to continue the circular argument of nonsense, my applause is for Ms. Rowling for having the balls (now that may throw things off a bit) to stand up for women (those born with innies) and reshape the argument by taking control of the issue and doing something about it. The vitriol she receives from some in the militant trans community is horrific, but her statement, “It’s important that women like us stand up – people who can afford to take the hit…” tells me there is a big difference between her and many of us who simply comment. She’s a talented author who could sit in her mansion and take up no cause, but she’s put herself on the front lines of this issue for personal reasons. We are in the Age of Idiocy, an era that requires people to take a stand to put us right against the lunatic fringe. Let’s follow her leadership on this issue. She keeps it simple by not parsing every exception. Biology does not lie despite how own might “feel” about it.
Whilst “several” wish to continue the circular argument of nonsense, my applause is for Ms. Rowling for having the balls (now that may throw things off a bit) to stand up for women (those born with innies) and reshape the argument by taking control of the issue and doing something about it. The vitriol she receives from some in the militant trans community is horrific, but her statement, “It’s important that women like us stand up – people who can afford to take the hit…” tells me there is a big difference between her and many of us who simply comment. She’s a talented author who could sit in her mansion and take up no cause, but she’s put herself on the front lines of this issue for personal reasons. We are in the Age of Idiocy, an era that requires people to take a stand to put us right against the lunatic fringe. Let’s follow her leadership on this issue. She keeps it simple by not parsing every exception. Biology does not lie despite how own might “feel” about it.
Single-sex hospital wards should also be ring-fenced. Anyone who’s happy to be in a mixed-sex ward should be given that opportunity, but nobody should be forced to do so, or refused treatment because they don’t want to share their sleeping quarters with people of the opposite sex.
You can’t ‘include’ the one-in-two-hundred who, apparently, ‘identify with a gender different from that ‘assigned at birth’ by erasing the 51 per cent whose biological sex accords with their ‘identity’. It isn’t JUST a man’s world.
Single-sex hospital wards should also be ring-fenced. Anyone who’s happy to be in a mixed-sex ward should be given that opportunity, but nobody should be forced to do so, or refused treatment because they don’t want to share their sleeping quarters with people of the opposite sex.
You can’t ‘include’ the one-in-two-hundred who, apparently, ‘identify with a gender different from that ‘assigned at birth’ by erasing the 51 per cent whose biological sex accords with their ‘identity’. It isn’t JUST a man’s world.
And meanwhile, there are zero facilities or resources allocated to the 50% of domestic violence victims who are men, who are in fact mocked or ignored if they dare complain.
Remember the male equivalent of JK Rowling (with a lot less money and privilege) who ended up being forced to commit suicide?
The new feminist revolution. Same as the old one.
So following the same pattern, a group of men should set up a male-only clinic for male victims of domestic violence.
Like the boy Scouts it’d get stuffed up.
I hope not. No self respecting man is going to go to a clinic for victims of domestic violence. Besides, whenever the issue is carefully studied, we find that ‘treatment’ for mental afflictions is rarely if ever associated with actual healing. Clean yourself up and go back to work. Find a less violent partner. Move on.
And why isn’t that possible? The empathy gap. I recommend the ebook (under £5.00), William Collins’s “The Empathy Gap: Male Disadvantages and the Mechanisms of Their Neglect.”
Did in that case I mentioned (in Canada of I recall).
Ended up facing enormous pressure to close down, including pressure on any businesses sponsoring that shelter, ending with all financial support being withdrawn.
The pressure was exerted primarily by feminist women. The result was that the charity was closed down and the man commited suicide.
If women can’t allow boy scouts or men only clubs, you think they would let the patriarchy muscle in on the domestic violence boondoggle just because half the victims are men?
Of all the things that never happened, this one never happened the most.
Of all the things that never happened, this one never happened the most.
Like the boy Scouts it’d get stuffed up.
I hope not. No self respecting man is going to go to a clinic for victims of domestic violence. Besides, whenever the issue is carefully studied, we find that ‘treatment’ for mental afflictions is rarely if ever associated with actual healing. Clean yourself up and go back to work. Find a less violent partner. Move on.
And why isn’t that possible? The empathy gap. I recommend the ebook (under £5.00), William Collins’s “The Empathy Gap: Male Disadvantages and the Mechanisms of Their Neglect.”
Did in that case I mentioned (in Canada of I recall).
Ended up facing enormous pressure to close down, including pressure on any businesses sponsoring that shelter, ending with all financial support being withdrawn.
The pressure was exerted primarily by feminist women. The result was that the charity was closed down and the man commited suicide.
If women can’t allow boy scouts or men only clubs, you think they would let the patriarchy muscle in on the domestic violence boondoggle just because half the victims are men?
Fantastic well done to you all and thanks to JK for sticking to what 99% of the population know to be true
That is an argument for setting up such a facility. It is not an argument for opposing such a facility for women.
I would like to see the evidence that 50% of domestic violence victims are men. Frankly, it sounds implausible.
It doesn’t matter whether it’s 50% or 2%. The fact is that it happens and doesn’t get the recognition that it deserves (and is implicitly denied as a result). We either believe in equality before the law or we don’t.
Does it really serve us well to treat violence against men as a different (and often lesser) problem than violence against women ?
It does matter, though. If one group is, say, 10x more likely to be a victim than another one, there’s clearly a priority to be taken into account (and no one with any meaningful knowledge of the issue would say men are 50% of the victims of domestic violence).
Which doesn’t mean men shouldn’t have whatever facilities they deem necessary to deal with the horrors imposed on them by violent women. Plenty of male billionaires around to support the cause, just as JK did for women. Money, mouth etc.
Little of the money that funds support for female victims of DV comes from billionaires, it comes from local or central government. The government knows perfectly well that at least half of the victims of DV in straight couples are men but doesn’t give a damn about them. World to end, women most affected.
There was a man in Australia who sponsored scholarships for white male students in vet schools (or some other medical line) coming from poor backgrounds.
Got refused.
You really think a billionaire could get away with a male shelter? Even the comments section here is toxic at the very thought.
And as Mike pointed out correctly, men do pay for the shelters. The bulk of tax income is generated by men. Which is then used to pay ONLY for facilities for women.
There was a man in the moon who supported sponsored scholarships for white male students in vet schools (or some other medical line).
He has opened many of these moon schools and men and boys now float around in space suits being taught how to treat space cats and dogs.
When inventing fables, we should, I feel, enjoy a bit more creativity than your comment allows.
There was a man in the moon who supported sponsored scholarships for white male students in vet schools (or some other medical line).
He has opened many of these moon schools and men and boys now float around in space suits being taught how to treat space cats and dogs.
When inventing fables, we should, I feel, enjoy a bit more creativity than your comment allows.
Research shows (at least, that research not sponsored by feminists) that most domestic violence is mutual, and is NOT the result of ‘patriarchal terrorism’ , ‘coercive control’ or other concepts invented by feminists and not supported empirically. Most DV is the result of poor communication, poor coping skills, and behaviours learned in childhood from the previous generation. So while less men will require ‘shelters’, the problem must be addressed by treating the root causes. If it makes you feel better about it, look at it this way: a husband and wife brought to therapy by the reporting of the wife for DV, may well end up saving HER from more serious injury or death.
For the real facts on DV, as opposed to feminist propaganda, see a series of videos from 2008, a part of the PASK (Partner Abuse State of Knowledge) program. This one from Prof Nicola Graham-Kevan is one of the best:
https://youtu.be/tiVgUJOkAJo
Little of the money that funds support for female victims of DV comes from billionaires, it comes from local or central government. The government knows perfectly well that at least half of the victims of DV in straight couples are men but doesn’t give a damn about them. World to end, women most affected.
There was a man in Australia who sponsored scholarships for white male students in vet schools (or some other medical line) coming from poor backgrounds.
Got refused.
You really think a billionaire could get away with a male shelter? Even the comments section here is toxic at the very thought.
And as Mike pointed out correctly, men do pay for the shelters. The bulk of tax income is generated by men. Which is then used to pay ONLY for facilities for women.
Research shows (at least, that research not sponsored by feminists) that most domestic violence is mutual, and is NOT the result of ‘patriarchal terrorism’ , ‘coercive control’ or other concepts invented by feminists and not supported empirically. Most DV is the result of poor communication, poor coping skills, and behaviours learned in childhood from the previous generation. So while less men will require ‘shelters’, the problem must be addressed by treating the root causes. If it makes you feel better about it, look at it this way: a husband and wife brought to therapy by the reporting of the wife for DV, may well end up saving HER from more serious injury or death.
For the real facts on DV, as opposed to feminist propaganda, see a series of videos from 2008, a part of the PASK (Partner Abuse State of Knowledge) program. This one from Prof Nicola Graham-Kevan is one of the best:
https://youtu.be/tiVgUJOkAJo
It does matter, though. If one group is, say, 10x more likely to be a victim than another one, there’s clearly a priority to be taken into account (and no one with any meaningful knowledge of the issue would say men are 50% of the victims of domestic violence).
Which doesn’t mean men shouldn’t have whatever facilities they deem necessary to deal with the horrors imposed on them by violent women. Plenty of male billionaires around to support the cause, just as JK did for women. Money, mouth etc.
Look at the Gender Symmetry section of the relevant wikipedia page:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domestic_violence_against_men
Men are either half or more of DV cases in most surveys. Women attack men a lot. The Jonny Depp trial was an example of this. The reason you think it’s implausible is that feminists pretend this isn’t the case and despite this being Unherd, like everywhere else in the media, feminists dominate and ensure men’s side of the story doesn’t get coverage. I don’t even know why people like Bindel get articles here really, feminists have been anything but un-heard for decades and can still easily get their views in all kinds of places.
As for Rowling, she could easily have set up a domestic violence shelter for everyone but like everything done by feminists it excludes men, implicitly claiming that either no such problem exists or it’s unimportant. I get that Unherd commenters support Rowling for her stance on trans stuff, but that’s no excuse.
When I was writing my comment, the parable of the Good Samaritan came to mind. It sometimes feels as if some people involved in this debate would happily cross the road to help a female victim of domestic abuse, but happily walk on by it the victim was a man. I’m not suggesting anyone here takes that view – or trying to start an argument. But I just feel a little sad that there are people who seem to. Anyone who’s a genuine victim here deserves support – man, woman or child.
As you are aware, nobody has implied or suggested that male violence against men is unimportant.
Do feel free to write an article on that subject, or comment on one of the many thousands online, as the subject at hand here is that women and children need safe places to flee from violently abusive men.
I think you meant “female violence against men” !
Actually, I disagree. The fact that the subject is so little covered and commented on – there’s almost a media omerta here (as in so many areas these days) supports the an apparent social consensus that it is unimportant. And certainly less important than male violence against women. I strongly take the view that both are equally important and serious. But that does not feel like a majority view today. In a healthy and honest society, it should be.
The subject at hand was not that “women and children need safe places to flee from violently abusive men.” That’s been settled for a long time. It’s actually about how all the trans/gender/alphabet soup stuff has broken that.
The fact that you can offer a sweeping generalisation like “nobody has implied” which you cannot possibly know to be true suggests to me that you’d like to shut down or diminish opposing views. Good luck with that. It won’t wash with me.
I think you meant “female violence against men” !
Actually, I disagree. The fact that the subject is so little covered and commented on – there’s almost a media omerta here (as in so many areas these days) supports the an apparent social consensus that it is unimportant. And certainly less important than male violence against women. I strongly take the view that both are equally important and serious. But that does not feel like a majority view today. In a healthy and honest society, it should be.
The subject at hand was not that “women and children need safe places to flee from violently abusive men.” That’s been settled for a long time. It’s actually about how all the trans/gender/alphabet soup stuff has broken that.
The fact that you can offer a sweeping generalisation like “nobody has implied” which you cannot possibly know to be true suggests to me that you’d like to shut down or diminish opposing views. Good luck with that. It won’t wash with me.
As you are aware, nobody has implied or suggested that male violence against men is unimportant.
Do feel free to write an article on that subject, or comment on one of the many thousands online, as the subject at hand here is that women and children need safe places to flee from violently abusive men.
I for one am happy for Unherd to continue to give Julie Bindel a platform, not least since i almost certainly wouldn’t see the other “kinds of places” where she might be published.
This particular article informs us about the vital work of JK Rowling. I haven’t seen it mentioned anywhere else on mainstream media. You don’t have to read her articles but the huge Comments sections that usually follow them suggest there’s something very, very important being played out here. It’s just as important, for instance, for males to give their views on these matters, and that includes yours of course. This wouldn’t happen in a civilised way on many other platforms.
Well said. We do need to read Julie Bindel, however much we may not enjoy it – she sometimes says something I needed to hear. I just wish it was more than 5-10% of her output.
Well said. We do need to read Julie Bindel, however much we may not enjoy it – she sometimes says something I needed to hear. I just wish it was more than 5-10% of her output.
I think you have completely missed the point and the context in which this centre has been established. There is very good reason for such a centre to exclude men, for patently obvious reasons, and until this recent madness they all did. The Q is, why are DV centres for men not funded? We can’t blame women for that.
Not women, but feminists who perpetuate a narrative that DV is ‘gendered’, ie. a one way street, and who have the clout to get that narrative repeated constantly in the media, despite evidence to the contrary, thus influencing policy makers and public opinion.
As you are aware, all studies and stats prove irrefutably that men, as a sex, commit approximately 95 percent of all violent crime, and most domestic violence.
https://www.womensaid.org.uk/information-support/what-is-domestic-abuse/domestic-abuse-is-a-gendered-crime/
https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/violence-against-women
https://www.ourwatch.org.au/quick-facts/
https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/85-002-x/2018001/article/54978/02-eng.htm
https://www.womensaid.org.uk/information-support/what-is-domestic-abuse/domestic-abuse-is-a-gendered-crime/
https://ncadv.org/statistics
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4628110/
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1023/A:1018868913615
https://xyonline.net/content/sexist-humour-and-rape-jokes-five-key-points
https://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/life-and-relationships/this-is-why-sexist-jokes-are-dangerous-20190310-p5131w.html
https://gap.hks.harvard.edu/sexist-humor-and-rape-proclivity-moderating-role-joke-teller-gender-and-severity-sexual-assault
https://encompass.eku.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1013&context=etd
https://www.ling.upenn.edu/courses/Fall_2011/ling001/Frazer-Miller-2009.pdf
https://debuk.wordpress.com/tag/passive-voice/
https://web.stanford.edu/class/linguist156/Bohner_2001.pdf
https://journals.openedition.org/ejts/6359
https://www.macleans.ca/opinion/lets-finally-call-violence-against-women-what-it-really-is/
https://www.wbur.org/cognoscenti/2019/01/28/the-language-of-sexual-violence-doreen-arcus
That extreme right-wing medium, The Guardian, doesn’t appear to agree with you.
Guardian, September 2010
More than 40% of domestic violence victims are male, report reveals
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2010/sep/05/men-victims-domestic-violence
.
Not does that other extreme right wing-paper, The Independent.
Independent, 14th April 2013
Domestic Violence: ‘As A Man It’s Very Difficult To Say I’ve Been beaten Up’
The victims of female violence are real and their numbers are growing,
yet care and refuges are in very short supply
More married men (2.3 per cent)
suffered from partner abuse last year than married women,
according to the latest British Crime Survey.
The British Crime Survey found that only 10 per cent of
male victims of domestic violence had told the police,
compared with 29 per cent of women.
That extreme right-wing medium, The Guardian, doesn’t appear to agree with you.
Guardian, September 2010
More than 40% of domestic violence victims are male, report reveals
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2010/sep/05/men-victims-domestic-violence
.
Not does that other extreme right wing-paper, The Independent.
Independent, 14th April 2013
Domestic Violence: ‘As A Man It’s Very Difficult To Say I’ve Been beaten Up’
The victims of female violence are real and their numbers are growing,
yet care and refuges are in very short supply
More married men (2.3 per cent)
suffered from partner abuse last year than married women,
according to the latest British Crime Survey.
The British Crime Survey found that only 10 per cent of
male victims of domestic violence had told the police,
compared with 29 per cent of women.
As you are aware, all studies and stats prove irrefutably that men, as a sex, commit approximately 95 percent of all violent crime, and most domestic violence.
https://www.womensaid.org.uk/information-support/what-is-domestic-abuse/domestic-abuse-is-a-gendered-crime/
https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/violence-against-women
https://www.ourwatch.org.au/quick-facts/
https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/85-002-x/2018001/article/54978/02-eng.htm
https://www.womensaid.org.uk/information-support/what-is-domestic-abuse/domestic-abuse-is-a-gendered-crime/
https://ncadv.org/statistics
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4628110/
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1023/A:1018868913615
https://xyonline.net/content/sexist-humour-and-rape-jokes-five-key-points
https://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/life-and-relationships/this-is-why-sexist-jokes-are-dangerous-20190310-p5131w.html
https://gap.hks.harvard.edu/sexist-humor-and-rape-proclivity-moderating-role-joke-teller-gender-and-severity-sexual-assault
https://encompass.eku.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1013&context=etd
https://www.ling.upenn.edu/courses/Fall_2011/ling001/Frazer-Miller-2009.pdf
https://debuk.wordpress.com/tag/passive-voice/
https://web.stanford.edu/class/linguist156/Bohner_2001.pdf
https://journals.openedition.org/ejts/6359
https://www.macleans.ca/opinion/lets-finally-call-violence-against-women-what-it-really-is/
https://www.wbur.org/cognoscenti/2019/01/28/the-language-of-sexual-violence-doreen-arcus
Not women, but feminists who perpetuate a narrative that DV is ‘gendered’, ie. a one way street, and who have the clout to get that narrative repeated constantly in the media, despite evidence to the contrary, thus influencing policy makers and public opinion.
Use of Wikipedia for anything other than the comment “Never try to use Wikipedia as citation” is an automatic fail.
When I was writing my comment, the parable of the Good Samaritan came to mind. It sometimes feels as if some people involved in this debate would happily cross the road to help a female victim of domestic abuse, but happily walk on by it the victim was a man. I’m not suggesting anyone here takes that view – or trying to start an argument. But I just feel a little sad that there are people who seem to. Anyone who’s a genuine victim here deserves support – man, woman or child.
I for one am happy for Unherd to continue to give Julie Bindel a platform, not least since i almost certainly wouldn’t see the other “kinds of places” where she might be published.
This particular article informs us about the vital work of JK Rowling. I haven’t seen it mentioned anywhere else on mainstream media. You don’t have to read her articles but the huge Comments sections that usually follow them suggest there’s something very, very important being played out here. It’s just as important, for instance, for males to give their views on these matters, and that includes yours of course. This wouldn’t happen in a civilised way on many other platforms.
I think you have completely missed the point and the context in which this centre has been established. There is very good reason for such a centre to exclude men, for patently obvious reasons, and until this recent madness they all did. The Q is, why are DV centres for men not funded? We can’t blame women for that.
Use of Wikipedia for anything other than the comment “Never try to use Wikipedia as citation” is an automatic fail.
Of course it “sounds implausible” because feminists and the mainstream media have hidden the truth about DV for 50+ years, when Erin Pizzey was booted out of the first refuge in the world for abused women (which she’d founded) after pointing out most of the women were at least as violent as their male partners.
The evidence you want is here https://domesticviolenceresearch.org/pdf/FindingsAt-a-Glance.Nov.23.pdf.
Mike Buchanan
JUSTICE FOR MEN & BOYS
http://j4mb.org.uk
One third of domestic violence deaths are men. Check it up. Actual cases of non fatal DV are even more likely to be male for obvious reasons.
As you know, women are overwhelmingly at risk from men in DV situations, the numbers are extremely clear and the stats and studies all state the same the same thing – men, overwhelmingly, are the instigators of violence against women.
But if you feel men are at risk from other men you should find articles on that, write about that, and lobby for funding for shelters for it.
https://www.womensaid.org.uk/information-support/what-is-domestic-abuse/domestic-abuse-is-a-gendered-crime/
https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/violence-against-women
https://www.ourwatch.org.au/quick-facts/
https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/85-002-x/2018001/article/54978/02-eng.htm
https://www.womensaid.org.uk/information-support/what-is-domestic-abuse/domestic-abuse-is-a-gendered-crime/
https://ncadv.org/statistics
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4628110/
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1023/A:1018868913615
https://xyonline.net/content/sexist-humour-and-rape-jokes-five-key-points
https://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/life-and-relationships/this-is-why-sexist-jokes-are-dangerous-20190310-p5131w.html
https://gap.hks.harvard.edu/sexist-humor-and-rape-proclivity-moderating-role-joke-teller-gender-and-severity-sexual-assault
https://encompass.eku.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1013&context=etd
https://www.ling.upenn.edu/courses/Fall_2011/ling001/Frazer-Miller-2009.pdf
https://debuk.wordpress.com/tag/passive-voice/
https://web.stanford.edu/class/linguist156/Bohner_2001.pdf
https://journals.openedition.org/ejts/6359
https://www.macleans.ca/opinion/lets-finally-call-violence-against-women-what-it-really-is/
https://www.wbur.org/cognoscenti/2019/01/28/the-language-of-sexual-violence-doreen-arcus
https://www.womensaid.org.uk/information-support/what-is-domestic-abuse/domestic-abuse-is-a-gendered-crime/
As you know, women are overwhelmingly at risk from men in DV situations, the numbers are extremely clear and the stats and studies all state the same the same thing – men, overwhelmingly, are the instigators of violence against women.
But if you feel men are at risk from other men you should find articles on that, write about that, and lobby for funding for shelters for it.
https://www.womensaid.org.uk/information-support/what-is-domestic-abuse/domestic-abuse-is-a-gendered-crime/
https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/violence-against-women
https://www.ourwatch.org.au/quick-facts/
https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/85-002-x/2018001/article/54978/02-eng.htm
https://www.womensaid.org.uk/information-support/what-is-domestic-abuse/domestic-abuse-is-a-gendered-crime/
https://ncadv.org/statistics
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4628110/
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1023/A:1018868913615
https://xyonline.net/content/sexist-humour-and-rape-jokes-five-key-points
https://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/life-and-relationships/this-is-why-sexist-jokes-are-dangerous-20190310-p5131w.html
https://gap.hks.harvard.edu/sexist-humor-and-rape-proclivity-moderating-role-joke-teller-gender-and-severity-sexual-assault
https://encompass.eku.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1013&context=etd
https://www.ling.upenn.edu/courses/Fall_2011/ling001/Frazer-Miller-2009.pdf
https://debuk.wordpress.com/tag/passive-voice/
https://web.stanford.edu/class/linguist156/Bohner_2001.pdf
https://journals.openedition.org/ejts/6359
https://www.macleans.ca/opinion/lets-finally-call-violence-against-women-what-it-really-is/
https://www.wbur.org/cognoscenti/2019/01/28/the-language-of-sexual-violence-doreen-arcus
https://www.womensaid.org.uk/information-support/what-is-domestic-abuse/domestic-abuse-is-a-gendered-crime/
It’s an argument for accepting the data, the need to devote more tax funded resources to male victims and to drop treating them with ridicule. A fairly sensible proposition that would be strongly opposed by the likes of JK Rowling and other feminists.
Evidence posted below.
Or else read up the story of an amazing woman called Erin Pizzey, who founded the first domestic violence shelter for women – and hounded by feminists for pointing out that even for her shelter, 3/4th of those women either initiated or co-initiated violence.
It doesn’t matter whether it’s 50% or 2%. The fact is that it happens and doesn’t get the recognition that it deserves (and is implicitly denied as a result). We either believe in equality before the law or we don’t.
Does it really serve us well to treat violence against men as a different (and often lesser) problem than violence against women ?
Look at the Gender Symmetry section of the relevant wikipedia page:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domestic_violence_against_men
Men are either half or more of DV cases in most surveys. Women attack men a lot. The Jonny Depp trial was an example of this. The reason you think it’s implausible is that feminists pretend this isn’t the case and despite this being Unherd, like everywhere else in the media, feminists dominate and ensure men’s side of the story doesn’t get coverage. I don’t even know why people like Bindel get articles here really, feminists have been anything but un-heard for decades and can still easily get their views in all kinds of places.
As for Rowling, she could easily have set up a domestic violence shelter for everyone but like everything done by feminists it excludes men, implicitly claiming that either no such problem exists or it’s unimportant. I get that Unherd commenters support Rowling for her stance on trans stuff, but that’s no excuse.
Of course it “sounds implausible” because feminists and the mainstream media have hidden the truth about DV for 50+ years, when Erin Pizzey was booted out of the first refuge in the world for abused women (which she’d founded) after pointing out most of the women were at least as violent as their male partners.
The evidence you want is here https://domesticviolenceresearch.org/pdf/FindingsAt-a-Glance.Nov.23.pdf.
Mike Buchanan
JUSTICE FOR MEN & BOYS
http://j4mb.org.uk
One third of domestic violence deaths are men. Check it up. Actual cases of non fatal DV are even more likely to be male for obvious reasons.
It’s an argument for accepting the data, the need to devote more tax funded resources to male victims and to drop treating them with ridicule. A fairly sensible proposition that would be strongly opposed by the likes of JK Rowling and other feminists.
Evidence posted below.
Or else read up the story of an amazing woman called Erin Pizzey, who founded the first domestic violence shelter for women – and hounded by feminists for pointing out that even for her shelter, 3/4th of those women either initiated or co-initiated violence.
Who is the male equivalent to Rowling you mention? I don’t think I’m familiar with that situation.
Earl Silverman.
Earl Silverman.
As you know, women are overwhelmingly at risk from men in DV situations, the numbers are extremely clear and the stats and studies all state the same the same thing – men, overwhelmingly, are the instigators of violence against women.
But if you feel men are at risk from other men you should find articles on that, write about that, and lobby for funding for shelters for it.
https://www.womensaid.org.uk/information-support/what-is-domestic-abuse/domestic-abuse-is-a-gendered-crime/
https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/violence-against-women
https://www.ourwatch.org.au/quick-facts/
https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/85-002-x/2018001/article/54978/02-eng.htm
https://www.womensaid.org.uk/information-support/what-is-domestic-abuse/domestic-abuse-is-a-gendered-crime/
https://ncadv.org/statistics
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4628110/
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1023/A:1018868913615
https://xyonline.net/content/sexist-humour-and-rape-jokes-five-key-points
https://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/life-and-relationships/this-is-why-sexist-jokes-are-dangerous-20190310-p5131w.html
https://gap.hks.harvard.edu/sexist-humor-and-rape-proclivity-moderating-role-joke-teller-gender-and-severity-sexual-assault
https://encompass.eku.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1013&context=etd
https://www.ling.upenn.edu/courses/Fall_2011/ling001/Frazer-Miller-2009.pdf
https://debuk.wordpress.com/tag/passive-voice/
https://web.stanford.edu/class/linguist156/Bohner_2001.pdf
https://journals.openedition.org/ejts/6359
https://www.macleans.ca/opinion/lets-finally-call-violence-against-women-what-it-really-is/
https://www.wbur.org/cognoscenti/2019/01/28/the-language-of-sexual-violence-doreen-arcus
https://www.womensaid.org.uk/information-support/what-is-domestic-abuse/domestic-abuse-is-a-gendered-crime/
https://www.ncdv.org.uk/domestic-violence-against-men/
https://lwa.org.uk/understanding-abuse/statistics/
Will affect 1 in 4 women and 1 in 6 men in their lifetime
Leads to, on average, two women being murdered each week and 30 men per year
(Note: that’s 60 versus 30, is 1/3rd men)
If men are assaulting men, feel free to write about that elsewhere. As you are aware, men are responsible for almost all violent crime and sexual crime.
If men are assaulting men, feel free to write about that elsewhere. As you are aware, men are responsible for almost all violent crime and sexual crime.
https://www.ncdv.org.uk/domestic-violence-against-men/
https://lwa.org.uk/understanding-abuse/statistics/
Will affect 1 in 4 women and 1 in 6 men in their lifetime
Leads to, on average, two women being murdered each week and 30 men per year
(Note: that’s 60 versus 30, is 1/3rd men)
So following the same pattern, a group of men should set up a male-only clinic for male victims of domestic violence.
Fantastic well done to you all and thanks to JK for sticking to what 99% of the population know to be true
That is an argument for setting up such a facility. It is not an argument for opposing such a facility for women.
I would like to see the evidence that 50% of domestic violence victims are men. Frankly, it sounds implausible.
Who is the male equivalent to Rowling you mention? I don’t think I’m familiar with that situation.
As you know, women are overwhelmingly at risk from men in DV situations, the numbers are extremely clear and the stats and studies all state the same the same thing – men, overwhelmingly, are the instigators of violence against women.
But if you feel men are at risk from other men you should find articles on that, write about that, and lobby for funding for shelters for it.
https://www.womensaid.org.uk/information-support/what-is-domestic-abuse/domestic-abuse-is-a-gendered-crime/
https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/violence-against-women
https://www.ourwatch.org.au/quick-facts/
https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/85-002-x/2018001/article/54978/02-eng.htm
https://www.womensaid.org.uk/information-support/what-is-domestic-abuse/domestic-abuse-is-a-gendered-crime/
https://ncadv.org/statistics
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4628110/
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1023/A:1018868913615
https://xyonline.net/content/sexist-humour-and-rape-jokes-five-key-points
https://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/life-and-relationships/this-is-why-sexist-jokes-are-dangerous-20190310-p5131w.html
https://gap.hks.harvard.edu/sexist-humor-and-rape-proclivity-moderating-role-joke-teller-gender-and-severity-sexual-assault
https://encompass.eku.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1013&context=etd
https://www.ling.upenn.edu/courses/Fall_2011/ling001/Frazer-Miller-2009.pdf
https://debuk.wordpress.com/tag/passive-voice/
https://web.stanford.edu/class/linguist156/Bohner_2001.pdf
https://journals.openedition.org/ejts/6359
https://www.macleans.ca/opinion/lets-finally-call-violence-against-women-what-it-really-is/
https://www.wbur.org/cognoscenti/2019/01/28/the-language-of-sexual-violence-doreen-arcus
https://www.womensaid.org.uk/information-support/what-is-domestic-abuse/domestic-abuse-is-a-gendered-crime/
And meanwhile, there are zero facilities or resources allocated to the 50% of domestic violence victims who are men, who are in fact mocked or ignored if they dare complain.
Remember the male equivalent of JK Rowling (with a lot less money and privilege) who ended up being forced to commit suicide?
The new feminist revolution. Same as the old one.
What does this mean for trans men who are biologically female? Is there any clarity on this?
“Transmen” don’t exist except in their own imagination. Materially, in the real world, they are always women. Women who have been identifying as men are aware that they are women. Nobody has ever changed sex, so of course women would be welcome in a women’s shelter.
It’s true that “nobody has ever changed sex.” But it’s only half true that “‘transmen’ [born female] don’t exist except in their own imagination.” After all, neither do transwomen (born male) and there are plenty of those. What can make a difference in practical terms is not sex, as you say, but “gender.” By that, I mean the part of identity that relies on culture, ideology and personal motivation. Trans ideology is an ironic offshoot of both feminist ideology (which is not the same as egalitarian feminism) and woke ideology, both of which deny (a) inconvenient facts of biology and (b) the use of reason to solve problems.
Your linguistic argument about who hears what in words such as “men” or “women” is simplistic, because the use of language involves more than the intentions of speakers. After half a century of relentless feminist hostility to “men” in general, not only to this or that group of men, more than a few people–many men–do hear underlying hostility to men. And that has had a disastrous effect on relations between the sexes. So, if you want to be part of the solution instead of the problem, I suggest that you be more careful about your own language.
I will continue to use reality based language, whether that enrages you or not.
“Ttranswomen” and “transmen” with or without the space do not exist outside their own imagination.
No amount of attempted coercive control will compel me to alter my rational, factual speech to suit you.
There are men and there are women. Fin.
I will continue to use reality based language, whether that enrages you or not.
“Ttranswomen” and “transmen” with or without the space do not exist outside their own imagination.
No amount of attempted coercive control will compel me to alter my rational, factual speech to suit you.
There are men and there are women. Fin.
They do exist, but the ratio is between 2:1 and 4:1. Plus you rarely hear trans men complaining that they are more discriminated against as trans men than they were as women. Nor do trans men start winning sporting events as men that they couldn’t as women. In general, they just don’t make the evening news for any reason.
There is no material definition of “transwomen” or “transmen”. Definitions include everything from pretends to be a woman on Thursdays to AGP fetishist to BPD, NPD, to men who dress up as babies and children. The umbrella “trans’ includes anybody who says they are at any time for any reason.
As there is no material definition, the concept does not exist outside their own imagination.
The material reality is that men who identify as transgender are just as criminal in their behaviour as men who do not and that men who identify as transgender have been beating and raping women in prisons, hospital wards and rape shelters, which is why a woman only rape shelter is required.
There are men and there are women. Fin.
There is no material definition of “transwomen” or “transmen”. Definitions include everything from pretends to be a woman on Thursdays to AGP fetishist to BPD, NPD, to men who dress up as babies and children. The umbrella “trans’ includes anybody who says they are at any time for any reason.
As there is no material definition, the concept does not exist outside their own imagination.
The material reality is that men who identify as transgender are just as criminal in their behaviour as men who do not and that men who identify as transgender have been beating and raping women in prisons, hospital wards and rape shelters, which is why a woman only rape shelter is required.
There are men and there are women. Fin.
It’s true that “nobody has ever changed sex.” But it’s only half true that “‘transmen’ [born female] don’t exist except in their own imagination.” After all, neither do transwomen (born male) and there are plenty of those. What can make a difference in practical terms is not sex, as you say, but “gender.” By that, I mean the part of identity that relies on culture, ideology and personal motivation. Trans ideology is an ironic offshoot of both feminist ideology (which is not the same as egalitarian feminism) and woke ideology, both of which deny (a) inconvenient facts of biology and (b) the use of reason to solve problems.
Your linguistic argument about who hears what in words such as “men” or “women” is simplistic, because the use of language involves more than the intentions of speakers. After half a century of relentless feminist hostility to “men” in general, not only to this or that group of men, more than a few people–many men–do hear underlying hostility to men. And that has had a disastrous effect on relations between the sexes. So, if you want to be part of the solution instead of the problem, I suggest that you be more careful about your own language.
They do exist, but the ratio is between 2:1 and 4:1. Plus you rarely hear trans men complaining that they are more discriminated against as trans men than they were as women. Nor do trans men start winning sporting events as men that they couldn’t as women. In general, they just don’t make the evening news for any reason.
“Transmen” don’t exist except in their own imagination. Materially, in the real world, they are always women. Women who have been identifying as men are aware that they are women. Nobody has ever changed sex, so of course women would be welcome in a women’s shelter.
What does this mean for trans men who are biologically female? Is there any clarity on this?
I’ve never understood why men who want to appear to be women are called ‘tans-woman’. How come they aren’t transmen? Men who want to look like a women. And women who want to appear as men are trans-women”. Make it clear what sex they are transitioning from- not to.
Just asking, would a woman who’s being abused by her lesbian partner be turned away?
Just asking, would a woman who’s being abused by her lesbian partner be turned away?
Predictably, the services doesn’t offer support to men or women or children who’ve suffered at the hands of violent WOMEN. Yet official statistics show that a woman is almost twice as likely to suffer abuse at the hands of a female partner, compared with a male partner. Our latest blog piece has a link to those stats, and Julie Bindel’s response when confronted with them in a recent interview with Philip Davies MP and Esther McVey MP on GB News https://j4mb.org.uk/2022/12/09/are-women-more-likely-to-be-abused-in-lesbian-or-heterosexual-relationships/.
Mike Buchanan
JUSTICE FOR MEN & BOYS
http://j4mb.org.uk
As you are aware, all studies and stats prove irrefutably that men, as a sex, commit approximately 95 percent of all violent crime, and most domestic violence.
https://www.womensaid.org.uk/information-support/what-is-domestic-abuse/domestic-abuse-is-a-gendered-crime/
https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/violence-against-women
https://www.ourwatch.org.au/quick-facts/
https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/85-002-x/2018001/article/54978/02-eng.htm
https://www.womensaid.org.uk/information-support/what-is-domestic-abuse/domestic-abuse-is-a-gendered-crime/
https://ncadv.org/statistics
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4628110/
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1023/A:1018868913615
https://xyonline.net/content/sexist-humour-and-rape-jokes-five-key-points
https://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/life-and-relationships/this-is-why-sexist-jokes-are-dangerous-20190310-p5131w.html
https://gap.hks.harvard.edu/sexist-humor-and-rape-proclivity-moderating-role-joke-teller-gender-and-severity-sexual-assault
https://encompass.eku.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1013&context=etd
https://www.ling.upenn.edu/courses/Fall_2011/ling001/Frazer-Miller-2009.pdf
https://debuk.wordpress.com/tag/passive-voice/
https://web.stanford.edu/class/linguist156/Bohner_2001.pdf
https://journals.openedition.org/ejts/6359
https://www.macleans.ca/opinion/lets-finally-call-violence-against-women-what-it-really-is/
https://www.wbur.org/cognoscenti/2019/01/28/the-language-of-sexual-violence-doreen-arcus
“…all studies and stats prove irrefutably that men, as a sex, commit… most domestic violence.”
Demonstrably incorrect (but thanks for the laugh provoked by a Women’s Aid link!)
The most comprehensive review of domestic violence research literature ever carried out was the Partner Abuse State of Knowledge Project in 2013, “findings at a glance” here https://domesticviolenceresearch.org/pdf/FindingsAt-a-Glance.Nov.23.pdf. The headline finding of the review was this:
“Men and women perpetrate physical and non-physical forms of abuse at comparable rates, most domestic violence is mutual, women are as controlling as men, domestic violence by men and women is correlated with essentially the same risk factors, male and female perpetrators are motivated for similar reasons.”
The review also reported that in heterosexual couples where there’s violence, in about 60% of cases it’s bi-directional. In the remaining large minority of cases where it’s uni-directional, the perpetrator is TWICE as likely to be the woman as the man.
When you include “non-physical” kinds of abuse, you are no longer talking rape. By definition, rape is physical. If you equate violence such as throwing something at hand or breaking a plate or “violence” like that to beating the other person up, you may get to your (almost) 50%. But those are *not* equal levels of violence and cannot be treated as if they were.
I’d like to see a study documenting how often men are hospitalized as a result of domestic abuse compared to the number of women who are before I accept your implied 50/50 share of *all* levels of domestic violence. It’s not in the study that you linked to. In fact, it explicitly said,
“When severe aggression has been perpetrated (e.g., punching, kicking, using a weapon), rates of injury are much higher among female victims than male victims, and those injuries are more likely to be life-threatening and require a visit to an emergency room or hospital.”
It wouldn’t surprise me if women were (almost) as likely to verbally abuse people are men are, but that is not equivalent to rape or physical violence. And the only reason I said “almost” is that there are still too many people (of both sexes) who believe, as a matter of faith, that women are to be subservient to men and too many men who are taught by this sort of thinking that being a “man” is defined by being dominant in all ways.
All true. But the problem is that all those statistics about violence *do* include lower violence levels. ‘Sexual assault’ goes down all the way to gently putting a hand where it does not belong. A lot of people even talk about ‘feeling unsafe’ at mere talk. I would happily accept a definition of abuse that was limited to serious violence and ignored the rest – and by that definition men would indeed be committing the major part of all abuse. But in return you would have to accept that some level of violence in couples is natural, abuse is quite rare, and most of the claims for ‘abuse’ do not pass the threshold. Would you?
All true. But the problem is that all those statistics about violence *do* include lower violence levels. ‘Sexual assault’ goes down all the way to gently putting a hand where it does not belong. A lot of people even talk about ‘feeling unsafe’ at mere talk. I would happily accept a definition of abuse that was limited to serious violence and ignored the rest – and by that definition men would indeed be committing the major part of all abuse. But in return you would have to accept that some level of violence in couples is natural, abuse is quite rare, and most of the claims for ‘abuse’ do not pass the threshold. Would you?
Only predatory, violent men feel the need to lie about rape and violence statistics. Our conversation is now over.
When you include “non-physical” kinds of abuse, you are no longer talking rape. By definition, rape is physical. If you equate violence such as throwing something at hand or breaking a plate or “violence” like that to beating the other person up, you may get to your (almost) 50%. But those are *not* equal levels of violence and cannot be treated as if they were.
I’d like to see a study documenting how often men are hospitalized as a result of domestic abuse compared to the number of women who are before I accept your implied 50/50 share of *all* levels of domestic violence. It’s not in the study that you linked to. In fact, it explicitly said,
“When severe aggression has been perpetrated (e.g., punching, kicking, using a weapon), rates of injury are much higher among female victims than male victims, and those injuries are more likely to be life-threatening and require a visit to an emergency room or hospital.”
It wouldn’t surprise me if women were (almost) as likely to verbally abuse people are men are, but that is not equivalent to rape or physical violence. And the only reason I said “almost” is that there are still too many people (of both sexes) who believe, as a matter of faith, that women are to be subservient to men and too many men who are taught by this sort of thinking that being a “man” is defined by being dominant in all ways.
Only predatory, violent men feel the need to lie about rape and violence statistics. Our conversation is now over.
That’s not the same as saying 95% of men commit violent crimes. A reputable study in Sweden found that persistent violent offenders, accounting for 1% of the population, were responsible for 63% of the convictions for violent crime. We can say men are massively over represented in the sub 5% that commit violent crimes but does this mean 95% of men, who are outside these stats should be treated as more culpable than women??
violent crime is an extreme abuse of power…and, in the cauldron of life (especially domestic life), the men are overwhelmingly the ones with the physical power to abuse. the violence stats are also tilted towards younger men (sub 27 years), which some attribute to higher levels of testosterone and the opportunities, as they become young adults, to be a bad influence on each other; especially in deprived areas. Are you not stating the obvious? Socialising young men has always been society’s biggest challenge. You might say why do we bother with them?… but how do we weed out the bad ones ahead of time? men play an important role in socialising young men but so do women. education and social progress are the only weapons we have. there are moments when we are reminded there are good survival reasons for why men evolved in this way; leaving us with problems we have, at the extremes of the distribution curve. Women abuse power as well, usually not physically, albeit we do see physical abuse by women on those that are weaker (eg children). As women accrue more power we will see how they handle it. I doubt they are any nicer.
my niece sent me many of the studies you include and, whilst I do not wish to challenge the conclusion that most violent crime is committed by men, I can only say some of the data presented on rape (and especially the headlines) would not pass muster in any serious review.
Only predatory, violent men feel the need to lie about rape and violence statistics. Our conversation is now over.
Only predatory, violent men feel the need to lie about rape and violence statistics. Our conversation is now over.
This is an example of the phenomenon which is presently being headed and promoted by Mss Surgeon in Scotland.
“…all studies and stats prove irrefutably that men, as a sex, commit… most domestic violence.”
Demonstrably incorrect (but thanks for the laugh provoked by a Women’s Aid link!)
The most comprehensive review of domestic violence research literature ever carried out was the Partner Abuse State of Knowledge Project in 2013, “findings at a glance” here https://domesticviolenceresearch.org/pdf/FindingsAt-a-Glance.Nov.23.pdf. The headline finding of the review was this:
“Men and women perpetrate physical and non-physical forms of abuse at comparable rates, most domestic violence is mutual, women are as controlling as men, domestic violence by men and women is correlated with essentially the same risk factors, male and female perpetrators are motivated for similar reasons.”
The review also reported that in heterosexual couples where there’s violence, in about 60% of cases it’s bi-directional. In the remaining large minority of cases where it’s uni-directional, the perpetrator is TWICE as likely to be the woman as the man.
That’s not the same as saying 95% of men commit violent crimes. A reputable study in Sweden found that persistent violent offenders, accounting for 1% of the population, were responsible for 63% of the convictions for violent crime. We can say men are massively over represented in the sub 5% that commit violent crimes but does this mean 95% of men, who are outside these stats should be treated as more culpable than women??
violent crime is an extreme abuse of power…and, in the cauldron of life (especially domestic life), the men are overwhelmingly the ones with the physical power to abuse. the violence stats are also tilted towards younger men (sub 27 years), which some attribute to higher levels of testosterone and the opportunities, as they become young adults, to be a bad influence on each other; especially in deprived areas. Are you not stating the obvious? Socialising young men has always been society’s biggest challenge. You might say why do we bother with them?… but how do we weed out the bad ones ahead of time? men play an important role in socialising young men but so do women. education and social progress are the only weapons we have. there are moments when we are reminded there are good survival reasons for why men evolved in this way; leaving us with problems we have, at the extremes of the distribution curve. Women abuse power as well, usually not physically, albeit we do see physical abuse by women on those that are weaker (eg children). As women accrue more power we will see how they handle it. I doubt they are any nicer.
my niece sent me many of the studies you include and, whilst I do not wish to challenge the conclusion that most violent crime is committed by men, I can only say some of the data presented on rape (and especially the headlines) would not pass muster in any serious review.
This is an example of the phenomenon which is presently being headed and promoted by Mss Surgeon in Scotland.
As you are aware, all studies and stats prove irrefutably that men, as a sex, commit approximately 95 percent of all violent crime, and most domestic violence.
https://www.womensaid.org.uk/information-support/what-is-domestic-abuse/domestic-abuse-is-a-gendered-crime/
https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/violence-against-women
https://www.ourwatch.org.au/quick-facts/
https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/85-002-x/2018001/article/54978/02-eng.htm
https://www.womensaid.org.uk/information-support/what-is-domestic-abuse/domestic-abuse-is-a-gendered-crime/
https://ncadv.org/statistics
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4628110/
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1023/A:1018868913615
https://xyonline.net/content/sexist-humour-and-rape-jokes-five-key-points
https://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/life-and-relationships/this-is-why-sexist-jokes-are-dangerous-20190310-p5131w.html
https://gap.hks.harvard.edu/sexist-humor-and-rape-proclivity-moderating-role-joke-teller-gender-and-severity-sexual-assault
https://encompass.eku.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1013&context=etd
https://www.ling.upenn.edu/courses/Fall_2011/ling001/Frazer-Miller-2009.pdf
https://debuk.wordpress.com/tag/passive-voice/
https://web.stanford.edu/class/linguist156/Bohner_2001.pdf
https://journals.openedition.org/ejts/6359
https://www.macleans.ca/opinion/lets-finally-call-violence-against-women-what-it-really-is/
https://www.wbur.org/cognoscenti/2019/01/28/the-language-of-sexual-violence-doreen-arcus
Predictably, the services doesn’t offer support to men or women or children who’ve suffered at the hands of violent WOMEN. Yet official statistics show that a woman is almost twice as likely to suffer abuse at the hands of a female partner, compared with a male partner. Our latest blog piece has a link to those stats, and Julie Bindel’s response when confronted with them in a recent interview with Philip Davies MP and Esther McVey MP on GB News https://j4mb.org.uk/2022/12/09/are-women-more-likely-to-be-abused-in-lesbian-or-heterosexual-relationships/.
Mike Buchanan
JUSTICE FOR MEN & BOYS
http://j4mb.org.uk
Can male victims of male violence have all-women run support centres too?
You should look into that and write an article on it.
Maybe female victims of female violence should have all-men run support centres? The chance of that getting public funding is precisely zero.
Maybe female victims of female violence should have all-men run support centres? The chance of that getting public funding is precisely zero.
You should look into that and write an article on it.
Can male victims of male violence have all-women run support centres too?
I am surprised by Julie Bindel’s antipathy towards trans. I understood that one of the tenants of modern feminism is that there is no difference in the psychological make-up of man and woman – Our brains are not wired up differently. Although women are of course “better” at being the same, (I love a bit of double think) Any apparent differences between the se xes is due to socialisation and oppression by male bigots.
It follows that if a man claims not to be a man, but a woman, then who is Julie Bindel to say otherwise? Apart from a few body parts there is no difference.
The trouble with foolish dogmas is that they have foolish consequences.
Those few body parts can do a lot of damage.
This centre is there to put right that damage. Of course victims have a fear of those few body parts.
I wasn’t commenting on the centre (which I whole-heartedly support). I was commenting on Julie Bindel’s brand of feminism, which has helped open the door to the trans movement.
By all means argue with what I said. But please don’t argue with what I didn’t say
I wasn’t commenting on the centre (which I whole-heartedly support). I was commenting on Julie Bindel’s brand of feminism, which has helped open the door to the trans movement.
By all means argue with what I said. But please don’t argue with what I didn’t say
“no difference in the psychological make-up of man and woman” is that really “tenants of modern feminism”. I can’t believe that at all. We can see the differences in male/female thinking at birth. We can identify the sexes in infants by observing what attracts their attention. A man can in no way have a female thought pattern IMHO. I do observe that the gay community features a degree of creativity not nominally found in most men suggesting a unique thought pattern.
You’re in possession of the facts. The feminist movement wasn’t.
Nonsense. The purpose of sexual difference is reproduction. All mammals display sex-based behaviours related to reproduction. Anything that humans alone do is social conditioning. Feminists recognise the former and, rightly, reject the latter.
“no difference in the psychological make-up of man and woman” is that really “tenants of modern feminism”.
Seems to be. Apparently the reason that girls prefer playing with dolls rather than steam engines is because they have been educated to prefer dolls, rather than because of anything inate to their femininity.
Before anyone else misconstrues something I say. I whole-heartedly support equal rights for all. I merely hold the view that women are different to men, not just in the way that they look, but in the way that they perceive the world, in what they deem to be important compared to what they deem to be less important. It is a biological necessity that they think and behave differently.
You cannot change gender, but by down-playing the psychological difference between the two, you leave room for the line of argument that, with just a bit of nifty surgery, you can become something other than that which you were born.
This is incorrect, and also irrelevant.
Factually, we have measured stats and irrefutable evidence that the male sex is predatory and violent, and women and children sometimes require sanctuary from them.
That’s all that matters.
“That’s all that matters.”
So does reasoned argument – You should try it sometime.
You’re babbling. Nothing you have said is relevant to my comment.
Nothing that you said in your reply to me bore any relation to what I actually said in my original post. When I point that out to you, you accuse me of babbling.
That is pretty much how you react to any question that you are unable to answer, isn’t it?.
I won’t engage with you – It is a waste of my time.
Nothing that you said in your reply to me bore any relation to what I actually said in my original post. When I point that out to you, you accuse me of babbling.
That is pretty much how you react to any question that you are unable to answer, isn’t it?.
I won’t engage with you – It is a waste of my time.
You’re babbling. Nothing you have said is relevant to my comment.
So what do you propose? A return to Victorian-style chaperoning? Medieval chastity belts? Ancient-world harems guarded by eunuchs?
What are your solutions?
You’re babbling. Nothing you said is relevant to my comment.
You’re babbling. Nothing you said is relevant to my comment.
Statistics show that women (specifically mothers) commit the majority of physical abuse upon children. No doubt you will be equally willing to apply the descriptor ‘violent and predatory’ to them. Even as I write this, violent and predatory women are abusing children all over the world.
“That’s all that matters.”
So does reasoned argument – You should try it sometime.
So what do you propose? A return to Victorian-style chaperoning? Medieval chastity belts? Ancient-world harems guarded by eunuchs?
What are your solutions?
Statistics show that women (specifically mothers) commit the majority of physical abuse upon children. No doubt you will be equally willing to apply the descriptor ‘violent and predatory’ to them. Even as I write this, violent and predatory women are abusing children all over the world.
can we please stop saying ‘*tenants* of modern feminism’! 🙂
We can.
Feel better now?
We can.
Feel better now?
I suggest that you mean tenets, not tenants.
You suggest correctly. It invalidates my whole argument, doesn’t it?
You suggest correctly. It invalidates my whole argument, doesn’t it?
This is incorrect, and also irrelevant.
Factually, we have measured stats and irrefutable evidence that the male sex is predatory and violent, and women and children sometimes require sanctuary from them.
That’s all that matters.
can we please stop saying ‘*tenants* of modern feminism’! 🙂
I suggest that you mean tenets, not tenants.
Sources please. According to the most up to date science, brains are a mosaic, and “thought patterns” and areas of the brain change all the time in response to stimuli.
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2021/03/210325115316.htm#:~:text=%22Sex%20differences%20are%20sexy%2C%20but,that%20differ%20between%20the%20sexes.
“The truth is that there are no universal, species-wide brain features that differ between the sexes. Rather, the brain is like other organs, such as the heart and kidneys, which are similar enough to be transplanted between women and men quite successfully.”
Regardless, it’s not relevant whether men and women are alike or unalike in thoughts. What matters is that men are the predatory, violent sex, which is why women and children require sanctuary from predatory violent men.
Which organ in the human body causes predation and violence?
Nobody knows exactly why men are so violently predatory as a sex.
Please, ask any evolutionary biologist or look around at mammals, it’s a very, very different BRAIN catalysed by very, very different hormones that males have.
Please, ask any evolutionary biologist or look around at mammals, it’s a very, very different BRAIN catalysed by very, very different hormones that males have.
Nobody knows exactly why men are so violently predatory as a sex.
Please try not lump all men into simplistic claims. Lack of nuance leads to totalitarian thinking and hurts, rather than supports, your arguments.
You’re babbling. Nothing you said is relevant to my comment.
You’re babbling. Nothing you said is relevant to my comment.
Which organ in the human body causes predation and violence?
Please try not lump all men into simplistic claims. Lack of nuance leads to totalitarian thinking and hurts, rather than supports, your arguments.
You’re in possession of the facts. The feminist movement wasn’t.
Nonsense. The purpose of sexual difference is reproduction. All mammals display sex-based behaviours related to reproduction. Anything that humans alone do is social conditioning. Feminists recognise the former and, rightly, reject the latter.
“no difference in the psychological make-up of man and woman” is that really “tenants of modern feminism”.
Seems to be. Apparently the reason that girls prefer playing with dolls rather than steam engines is because they have been educated to prefer dolls, rather than because of anything inate to their femininity.
Before anyone else misconstrues something I say. I whole-heartedly support equal rights for all. I merely hold the view that women are different to men, not just in the way that they look, but in the way that they perceive the world, in what they deem to be important compared to what they deem to be less important. It is a biological necessity that they think and behave differently.
You cannot change gender, but by down-playing the psychological difference between the two, you leave room for the line of argument that, with just a bit of nifty surgery, you can become something other than that which you were born.
Sources please. According to the most up to date science, brains are a mosaic, and “thought patterns” and areas of the brain change all the time in response to stimuli.
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2021/03/210325115316.htm#:~:text=%22Sex%20differences%20are%20sexy%2C%20but,that%20differ%20between%20the%20sexes.
“The truth is that there are no universal, species-wide brain features that differ between the sexes. Rather, the brain is like other organs, such as the heart and kidneys, which are similar enough to be transplanted between women and men quite successfully.”
Regardless, it’s not relevant whether men and women are alike or unalike in thoughts. What matters is that men are the predatory, violent sex, which is why women and children require sanctuary from predatory violent men.
Stop trying to say not wanting a p***s in a rape crisis centre is Hating trans. It isnt.
Why not? I hate ‘trans’ ideology with every female cell of my being. I hate it for the mutilation of young gay men and lesbian women just as much as I hate it for encouraging heterosexual perverts to demand access to female spaces.
With respect, I don’t think you’ve made the necessary distinction in your present commentary between trans ideology and the unfortunate people caught in its clutches.
With respect, I don’t think you’ve made the necessary distinction in your present commentary between trans ideology and the unfortunate people caught in its clutches.
Stop foaming at the mouth and read and comprehend what I said.
Sorry if I am too subtle for you.
Why not? I hate ‘trans’ ideology with every female cell of my being. I hate it for the mutilation of young gay men and lesbian women just as much as I hate it for encouraging heterosexual perverts to demand access to female spaces.
Stop foaming at the mouth and read and comprehend what I said.
Sorry if I am too subtle for you.
‘Gender’ ideology is the antithesis of feminism. Feminism believes that differences in personality are simply that. ‘Gender’ ideology believes that they are because of ‘gender identity’. You believe that they are because of sex. There is little difference between the last two views and both are rooted in misogyny.
“You believe that they are because of sex.”
I do indeed. Not everyting of course. Individuals differ by personaliy as well – Did I really have to spell that out? Please tell me how my view is “rooted in misogyny”
“The purpose of sexual difference is reproduction. All mammals display sex-based behaviours related to reproduction.”
I agree, What have I said that suggests that I disagree? Other than that I extend sex-based behaviour into the psychological sphere. We think and feel as much as we do. We are not automatons.
It’s the antithesis of everything. Once it’s codified into law it will be a nightmare to unravel. The amount of time and resources already diverted to this ideology is stupendous.
“You believe that they are because of sex.”
I do indeed. Not everyting of course. Individuals differ by personaliy as well – Did I really have to spell that out? Please tell me how my view is “rooted in misogyny”
“The purpose of sexual difference is reproduction. All mammals display sex-based behaviours related to reproduction.”
I agree, What have I said that suggests that I disagree? Other than that I extend sex-based behaviour into the psychological sphere. We think and feel as much as we do. We are not automatons.
It’s the antithesis of everything. Once it’s codified into law it will be a nightmare to unravel. The amount of time and resources already diverted to this ideology is stupendous.
Victims of sexual violence should not be punished for the short sightedness of deconstruction-obsessed feminists.
Have I said anything to the contrary?
No, but I took “the trouble with foolish dogmas is that they have foolish consequences” to reflect a small degree of implication. It is a cheap point, I admit.
A very cheap point indeed.
Is a cheap point the best that you can come up with?
A very cheap point indeed.
Is a cheap point the best that you can come up with?
No, but I took “the trouble with foolish dogmas is that they have foolish consequences” to reflect a small degree of implication. It is a cheap point, I admit.
Have I said anything to the contrary?
Men rape, beat and muder women at alarming rates and we have no way to tell which men are rapists and murderers. Men have been saying they are women to gain access to women and children all over the world, and have been raping and beating them.
That’s the only issue that matters.
Here a couple of years of examples.
https://transcrimeuk.com/
https://grahamlinehan.substack.com/
And where did I say anything to the contrary?
Just tell me.
This reply is irrelevant.
Actually, it wasn’t.
But yours certainly is !
Actually, it wasn’t.
But yours certainly is !
This reply is irrelevant.
And where did I say anything to the contrary?
Just tell me.
Those few body parts can do a lot of damage.
This centre is there to put right that damage. Of course victims have a fear of those few body parts.
“no difference in the psychological make-up of man and woman” is that really “tenants of modern feminism”. I can’t believe that at all. We can see the differences in male/female thinking at birth. We can identify the sexes in infants by observing what attracts their attention. A man can in no way have a female thought pattern IMHO. I do observe that the gay community features a degree of creativity not nominally found in most men suggesting a unique thought pattern.
Stop trying to say not wanting a p***s in a rape crisis centre is Hating trans. It isnt.
‘Gender’ ideology is the antithesis of feminism. Feminism believes that differences in personality are simply that. ‘Gender’ ideology believes that they are because of ‘gender identity’. You believe that they are because of sex. There is little difference between the last two views and both are rooted in misogyny.
Victims of sexual violence should not be punished for the short sightedness of deconstruction-obsessed feminists.
Men rape, beat and muder women at alarming rates and we have no way to tell which men are rapists and murderers. Men have been saying they are women to gain access to women and children all over the world, and have been raping and beating them.
That’s the only issue that matters.
Here a couple of years of examples.
https://transcrimeuk.com/
https://grahamlinehan.substack.com/
I am surprised by Julie Bindel’s antipathy towards trans. I understood that one of the tenants of modern feminism is that there is no difference in the psychological make-up of man and woman – Our brains are not wired up differently. Although women are of course “better” at being the same, (I love a bit of double think) Any apparent differences between the se xes is due to socialisation and oppression by male bigots.
It follows that if a man claims not to be a man, but a woman, then who is Julie Bindel to say otherwise? Apart from a few body parts there is no difference.
The trouble with foolish dogmas is that they have foolish consequences.
The most hilarious bit of this five-alarm dumpster fire is this:
“Alsalem told Sturgeon that the reforms presented “potential risks to the safety of women in all their diversity”, and that “empirical evidence” suggested predatory men might seek to abuse the system.”
“Might”?? After all this overwrought handwringing, the justification for this whole project hinges on something that “might” happen?
Here’s something we know, with absolute certainty, that actually happens with some regularity: Women sexually assaulting other women. What’s Rowling planning to do to protect women from other women?
Sources, please.
ONS stats show clearly that women are nearly twice as likely to be abused (all types combined) by female partners as male partners https://j4mb.org.uk/2022/12/09/are-women-more-likely-to-be-abused-in-lesbian-or-heterosexual-relationships/ They are equally likely to be sexually abused by female and male partners. Women are at least as violent as men in intimate heterosexual relationships – many sources including the Partner Abuse State of Knowledge Project 2013 https://domesticviolenceresearch.org/pdf/FindingsAt-a-Glance.Nov.23.pdf.
But I know that you’re only asking for sources to waste people’s time. I must have posted links to many hundreds of sources of data over the years, and not once has a requester for sources responded in a way that suggested any engagement with the evidence.
Mike Buchanan
JUSTICE FOR MEN & BOYS
http://j4mb.org.uk
Quoting Ally Fogg (who is highly woke but respects the truth) men and women are indeed about equally violent in intimate relationships, and a majority of in-couple violence is mutual – both hit each other. One important difference, though, is that if you look only at the smaller subset of serious, high-damage violence, men do it much more than women. So, similar frequency of violence, but sometimes men hit a lot harder.
shameful talking about “men and boys” on this thread. No respect whatsoever. Disgusting.
Quoting Ally Fogg (who is highly woke but respects the truth) men and women are indeed about equally violent in intimate relationships, and a majority of in-couple violence is mutual – both hit each other. One important difference, though, is that if you look only at the smaller subset of serious, high-damage violence, men do it much more than women. So, similar frequency of violence, but sometimes men hit a lot harder.
shameful talking about “men and boys” on this thread. No respect whatsoever. Disgusting.
ONS stats show clearly that women are nearly twice as likely to be abused (all types combined) by female partners as male partners https://j4mb.org.uk/2022/12/09/are-women-more-likely-to-be-abused-in-lesbian-or-heterosexual-relationships/ They are equally likely to be sexually abused by female and male partners. Women are at least as violent as men in intimate heterosexual relationships – many sources including the Partner Abuse State of Knowledge Project 2013 https://domesticviolenceresearch.org/pdf/FindingsAt-a-Glance.Nov.23.pdf.
But I know that you’re only asking for sources to waste people’s time. I must have posted links to many hundreds of sources of data over the years, and not once has a requester for sources responded in a way that suggested any engagement with the evidence.
Mike Buchanan
JUSTICE FOR MEN & BOYS
http://j4mb.org.uk
I don’t know why Alsalem used the word ‘might’ – I think probably in the context of de jure self-ID not yet having formally been introduced in Scotland via the GR Bill – but where self-ID has been introduced, both de jure and de facto, sexual assault of women and girls by trans-identifying men in hitherto female-only spaces has definitely happened and is happening too often, not just in the USA, but also in the UK.
An embedded modal in reported speech is an exceedingly shallow pretext for whatever point you’re trying to make.
Another moron.
stop signing your posts, thanks
sorry for not mentioning you as well.
sorry for not mentioning you as well.
stop signing your posts, thanks
i don’t normally comment here but your views are so wrong headed and so completely bananas i just have to wonder. what planet are you from?
Sources, please.
I don’t know why Alsalem used the word ‘might’ – I think probably in the context of de jure self-ID not yet having formally been introduced in Scotland via the GR Bill – but where self-ID has been introduced, both de jure and de facto, sexual assault of women and girls by trans-identifying men in hitherto female-only spaces has definitely happened and is happening too often, not just in the USA, but also in the UK.
An embedded modal in reported speech is an exceedingly shallow pretext for whatever point you’re trying to make.
Another moron.
i don’t normally comment here but your views are so wrong headed and so completely bananas i just have to wonder. what planet are you from?
The most hilarious bit of this five-alarm dumpster fire is this:
“Alsalem told Sturgeon that the reforms presented “potential risks to the safety of women in all their diversity”, and that “empirical evidence” suggested predatory men might seek to abuse the system.”
“Might”?? After all this overwrought handwringing, the justification for this whole project hinges on something that “might” happen?
Here’s something we know, with absolute certainty, that actually happens with some regularity: Women sexually assaulting other women. What’s Rowling planning to do to protect women from other women?
‘The service is funded solely by Rowling and is not set up as a charity, which means trans activists won’t be able to petition the Charities Commission to close it down.’
I think this is my favourite part. Not only has Rowling spent time and money on finding a legal loophole to make sure she helps fewer abused people, if she had to choose between helping both trans women and cis woman or no-one at all, she’d pick no-one. What a victory for feminism! It’s so transparent that Rowling has no actual interest in helping women or anyone and the only reason this exists is to give the middle finger to people she doesn’t like.
It takes an odd personality to whine about someone spending their own money to help vulnerable women.
She did a good thing entirely motivated by spite so yeah
She did a good thing entirely motivated by spite so yeah
that’s insane. And so, likely , are you.
C,mon, what else could that possibly mean? The only way the shelter could possibly shut down would be JK deciding to take her ball home and stop funding it if she’s not allowed to exclude the women she doesn’t like.
she’s not excluding ANY women. She’s excluding men claiming to be women. They aren’t.
she’s not excluding ANY women. She’s excluding men claiming to be women. They aren’t.
C,mon, what else could that possibly mean? The only way the shelter could possibly shut down would be JK deciding to take her ball home and stop funding it if she’s not allowed to exclude the women she doesn’t like.
It takes an odd personality to whine about someone spending their own money to help vulnerable women.
that’s insane. And so, likely , are you.
‘The service is funded solely by Rowling and is not set up as a charity, which means trans activists won’t be able to petition the Charities Commission to close it down.’
I think this is my favourite part. Not only has Rowling spent time and money on finding a legal loophole to make sure she helps fewer abused people, if she had to choose between helping both trans women and cis woman or no-one at all, she’d pick no-one. What a victory for feminism! It’s so transparent that Rowling has no actual interest in helping women or anyone and the only reason this exists is to give the middle finger to people she doesn’t like.