They're not going to take action against someone quoting an article that they've linked to.
(Not to be a downer, but just being realistic about this specific example)
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Vile TERF Rowling can't stop spreading hate.
- Thread starter It’s Time To Go
- Start date
- Status
They're not going to take action against someone quoting an article that they've linked to.
(Not to be a downer, but just being realistic about this specific example)
She is one sick, twisted individual.
It's time we cancelled her for good. There is no way I can look at anything Harry Potter related without thinking of her bigoted views. A bigot like JK shouldn't be making any more money from her brand.
It's time we cancelled her for good. There is no way I can look at anything Harry Potter related without thinking of her bigoted views. A bigot like JK shouldn't be making any more money from her brand.
Did you take into account the fact that some people on this forum do not live in a country where english is the first language? So yeah, it's possible to not know every modern english acronyms and not being a jerk at the same time...
LMGTFY - Let Me Google That For You
For all those people who find it more convenient to bother you with their question rather than to Google it for themselves.
User banned (1 month): driving thread derail over multiple posts in a sensitive thread, account in junior phase
LMGTFY - Let Me Google That For You
For all those people who find it more convenient to bother you with their question rather than to Google it for themselves.lmgtfy.com
I disagree. A forum is a social place. I'm a university teacher. If everytime one of my student ask what I could consider a "stupid" question my answer would be "google it you stupid fuck" I would just be a snob and it would render pointless the very idea of scheduling an hour for class in the first place. This line of reasoning on a place where the purpose is litterally to discuss is just being edgy. Besides, it's not like "TERF" is a term with centuries of history. It's contemporary and english centric, so yeah it's not very hard to understand some people do not still know what it means. If you dismiss the very fact people can ask question on a forum, than you can close the forum because every questions that are asked on this forum the answer can be find by googling the question. But, maybe we can still be civilized anyway and not become arrogant pricks just because google exists...
For a uni teacher, you've got quite the language! Who is being an "arrogant prick" and implying signposting someone to a search is being a "stupid fuck"? A forum is not an educational institution, so users are not beholden to teach everyone everything if they don't want to.
Arrogance is the expectation that people should answer your question despite having made no attempt to answer it yourself, or to see if said question/point has been discussed already, in addition to being insulting while doing so.
Of course, every users are not beholden to teach everyone everything. And this is precisely why people can ask questions freely. Because someone can if he/she wants answer the question. If you don't want to aswner the question, do not answer it and let the kind human who will want to gently answer it asnwer it. But, by posting "google it" the only thing you are transmitting is condescendance and useless info. Because everyone knows google exists. So, if they ask the question to human beings on forums instead to google, it's because they want humain interaction on a place that exists for the purpose of humain interactions.
OP
OP
Transparent again. Please try harder. What's great about theee people is they object more that they might have to google something than about Rowling using her huge platform to spread bigotry and lies and hate. Like I said, you are transparent.
Assuming that someone who is asking a simple question on a forum has the expectation the other people owe him/her the response is a trial of intent. It's not very difficult to imagine it can be genuine curiosity. And if you feel insulted just because someones has asked you a simple question on a place the sole purpose is to be an agora, well maybe it's time to stop trying to be a civilisation anymore.
You know, when someone on the street asks me his/her direction, even if he/she has a smartphone, I answer politely, and I don't answer "try google maps, you're insulting me, lulz"....
The danger in the assumption that the person just wants human interaction is there is the possibility they're JAQing off (just asking questions in bad faith) or sealioning as a form of trolling, then trying to dismiss the user who does answer. And if a user is aware of this possibility, they might not want to deal with the wasted energy of the dismissiveness and trolling, so direct the responsibility for education to the questioner.
YOU are the one who felt the need to add a second post right after your OP to imply sarcastically that it would not be possible to ask a question about the definition of a recent term on your OP because whatever reason... sorry but the responsibility is on your side...
Sure, I understand it's not pleasant someone is making the remark it's not the best way to initiate a discussion. But, at the very least, I am making arguments. You are just answering by edgy catchphrases.
Besided, I have first opened the post because I was interested by the content. It's not my fault if the OP have decided right after his/her OP he/she needed to make a snarky comment. It's because of this comment I have decided to answer on this aspect.
But, you don't know who I am, so I don't know what you are implying when you say I belong to "these" people (who?, if you are insulting me, at the very leat please be explicit and do not hide behind sarcasm because it's just cowardice).
But if you want my opinion on the matter, it's the same than most of the people here: JK Rowling is a bigoted human being full of despicable hatred and I solely condemn what she said because it's trash. And the very fact she is using her fame for spreading hate is sickening.
Last edited:
OP
OP
You are not making arguments, you are derailing the discussion again, like nonsense people trying to hide their transphobia always do. It's disgusting whataboutism shit, and you are nakedly obvious with what you are trying to do.
Maybe you don't know but that post was a reaction to people often coming into threads like this asking it after it often was already answered. The reason why people react to you so strongly is because it seems you have a very strong opinion about a situation you don't know much about. At least it looks that way.
You are wrong. Please read my previous post again. You really do not know me and I really do not give a shit about your opinion on me. But, I am not transphobe, and I'm not someone who is speading hatred. But, YOU are the one who is making accusations without knowing anything about who I am and you are making these accusations on speculations on my intents rather than facts. You are the one derailing my response to your snarky comments by implying more than you know.
JK rowling using detransitioned transpeople as a weapon against trans people is fucking gross. imagine if sexual abuse victims were used as a weapon against her it would be equally disgusting. what a twat.
on a side note: I think there is a conversation to be had about the assumption of bad faith here, but lets maybe not derail the thread?
on a side note: I think there is a conversation to be had about the assumption of bad faith here, but lets maybe not derail the thread?
TERF has changed from a word to describe your radical feminist Andrea Dworkin types to describe anyone who has the wrong views on trans people regardless of their views on everything else.
It's ok to want some clarity on it on a discussion forum
It's ok to want some clarity on it on a discussion forum
Sure, but it often falls on trans members to keep explaining the simple things. I don't blame them for getting exhausted having to keep answering the basic stuff over and over, particularly as it pertains to their identity personally. The rest of us need to shoulder that weight more, whether it's being the ones to answer wherever we can and when appropriate, or simply doing your research before entering a thread like this and not expecting everything to be explained to you.
*Or* simply sitting and listening more before you're able to participate.
Last edited:
Can't think of many times in threads that someone has just asked for clarity around something they've obviously taken a moment to look up and it's not been responded to in kind. It's more speaking to the same questions being asked every page of every thread to where both the discussion on the topic itself is being perforated by these questions (+ there's usually some back and forth for each as well) and the people engaging having to not only repeatedly explain the same things, but often having to re-debate them in each instance.
I know you're banned, but I just hate the fucking "not everyone grew up with English as their first language" shit so fucking much. English is my THIRD language and you don't ever see me fucking JAQing, because Google fucking exists. Also to say that non-native English speakers don't know about these terms is hilarious, because trust me. People know. Especially if they're LGBT like me. Just because we didn't come out of the womb speaking flawless English, doesn't mean that we're not well-educated on social issues & can't fucking educate ourselves. I swear this is the same excuse pople have when they say "uuuu they/them pronouns don't make sense because they don't exist in my language". Surprise, they don't exist in my languages either, but I still go by fucking they/them in English speaking circles.
Seriously, if you're not trans you shouldn't fucking do the shit you did in this thread. God damn it, you sure are fucking stupid for a uni teacher.
sorry if this counts as antagonizing a member. sorry
Wait, is this really the case? This thread actually prompted me to look up Rowling's radical feminist credentials and made me wonder if I was missing something.
So thanks for clearing that up.
I'd say writing as vile a transphobic manifesto as she did and spending this many hours on what seems (almost) daily transphobic propaganda at this point warrants the definition of a radical feminist. They can't necessarily otherwise be clumped together with radical feminists, but they are plenty radical in this area and I think that makes the term TERF appropriate.
It's really disgusting that the concept of detransitioning became co-opted by transphobes. Just because someone made the personal decision to try and reverse their transition doesn't mean that they should be used as evidence that trans identity is invalid.
Especially when you consider that a number of people who choose to detransition do so because of the stigma and abuse they've faced from transphobes while transitioning.
I think the distinction with Rowling being a TERF is that she hides her transphobia behind feminism, and the specific argument that because trans women don't share the same lived experience as cis women, they aren't "real women." So she's certainly living up to the "trans exclusionary" part of the label.
Yeah, people are rightfully pointing in the comments Rowling only cares about detransitioners inasmuch she can use them to hurt transgender people. I understand being frustrated by being a small subset of a collective that's already incredibly marginalized to begin with, but it's just so sad to see them thinking that TERFs using them as weapons against transgender people somehow means they're on their side in any meaningful way. :(
It's almost as if teaching other people was your literal job that you actually get paid for, while people in this forum are under no such obligation whatsoever...
While I agree TERF is often misused to describe any plain old transphobe (and I'm the first to pedantically point out the misuse, especially when the person in question is obviously not a feminist by any stretch of the word), I think it's perfectly apt here, because Rowling is using every single tactic in the TERF book ("what about women that don't feel safe in toilets with trans women", "hurting children by making them transition", "transgenderism trivializes feminity", etc.).
Last edited:
I never saw anyone who was just being transphobic that didn't pretended to care about women rights be called a terf.
Both Glinner and Rowling my not be full feminists, but their transphobia is CLEARLY disguised as "i am worried about women rights being erased"
I take everyone who quoted me on board. i still feel like I see it thrown around a lot against people who aren't really feminist, but that's moreso on twitter and you see all sorts of silly shit on there so idk. I'd be ok with calling them trans exlusionary without the rest of the acronym, but it won't be up to me if that catches on lol. words and terms morph so fast online and it's good to try and be as precise as possible imo. Trans Exclusionary Donkeys?
Hopefully an ok example of talking about the term without derailing the thread completely, because otherwise the thread seems unanimous? I'm really bemused why people decide to self immolate on this particular issue; especially people who were or are otherwise liberal. They'd be scoffing at the same kind of people they're being right now about the moral panic against gay people in the 80s to 00s.
Hopefully an ok example of talking about the term without derailing the thread completely, because otherwise the thread seems unanimous? I'm really bemused why people decide to self immolate on this particular issue; especially people who were or are otherwise liberal. They'd be scoffing at the same kind of people they're being right now about the moral panic against gay people in the 80s to 00s.
Last edited:
Yeah, I don't use the word TERF lightly because in my opinion it applies to a very specific breed of transphobe...
But JK is absolutely a TERF. She makes herself out to be the savior of women and in the same breath shits on trans people. That's the definition of TERF.
AFAIK, TERF was a term TERF's gave themselves before they later decided it was a slur.
I prefer FART myself (Feminism-Appropriating Reactionary Transphobes).
The detransitioners: what happens when trans men want to be women again?
When I told people I was going to create a photographic series about trans men who wanted to “detransition” and become women again, I was told to expect a backlwww.thetimes.co.uk
I hope we can ban any discussion of Harry Potter or Cormoran strike on here again.
This quote is just so dumb. It reads like "it's very hard being a cis woman so I'll be trans, people notorious for being very privileged."
From what I know, this is indeed correct. It's almost as if an awful world view tainted whichever euphemism was used to describe it, until the euphemism itself was offensive. The more repugnant the stance, the quicker this happens.
In other completely unrelated news that I decided to bring up for no reason at all, "nazisim" (from national socialism) and "fascism" (from fascio, "bundle of sticks", symbolizing strength through unity) happen to be terms created by the very people espousing these ideologies. Of course, this makes it pretty funny when people following the exact same doctrines now, are offended at being called what they are.
That's kind of amazing; I would totally stan for that if not for the fact that it's also more prone to confusion.
And as anything TERF logic, it gets more hilarious when you try with the other gender
"They all, in some combination, found being a man too difficult, too dangerous or too disgusting"
yeah right
Exactly. I'm sure it's possible to overshoot in diagnosing too many people as trans and harming those people in the process, but when you look at the state of things as they are now for the majority of trans people, how in the world could you think the problem is there's not enough roadblocks.
Does not work. Notch does not profit from minecraft any more and never will again. She still profits from harry potter and will till she dies or sells it.
You want to limit discussion of her hate but not limit discussion of harry potter? Sounds like you are privileged enough to not be hurt by her hate speech and want to feel better when you inevitably give her more money.
You assume a lot. I'm trans and I have no interest in anything related to Harry Potter.
i want discussion of her hate tweets in one big thread instead of every time she tweets. But I also have no problem with discussion of her general bigotry in threads about her IP.
I apologize for assuming then. I'm getting tired of seeing the games side here wanting to ignore this because harry potter game.
I think harry potter is big enough that i want discussions to be allowed so i can know which are the next artists and studios that CHOOSE to work with rowling knowing about her shit.
Also because most people only go to the gaming discussion or don't follow specific rowling stuff ... so we can spread the word to more people that rowling is a huge asshole
And it is not like Harry Potter would be smaller or Rowling would be deplataformed like the smaller games that have discussions banned about them.
If we can't fight it not talking i think it is better to fight complaining about
The fact that I ever tried to give her the benefit of the doubt with the tweets she was liking makes me sick to my stomach.
Fuck J.K. Rowling.
Fuck J.K. Rowling.
I liked saying it bubbled up from England's collective unconscious. With all that entails.
Then I got a response going to Hatsune Miku again. Sigh.
That said space is fine. You don't necessarily want to touch random stuff coming from space, so it's appropriate.
- Status