I agree with the rest of your post, but there's nothing wrong with this point.
Transgender rights discussion
- Thread starter crappycraperson
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
I agree with the rest of your post, but there's nothing wrong with this point.
I have no idea what the fuss is? It's upon an individual person to decide if they are trans or not. It's not to the rest of us to decide for others. Let us respect their choice.
Wait, what the feck is supposed to be wrong with this?
It's hardly the Krusty the Clown flapping dickie bit.
Cho Chang is supposed to be Chinese but both names are actually Korean - it’s that sloppiness and lazy characterisation of her that has led to criticism for falling into the same tropes of Orientalism when most Western writers depict East Asian characters.
See above.
I might be confusing him (a lot of bio professors with a W last name in the IDW) but he's part of the race-IQ evo-psych crowd I think. No idea what his podcast is like.
I'm sorry, but that's just fecking ridiculous. There's no way that anybody on earth is actually offended by that outside of people looking to be in order to score points for being "woke".
I play Pro Evo, a Japanese made game. All the newly generated European players have British/Irish names presumably because 'those are the types of names that white people have'. In my save in 2030 or whatever it is, the Polish national team is full of blokes called Jones and McDonnell. It's funny. Am I supposed to be offended? Should we be lobbying Ed to feck off the Konami sponsorship?
If the bar is really that low, all this type of moral crusade bullshit, well intentioned though it may be, can only serve to push people who see that type of stuff for being as ridiculous as it is to the political right.
It’s not I who found it offensive, it is some people from that region of the world who have taken issue with it. That’s the whole point - to most Western readers they’d be oblivious to it because these kind of depictions are normal to us. Maybe instead of laughing at the fact some have taken offence to it you could do a bit of research, listen to what they say, and then give an informed view on it?
There’s a huge difference between how we depict East Asians, given our history of racist brutality, imperialism and colonialism in that region, and how they depict us. If a white person stereotypes and lazily characterises a black person, that’s more offensive than the reverse given the history, agreed? I do not believe it’s a hard concept to grasp.
Nobody is saying it’s the crime of the century, but just because the racism is less obvious and overt does not make it any less harmful or insidious for those on the receiving end.
I wont comment on Rowling being transphobic as I have very limited knowledge on the issue but she's not racist. That is absurd. Anyone who has read Harry Potter knows that. The Malfoys and the Death Eaters were depicted as being racist and obsessed with purebloods and they were clearly the baddies. There was a lot of anti racist messages throughout the books as well. She may or may not be transphobic but calling her a racist is reaching.
So, it just really just boils down to anybody who isn't white automatically having the moral high ground, then? Just white guilt and obviously faulty "sins of the father" logic?
To stick with my Konami example - when the feck did anybody colonise Japan? A country which also knows a thing or two about imperialism and racism.
Does the balance of the moral high ground change again if I'm Swiss or Swedish and my country had no such colonial history, or is it still white = bad?
It's all so, so silly.
The amount of right wing propaganda on youtube is sickening. These youtube "intellectuals" have played a huge role in normalising racism and anti LGBT+ views.
But there are plenty of Chinese people with the surname Chang.
And Cho I would guess was just done for alliteration.
Peter Pettigrew, Severus Snape, Luna Lovegood, Minvera McGonnagal, Dudley Dursely, Moaning Myrtle.
She almost always alliterates (see what I did there).
Thats a very diplomatic way of phrasing pretty much my exact stance on the issue, so I will just steal it
Although I wouldnt agree that gender roles are there just to suppress women - I think by and large they are bad for everyone.
Where is that stated in the books?
Thats a very diplomatic way of phrasing pretty much my exact stance on the issue, so I will just steal it
Although I wouldnt agree that gender roles are there just to suppress women - I think by and large they are bad for everyone.
The thing is as @sullydnl mentioned previously, sexual characteristics are a massive trigger of dysphoria. It's why many trans Men will bind themselves during puberty.
Many rad fems really believe that elimination of gender roles will eliminate trans people, it won't but they don't get that because they're not trans.
In fact, I'm in bed eating a crisp sandwich with a bottle of doombar wondering why I didn't stick the directors cut of Aliens on instead of the cinematic release.
According to gender roles I should be eating Ben and Jerrys whilst sobbing my heart out to Mama Mia *shudder*.
I personally find gender roles as equally superfluous as the rad fems.
More power to you, and I am glad that your transition has resulted in an improvement in your life and made you happy, really.
People are free to do what they wish with their bodies, and it certainly wouldnt be the case every single time, but I am sure that at least some transgender people's decisions were influenced by gender roles in society. Its possibly a discussion for a different thread in terms of "what actually IS gender?", but broadly speaking I tend to be against most sorts of labelling.
I fancy a crisp sandwich now :O
More power to you, and I am glad that your transition has resulted in an improvement in your life and made you happy, really.
People are free to do what they wish with their bodies, and it certainly wouldnt be the case every single time, but I am sure that at least some transgender people's decisions were influenced by gender roles in society. Its possibly a discussion for a different thread in terms of "what actually IS gender?", but broadly speaking I tend to be against most sorts of labelling.
I fancy a crisp sandwich now :O
Go with cheese and onion, add some branstons, close your eyes and it's almost like you're eating a ploughmans
Is she not? I’ve only personally read the first book. I read an article critiquing Chang’s characterisation and that was one of the points it made. If that’s inaccurate I apologise.
#cancelBobbyManc
Hoist by my own petard. When I voted for the Cancel party, I never thought they’d cancel me
Nobody was calling her racist. There’s accusations that she has fallen into the trap of Orientalism that lots of Western writers do when depicting Asian characters.
Not on this thread, but I've seen a few tweets calling her racist because of her depiction of the Gringots bankers and Cho Chang.
So you're arguing this without even knowing whether what you're stating is actually correct? Come on...
I’d seen that a poem that went viral from an East Asian girl mentioned this so I naively assumed it to be true. Nevertheless, you can Google for yourself Orientalism and Rowling and see there are plenty of evidenced articles critiquing this aspect.
The ‘Cho Chang is said to be Chinese but it’s a Korean name’ was a mistake which I should have looked into, but it does not mean the other criticisms regards Orientalism are any less valid. It just means I’ve made a tit of myself.
I wouldn’t agree with that. These things are more a reflection of the society we live in than anything else - we will all have imbibed racist or problematic stereotypes and ideas to some extent. Even if it’s true that she falls into racist tropes, I would not personally wish to label her a racist just on that basis. It depends how well-established these tropes are, and if she is challenged on this and dismisses it or continues to perpetuate them in future writing.
She's a terf. To them the worst thing in the world is male-to-female transformation. Think religious nutters outside abortion clinics, racists and the likes. Terfs are the same in their niche.
This isn't anything new, Rowling has been tweeting things like that for years.
Terfs are themselves often gay. There's a movement within the LBGT+ community to remove the T.
she's been very careful to stick to a line where she can deny she's being anti-trans people (sually liking other people's more open tweets), she crossed that boundary with the recent ones.
Rowling never mentions religion in her Potter books because it's all about witches and muggles so there's no room left for religion in that story. At least that's how I saw it when I read the books. It's also make believe so anyone getting too wound up about the various characters is a bit
I have done, and to be honest, it's pretty lame. Rowling's writing is prolifically lazy across the board, so why highlight this specific aspect? I mean, if we are to take her writing with any degree of seriousness, then she depicts British schools as absurd places where the facility routinely place their students in mortal danger; the headmaster actively encourages Harry to join a bizarre elitist group run by someone with strong perverted tendencies, while it appears at no point do any of the children learn even basic English and Maths. Not to mention no one seems particularly bothered that Harry's parents make Danny DeVito and Rhea Perlman's performances in Matilda look saintly by comparison.
The top result complains that the Japanese school name mentioned in Fantastic Beasts translates to 'Magic Place,' while far more thought is put into the whimsical names of the western schools. If the author of that piece had bothered to do half as much research as she is accusing Rowling of lacking, then she wouldn't have listed 'Beauxbatons' as an example of this division, seeing as it translates to beautiful baguettes/sticks? But then, as you freely admit, you have only read one book she had written, and the primary complaints about orientalism don't even relate to that book, so you don't have any real basis to qualify the complaints about her writing.
Last edited:
i was heavily downvoted on reddit (is that a cancellation) about a year ago for saying that phrases explicitly referring to menstruation to identify a group of people are demeaning, especially if the context has nothing to do with mesntruation. reducing a person to their bodily function. and there is ongoing discrimination in india and other countries against women especially during their periods.
in this context the article she quoted was referring specifically to menstrual products, so for me it's borderline. i still don't like the phrasing but i can see why it's useful.
the problem with her is that this tweet isn't something in isolation but part of a number of tweets where she seems to doubt the possibility of transgenderism.
this is from that reddit thread (none of these are my post)
in this context the article she quoted was referring specifically to menstrual products, so for me it's borderline. i still don't like the phrasing but i can see why it's useful.
the problem with her is that this tweet isn't something in isolation but part of a number of tweets where she seems to doubt the possibility of transgenderism.
this is from that reddit thread (none of these are my post)
Last edited:
Rowling never mentions religion in her Potter books because it's all about witches and muggles so there's no room left for religion in that story. At least that's how I saw it when I read the books. It's also make believe so anyone getting too wound up about the various characters is a bit
It’s self-inflicted from Rowling though, no one would be criticising her lack of representation in a fantasy novel if she herself had not started to make all sorts of claims after publication (Hermione could have been black, Dumbledore is gay, loads of Jewish wizards there etc).
I was going to post about the folly of confusing a writer with their fiction but felt it'd become like the Xylophone Ribs controversy in the Itchy and Scratchy Show.
Do it anyway. I dares ya.
I'll spare you all the boredom of reading it.
Anyway, it's only a general point so it doesn't necessarily apply to JKR and her writing.Well I'm sad. I'm going to bed sad. You hear? I hope you're happy!I'll spare you all the boredom of reading it.
This thread is best left to people who know what they're talking about, mate (i.e. not me).
True. And the people asking those questions of her need to get a life, if indeed that's how a lot of this information came out. If it's her, without prompting, then it deserves even less attention, if that's possible.
Honestly it's way more flawed than you think because it presupposes that rape is simply an inevitable side effect of male/female contact which is insane. This argument is rooted in myth that most rapists are strangers who jump out of toilet cubicles when in reality it they're often someone known to the victim. When it comes to violent assaults of any kind, trans people are statistically more likely to be the victims and not the perpetrators.
Last edited:
Everyone's telling on themselves today and it's equal parts amazing and terrifying. Do better guys.
Why would I need to "tell on myself"? I've already got several posts explicitly stating that I think "cancel culture" and the politics of actively seeking to be offended is a load of bollocks.
If you'd like to come down off your high horse and tell me why that would be wrong, I'd welcome that.
Keep going sweetie, you're doing great!
I mean, or you can double down on being smug and sanctimonious if that's what makes you feel better.