Play gamepass on ipad6/16/2023 There are nuances to be discussed about the inclusion of trans women in certain, very specific spaces, but a blanket exclusion is indicative of a relatively poor understanding of biology. If, however, trans women are women, as is the position of many, then she's just galvanizing more people to suppress a subset of women. She fairly up-front about her belief that they are fundamentally not women as well, and that they shouldn't have access to the same spaces other women are in. People who would force themselves into spaces like that are not going to wait on some government "thumbs up" to do so.Įssentially, she believes that trans women aren't women. She also thinks that "male-oriented bodies" will use the bill to assert themselves further into women-only spaces. Inherent to the bill was a path to legal gender reassignment without prior surgery or hormones - which JKR stated would (paraphrasing for brevity) "provide protections of those who've had full sex reassignment surgery to intact males." Largely disregarding the bizarre use of the term "intact male," - a veterinary term for a non-neutered animal - it's clear that JKR thinks that trans-women who've not yet gone through surgery do not deserve the legal protections normally afforded to women even if they've been presenting and living as one. ![]() ![]() ![]() Thu 16th Feb Sure, primary and most obviously overt example is her support of protest against Scotland's at-the-time new inclusion law that would allow people who can provide evidence of living as their preferred gender for 3 months.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |