theJaw wrote:> Well JK Rowling does suck on a human level. Acknowledging garbage behavior =\= taking
> offense.
For the life of me, I don't understand why there is any controversy here. She didn't say anything hateful. I think some super sensitive and ultra-woke people twisted her words and claimed she hates trans people, which never actually happened, and then people around the world just read and believed that she is anti-trans.
Here is what she ACTUALLY said...
When speaking about biological women, she referred to them as "people who menstruate". Then, after some backlash, she went on to clarify:
“If sex isn’t real, there’s no same-sex attraction. If sex isn’t real, the lived reality of women globally is erased. I know and love trans people, but erasing the concept of sex removes the ability of many to meaningfully discuss their lives. It isn’t hate to speak the truth. The idea that women like me, who’ve been empathetic to trans people for decades, feeling kinship because they’re vulnerable in the same way as women—i.e., to male violence—‘hate’ trans people because they think sex is real and has lived consequences—is a nonsense.”
“I respect every trans person’s right to live any way that feels authentic and comfortable to them. I’d march with you if you were discriminated against on the basis of being trans. At the same time, my life has been shaped by being female. I do not believe it’s hateful to say so.”
Where is the "suck on a human level" and "garbage behavior" in those quotes?