427
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 30 Jun 2024
427 points (93.5% liked)
United Kingdom
4114 readers
237 users here now
General community for news/discussion in the UK.
Less serious posts should go in !casualuk@feddit.uk or !andfinally@feddit.uk
More serious politics should go in !uk_politics@feddit.uk.
Try not to spam the same link to multiple feddit.uk communities.
Pick the most appropriate, and put it there.
Posts should be related to UK-centric news, and should be either a link to a reputable source, or a text post on this community.
Opinion pieces are also allowed, provided they are not misleading/misrepresented/drivel, and have proper sources.
If you think "reputable news source" needs some definition, by all means start a meta thread.
Posts should be manually submitted, not by bot. Link titles should not be editorialised.
Disappointing comments will generally be left to fester in ratio, outright horrible comments will be removed.
Message the mods if you feel something really should be removed, or if a user seems to have a pattern of awful comments.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Transphobes are half the reason we got rid of downvotes over here. They’re simultaneously blowhards and too cowardly to speak.
Have you considered making an effort to be a person they would like to speak with?
They should make the effort to be worth talking to.
That works both ways.
It really doesn’t.
I disagree.
As is your right.
lmfao, who the fuck cares who TERFs like to speak with? I don't like speaking with TERFs, all the better if they don't speak to me.
@TheDoctor@hexbear.net
How about being a compassionate human being who tries to understand the conversation partner's fears without bowing down to misinformation? If that's not enough for them because they see debunking their bunk as personal attack, I don't think anyone from outside of their cult is an acceptable conversation partner for them.
That works both ways. Everything you've said could be seen as applying from the perspective of either party.
Yeah, everyone is the hero in their own story, so from their perspective, they surely feel like they know things until they meet an actual biologist challenging them.
TERFs invoke half-remembered high-school level biology as if it was mathematical fact. In actual biological reality, nothing is binary or absolute. I don't need a PhD in computational biology to know that, but if surely helps.
I'm curious (perhaps against my better judgement) what you think a biologist could tell Rowling that would challenge her?
We could maybe give people like her a glimpse into the sheer defiance that nature has against all attempts to fit into tiny categorical boxes.
It's not just the topics that she doesn't understand (especially the intersection of gender with endocrinology and neurology), but everything.
If you are a biologist and think you have found a rule that applies to some part of biology, you will feel deeply uncomfortable until the inevitable exceptions start cropping up that tell you that while the theory is still statistically sound, it's not unnaturally strict and therefore plausible.
Obviously trans people exist and are valid. Thinking otherwise would be ignoring mountains of biological patterns and data that tell us that every binary in biology isn't actually clean-cut.
To be clear I'm asking what you think a biologist could tell Rowling that would challenge her. You seem to be saying that a biologist could tell Rowling that biology is fuzzy at the edges. What makes you think this would challenge Rowling?