The "Cancellation" of J.K. Rowling

[Agema]

Ok oddly I've addressed this argument and I think even this paper before.

1) Dr Verma's research focuses specifically on synaptic connections between sections of the brain. So you can throw out the Gray matter arguments to begin with and the white matter ones. They're not relevant here to the argument their distributions isn't being questioned. Dr Verma's research was just measuring synaptic connections while the Pnas one is measuring matter distrubution.

Yes, but the Verma group, in the process of defending their work, reference things like differences in brain structure or grey/white volume in defence of their own argument of male/female differences. I don't think you can cite their work and then disclude factors that they believe relevant. I would state again, reliance on single papers is a deeply unsafe way to assess science, given that it can pretty much be guaranteed any paper will have shortcomings in methodology, analysis, or other factors, and Ingalhalikar et al (2014) is no exception. There is plenty of criticism which is important to be aware of.

From a scientific perspective, this criticism includes a lack of reference for how much difference there is compared to similarity between sexes, how much overlap there is between male and female sets, and causal link to behavioural differences; this has then led to scientific ethical criticisms that the claims of the authors far outstripped the ability of the work to support, which is particularly unfortunate for a study with significant societal implications.

2) While you can't be 100% sureidentifying a brain it's possible people back then could have had a try because female brains are generally smaller (Note: before people get mad, women evolved before men so are more adapted.

Women and men necessarily evolved at exactly the same time and pace, because women cannot have procreated without men. Also, brain size is generally related to body size, and there is no intraspecies correlation between brain size and cognitive capabilities.

Smaller does not mean less powerful, remember your cellphone can do more than some old computers that used to fill rooms can do so it's about efficiency and so women's brains are likely more efficient)

That anaology really doesn't work because women haven't had an extra few hundred thousand years of evolution to get more advanced brains like 60 years of technology has made computers more powerful in a smaller size.

There's actually an element of truth here, although more in interspecies comparisons. Size pressure can generate forms of efficiency: some animals subjected to evolutionary pressure to stay small often appear to have evolved more genes associated with synaptic signalling. This is theorised to be an alternative way of increasing complexity (thus processing power) where greater brain size is not feasible.

3) The Pnas one you linked to used standard MRI while I seem to remember Dr Verma's using a special kind of fluid resonance MRI system to give a more accurate picture.

That's just horses for courses, not that a horse is inherently better. The technique is relevant to the data to be acquired.

4) Dr Verma's research was original data sets using her own method while the Pnas one is existing standard MRI data sets.

Not really relevant per se.

5) As far as present understanding goes particular areas of the brain light up for specific tasks and communication between those sectors make some tasks easier. Front lobes to back lobes = good for special awareness. Left set of Lobes to right set of lobes = good for emotional intelligence / interpreting emotions (Tests showing these differences are in the video I linked in the OP)

Don't worry, I'm a neuroscientist. I'm pretty familiar with many aspects of brain lobe function, neuronal signalling and neuroimaging already.

 

[Trunkage]

A bit like a driving licence, but for existing.

I think they had triangles for that

I just wanted to clarify for the sake of getting the record straight. I was pretty plugged into the right-wing podcast scene in 2014-2017 and a lot of people where propagating the Pizzagate "idea." And I remember thinking at the time "This is going to blow up in your faces like the Satanic daycare abuses, isn't it?"

I totally would believe that. Just the snippets I get from people I know match with that. The issue is: what could have been done about it? Otherwise, it’s just like thoughts and prayers. A nice gesture that does nothing to help people not die.

And the other issue is: there definitely was a sex ring and the MSM pointed it out years ago. But it was ‘handled’ by people in power. What do we do about that? Making crackpot theories about actual crimes tends to not help

 

[CM156]

The issue is: what could have been done about it?

You mean about people spouting off the Pizzagate conspiracy? Not much, from a legal standpoint. Unless someone called for imminent lawless action.

And the other issue is: there definitely was a sex ring and the MSM pointed it out years ago.

You mean the one with Jeff Epstein? I don't know.

 

[Thaluikhain]

If you force transwomen to carry ID to prove they are women, apart from all the other problems with that, are you going to force ciswomen to carry ID to prove they are women? Cause you'll have to, and it's a terrible idea.

 

[Dreiko]

No, because that's not going to work in this situation, is it?

Point is, birth certificates are already a drivers license just for existing, so you're not trampling any sacred ground by getting another one of those.

 

[Neuromancer]

If only transwomen carry around IDs proving their womanhood, it's gonna paint a big target on their backs. Transfolk are already plenty reviled and abused without having to wave a card that says "I'm trans."

 

[Terminal Blue]

An electronic lock paired with a card reader would help.

Okay, but how do ciswomen use these facilities.

Does every woman have to carry their key-fob at all times to access things like bathrooms? Or are the keys given out by employees and you have to ask for them? If the latter, we're back at the same issue. How do the people handing out the keys decide whether or not someone is allowed to be in the women's bathroom? If the former, that seems like an incredibly invasive and illiberal system that has enormous potential for abuse.

Why don't we just install video cameras in bathrooms (maybe in the toilet bowl) and have some operator watching it constantly. That will make women feel safe.

Point is, birth certificates are already a drivers license just for existing, so you're not trampling any sacred ground by getting another one of those.

A birth certificate is a record of birth, not existence. If your birth is unregistered for some reason, you still exist and can still apply for things like a passport, you just might have difficulty because it's harder to prove where you were born, and thus harder to prove that you're entitled to the rights of citizenship which are normally incurred by being born in a particular country.

The problem with having a certificate for trans people (beyond the difficulty of identifying who a trans person actually is) is that firstly, it's a specific requirement only applied to a section of the population, and secondly unlike a birth certificate it comes with certain requirements that might need you to disclose personal information on demand.

People have a right to privacy, and if a trans person can be asked at any time to disclose sensitive information such as their name, their gender identity or, and I'm going to include this because some people think it's important, what their genitals look like, then that needs to be within the principles of what is necessary in a democratic society. If it's not (and it's very hard, I think, to argue why it is) then you're going to face human rights challenges.

Not to mention the potential for abuse towards trans people which could occur from forcing them to carry or disclose that information.

Or the risk that cis people might be mistaken for trans and denied services to which they are entitled on the basis that they don't have a trans license, which could also lead to legal or human rights challenges.

 

[Dreiko]

A birth certificate is a record of birth, not existence. If your birth is unregistered for some reason, you still exist and can still apply for things like a passport, you just might have difficulty because it's harder to prove where you were born, and thus harder to prove that you're entitled to the rights of citizenship which are normally incurred by being born in a particular country.

The problem with having a certificate for trans people (beyond the difficulty of identifying who a trans person actually is) is that firstly, it's a specific requirement only applied to a section of the population, and secondly unlike a birth certificate it comes with certain requirements that might need you to disclose personal information on demand.

People have a right to privacy, and if a trans person can be asked at any time to disclose sensitive information such as their name, their gender identity or, and I'm going to include this because some people think it's important, what their genitals look like, then that needs to be within the principles of what is necessary in a democratic society. If it's not (and it's very hard, I think, to argue why it is) then you're going to face human rights challenges.

Not to mention the potential for abuse towards trans people which could occur from forcing them to carry or disclose that information.

Or the risk that cis people might be mistaken for trans and denied services to which they are entitled on the basis that they don't have a trans license.

Your birth is no more generated by the birth certificate than your transness would be by its own certificate so if you wanna say that then this applies there too.

If you want to receive special treatment, such as, for example, access to facilities that normally people born with your body don't have access to, you do need to go an extra step. Kinda like how we have special seating and parking spots for handicapped people. You can't just park there if you are on a wheelchair, you gotta go out and get a permit too. Same deal here. You're asking for a special privilege other people don't enjoy by default so you gotta take more steps. The fact that there's an invasion of privacy or threat of harassment angle here doesn't somehow remove your responsibility if you want society to give you special treatment. The solution here is to reduce those other issues, not to remove order.

And do trans people get asked what their genitals look like? Aren't they just asked if they're male or female ones, irrespective of their particular form, which would make it not uncomfortable to describe? Does the length or width ever become relevant? The shape? I find it hard to believe lol.

 

[Kwak]

If you want to receive special treatment, such as, for example, access to facilities that normally people born with your body don't have access to, you do need to go an extra step.

What, the fucking toilet?

Just get over the puritanical attitude to micturation which every human has to do several times a day and make all toilets unisex stalls.
The solutions being proposed are for a problem that doesn't really exist.

 

[Thaluikhain]

Treating transwomen like women is special treatment now? K.

 

[Houseman]

If you force transwomen to carry ID to prove they are women, apart from all the other problems with that, are you going to force ciswomen to carry ID to prove they are women?

Okay, but how do ciswomen use these facilities.

Does every woman have to carry their key-fob at all times to access things like bathrooms?

Yes. It would be like your driver's license. You keep it in your wallet and you carry it everywhere you go. It's your "Bathroom identification card", that proves your gender. It either says "male" or "female". You're assigned one by the government at birth, and you provide a doctor's note and you get a new card if you want to switch genders. It would have a magnetic strip and you swipe it to gain access to a bathroom or locker room.

 

[Dreiko]

What, the fucking toilet?

Just get over the puritanical attitude to micturation which every human has to do several times a day and make all toilets unisex stalls.
The solutions being proposed are for a problem that doesn't really exist.

No, not just toilets in general, I'm talking about the particular toilet designated in a particular way. If it's a gender neutral toilet of course there's no issue.

I also have no issue with gender neutral toilets being a thing either btw. I just think people should be free to say that they prefer them to be separated if they so choose.


Also this isn't just toilets but things like gym changing rooms, pool shower and other stuff like that. Some people are just uncomfortable with the idea of dudes being able to claim they feel like they're girls and get to enter those places. I personally don't mind it at all actually. I come from a country where topless bathing is normal whereas in the US there's an actual activist group about freeing nipples lol.

Treating transwomen like women is special treatment now? K.

Of course it is. In most of the world if some dude that you see is a dude starts telling you he's a chick you'll think he's either joking or crazy lol. Being willing to offer this treatment at all and not just dismiss it out of hand should be something met with gratitude because it is indeed such a rare thing.

 

[Thaluikhain]

Of course it is. In most of the world if some dude that you see is a dude starts telling you he's a chick you'll think he's either joking or crazy lol. Being willing to offer this treatment at all and not just dismiss it out of hand should be something met with gratitude because it is indeed such a rare thing.

Doing the bare minimum to act like a decent human being (or, in this case, not going out of your way to do something) isn't something people should be grateful for, even if it's uncommon. That sounds a lot like "but mum, all the other kids were doing it".

 

[Baffle]

Treating transwomen like women is special treatment now? K.

Yes, it's the same as how we let people with different skin tone vote, just colossal benevolence on our part. No, don't thank us. Well, just a bit. Oh, hang on, getting an update: we need much more gratitude than I'd previously suggested.

 

[Dreiko]

Doing the bare minimum to act like a decent human being (or, in this case, not going out of your way to do something) isn't something people should be grateful for, even if it's uncommon. That sounds a lot like "but mum, all the other kids were doing it".

You're comparing this to an ideal hypothetical society filled with people who are intelligent and educated enough to be able to ascertain what the right thing is. You're not looking at the societies we actually have, ones in which it is a testament of moral character to be able to stand against centuries of tradition and indoctrination in religious thought and other such things, and most of all against peer pressure, because you value being fair just that much. Almost nobody is principled enough to do all this.

I think all things considered this is more than plenty to ask of anyone in this place in time.

Yes, it's the same as how we let people with different skin tone vote, just colossal benevolence on our part. No, don't thank us. Well, just a bit. Oh, hang on, getting an update: we need much more gratitude than I'd previously suggested.

The only reason to feel this way is taking being allowed to vote in a country of a primarily different ethnicity than your own for granted, when that is a pretty new development in human history.

I assure you, if Israel decided to let Palestinians vote in its elections, they'd be incredibly grateful indeed.

Gratitude is something that stems from valuing something. And taking for granted any sort of treatment or privilege diminishes how much you value it.


Just because people should be able to vote, doesn't mean that they always do. In some cases they don't get to. So being grateful that we do is indeed rational. The moment you forget your gratitude you lose a fundamental appreciation for something you enjoy that people had to fight to move human thought forward enough and give you, which should never be lost.

 

[Agema]

What, the fucking toilet?

Just get over the puritanical attitude to micturation which every human has to do several times a day and make all toilets unisex stalls.
The solutions being proposed are for a problem that doesn't really exist.

Whilst I think this is a sensible and obvious solution, I feel sorry for women in a way because an alarming number of men appear to be fucking troglodytes who piss all over the toilet seat and often also the floor (which is pretty astonishing given they have something to aim with), and decline to clean up after themselves.

 

[Trunkage]

Whilst I think this is a sensible and obvious solution, I feel sorry for women in a way because an alarming number of men appear to be fucking troglodytes who piss all over the toilet seat and often also the floor (which is pretty astonishing given they have something to aim with), and decline to clean up after themselves.

Ah... I want none of that either thanks very much

 

[NotDavidHayter]

I can still enjoy Harry Potter while disagreeing with Rowling's views on transgender people. Also, I don't think we should pretend she is a completely bigoted monster either. It isn't as if we found a Klan robe in her closet.

 

[Hawki]

I can still enjoy Harry Potter while disagreeing with Rowling's views on transgender people. Also, I don't think we should pretend she is a completely bigoted monster either. It isn't as if we found a Klan robe in her closet.

Klan robe? No.

Boggart? Yes.

 

[Buyetyen]

Point is, birth certificates are already a drivers license just for existing, so you're not trampling any sacred ground by getting another one of those.

How is it a license if it can't be revoked? It's just a record that you were born. Last I checked, nobody asks for my birth certificate when I walk into a bar.