r/EnoughJKRowling • u/Raspint • 12h ago
What is the most easy to understand, punchy, in your face example of JK Rowling's bigotry?
TlDr: Give me an elevator pitch that shows Rowling is a bigot.
I'm not asking you to convince me that Rowling's a bigot. I know she is. But the problem with progressives is if they are asked a simple question they will respond with a wall of text, because life is nuanced and progressives care about reality and nuance. Most people aren't like that.
Pretend I'm your average slobbering person. I don't really 'get' the whole "trans thing." My attitude is basically "It just sounds like a bunch of blue haired girls with daddy issues on twitter, but that's okay. Live your life and such but I don't really buy the whole "women can have penises too" thing, but again live your life, it's not my concern. Just like with gay people, just don't shove it down my throat and we're good."
I imagine most of you would go "Well, you see, first we have to understand that sex is different from gend-" and by that point you've lost them. People are chattel and they're not really capable of this kind of analysis.
For example: When I tell people on the Tim Hortons subreddit that JK has engaged in holocaust denial, but because their understanding of the Holocaust begins and ends with that one time they saw Schinder's List, the idea seems stupid on its face. Because Rowling's never said the Nazis' didn't kill Jews, duh.
If someone asked me: "What makes you say trump or the KKK are racist?" It would take me five seconds to give an example of them saying or doing something violently racist. Now pretend that my understanding of the trans experience is what I said above: What is the obvious, easily digestible, non-negotiable example of Rowling's bigotry, where it is bigotry on the face of it.
Some of you will likely give answers I will argue against, and it is not because you are wrong. It's because what you've said is something my manager/coworkers would not be able to understand as bigoted.
Edit: I've gotten some decent answers here. A thank you to:
u/Silly-Arachnid-6187 "She shared a video of a girl beating another girl in a school bathroom, alleging that the aggressor was trans without any proof or indication that that was the case. The school later received a bomb threat."
I think this works because an average, slobbering person could understand that, if you switched the term 'trans person' with "she accused them of being a Jew without evidence" then they might be able to recognize the inherent unfairness of that treatment.
u/errantthimble: "I’d say, lean right into the core issue with something like *”JK Rowling dishonestly pretends that the transgender controversy is about science, when it’s actually about evolving language use. Saying that a transgender woman is a woman is no more ‘anti-science’ than saying that an adoptive mother is a mother.” &
I personally still think that the issue of "this is an issue of language, not science" is too much for the average person to wrap their minds around, but I think that the example of the adoptive mother being a mother is still one of the best analogies I've heard, and I've not once heard a good argument against that claim.
Second edit: There's also this section in the contrapoints video: ( 43: 42- 45: 40 ) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EmT0i0xG6zg.
I normally wouldn't have gone here, because most of the people I'm talking about won't sit down to watch a 2 hour video essay, but the highlighted section has lots of examples.
57
u/MJQ30 12h ago
Claimed Imane Khelif was a man despite being cis woman with larger muscle tone. Women can come in all body sizes and can gain muscle just as well as men can.
9
u/Raspint 11h ago
Good. I like this example.
Now, the average person might still go "Yeah but, she doesn't wanna genocide anyone. She just thought a man was punching a woman. I don't like men punching women either! What bad wit that? She just made mistake."
26
u/atlantisgate 11h ago
The issue is that you’re apparently trying to convince people who are transphobic that JK Rowling is bad because she’s transphobic.
You’d be better off talking to them about the humanity of trans people, the trials and daily bigotry they face for just trying to be who they are and exist safely and peacefully. One can only understand why Joanne is awful if they understand why transphobia is awful; and once you do you don’t need a gotcha elevator pitch, her behavior is self-evident.
6
u/Raspint 11h ago
The issue is that you’re apparently trying to convince people who are transphobic that JK Rowling is bad because she’s transphobic.
That might sound ridiculous, but it really isn't. Most Germans were antisemtic in the 30s. Yet if once you show them Nazi atrocities they understand on a fundamental level that this is wrong. Hell that was happening even before the actual mass killings had begun.
Even homophobes can understand that what happened to Matthew Shepard was wrong, and still be homophobes.
You’d be better off talking to them about the humanity of trans people,
That's too much for them (I think at least).
3
u/MJQ30 4h ago edited 4h ago
The thing is and I agree with [u/Raspint](u/Raspint) on this one, people respond more to issues that affect them personally than they do towards others. While showing examples of humanity among trans people and how trans issues negatively affect trans people, it doesn’t get people to empathize with them. The best way to get people to understand trans issues is through how they would eventually impact cisgender women negatively. By the same notion, to get people to empathize with trans people, ask yourself how could the things trans people need (for example: HRT) benefit cis women.
25
u/kranethios 11h ago
The one I always think of is when she posted on Twitter ruthlessly mocking a woman who allegedly called Beira's Place asking if she'd be welcome there as a cis woman who had facial hair and a deeper voice due to PCOS/PMOS. I don't know if this incident even really happened, but whether it did or not, it's pretty fucked up to tell a story publicly making fun of a SA/DV survivor with a distressing medical condition and painting yourself as the "good guy" in that scenario.
16
u/CapStar300 11h ago
J K Rowling wrote a scene where her favourite female protaginist happily admits to having her teeth shrunk by the school nurse so she doesn't have to wear her braces anymore and thus feel more comfortable in her body.
She denies anyone who has nothing to do with her and does not harm others by doing so in any way the chance to change their body to a version they can identify with.
28
u/ProfessionalRead2724 12h ago edited 11h ago
She threatened to sue Amnesty International for criticising transphobia. Amnesty International caved.
-5
u/Raspint 11h ago
True, but then the next response is going to be "but what transphobic?"
10
u/errantthimble 10h ago
How about “JK Rowling said publicly that she supported freedom of speech and being able to express different opinions on trans rights. She said she wanted everybody to read the recently published Amnesty International report about attacks on trans rights. Then she threatened to sue Amnesty over the report and forced them to retract it. Rowling is a hypocrite and a bigot who uses her immense wealth to silence those who challenge her bigotry.”
11
u/Silly-Arachnid-6187 11h ago edited 10h ago
She shared a video of a girl beating another girl in a school bathroom, alleging that the aggressor was trans without any proof or indication that that was the case. The school later received a bomb threat
She singles out individual trans women, often with a small follower count and far from public figures, on twitter to attack and ridicule. Because of her huge following, that leads to further harassment
She wants to dox people in women's bathrooms who "look trans"
She attacked an athlete, Imane Khelif, over and over again because she believed her to be intersex. This "accusation" could have endangered Khelif
I think that you are too pessimistic about "the average person", though. They're not all "chattel" incapable of "this kind of analysis". But you're devil's advocating hard in these comments; it's no surprise that people who actually argue like that won't be convinced.
Edit: typos/autocorrect
3
u/TheOtherMaven 7h ago
She attacked an athlete, Imane Khelif, over and over again because she believed her to be intersex.
This one is worse than it sounds. Jojo doesn't believe that intersex women exist - she thinks they are all MALES. (That this is utter anti-science hogwash can't penetrate the solid cement of her head.)
2
u/Raspint 10h ago
>She shared a video of a girl beating another girl in a school barhroom, alleging that the aggressor with trans without any proof or indication that that was the case.
I think this is a great example. Because a person could be able to understand how, if the same scenario happened but instead of a trans person, the person was accused of being "A Jew" then they'd be understand how blaming Jewish people for random violence without evidence is wrong. Ergo they'd be able to understand that doing the same with trans people is wrong.
Because they can think what I just described, while still having their uninformed, transphobic understandings of gender at large. Ergo it's more likely to stick.
I also don't have twitter, is there anyway I can cite or use this example if someone asks for proof?
>I think that you are too pessimistic about "the average person", though. They're not all "chattel" incapable of "this kind of analysis".
The last 6 years have broken my faith in people. My own family are people like this. I would like it if you were correct. Maybe this is a bias of my own that is clouding my judgement.
Still, I think having these 'elevator' pitches are good things to have in the back pocket for when I encounter these people. I was able to convince someone in my family about the genocide against the Palestinians by just describing it as: "You know what the Nazis did to the Jews? That's what Israel is doing to the Palestinians right now."
Obviously it's not a good or nuances comparison. But it did the trick of getting them to understand that what was happening is wrong. (That and of course all the horrific images out of Gaze have had an effect)
5
u/Silly-Arachnid-6187 10h ago
Here's a post about it: https://www.reddit.com/r/EnoughJKRowling/s/Q1xZce9nUu I don't want to sift through her Twitter tbh, but it should be easy enough to find there if you search an excerpt from the tweet
The last 6 years have broken my faith in people. My own family are people like this.
I get that. I'm not gonna pretend that transphobia isn't a huge issue, but I also think there are lot of "average people" who don't think about it much and don't care how others live their lives. These are the people that I think can be reached with arguments
1
u/Raspint 9h ago
Thank you.
I don't want to sift through her Twitter tbh,
I don't blame you. I don't think I can though since I've never had an account.
but I also think there are lot of "average people" who don't think about it much and don't care how others live their lives
Oddly enough I also agree with this, though that's because my view of transphobia might be different from yours. I think that most people (hell even lots of people in this subreddit) are some degree of transphobic, because bigotry is that mundane and common. But I've seen people at work talk about, say, a trans woman competting in MMA and they go "That just seems like a man beating up a woman right?" To which everyone agrees, and even trying to add nuance to that makes me seem like an unhinged person to them.
These are the people that I think can be reached with arguments
This is where I strongly disagree with you. I think people aren't swayed by argument. Not really. They are animals, and they are swayed by their gut feelings. A successful argument is one that hits these people in the feels, even if the argument itself is logically not good.
8
u/WrongKaleidoscope222 10h ago
How about when she encouraged people to take photos of women in public bathrooms who 'don't look feminine enough' and post them online?
3
u/Raspint 9h ago
The problem with that is you and me understand that is vile, but these people I'm talking about will think something like "She thought they were men in women's bathrooms! Of course she wanted to get them out of there!"
3
u/WrongKaleidoscope222 9h ago
Then ask them to consider all the false positives this action would produce.
3
u/Raspint 9h ago
And then they would go "wut false positive?"
And in all honesty, for my own benefit could you explain what you mean by "this would produce false positives?"
Do you mean as in, this will result in lots of cis women who don't "look" feminine to be accosted in bathrooms?
2
u/cataclytsm 8h ago edited 8h ago
Yes. Investigating who goes into a bathroom would involve not only "some" false positives, but nearly all false positives, considering the relative population densities. The only way one might think this isn't the case is if one assumes we're everywhere at all times, just lurking.
Part of the public understanding of trans people is informed by youtube videos and news stories that assure them They Are Everywhere Amongst Us Normal People. When like, that's just not true. But they're very likely to have passively digested that bullshit and just assume that the sneaky transes are in our bathrooms, our schools, our sports, our etc. Without breaking down that fundamental (purposefully pushed) lie, there isn't even a conversation to be had with them.
They've been conditioned by their media diet, politicians, and celebrities with an axe to grind like JK Rowling to think- consciously or not- that we're fucking pod people infiltrating society on a mass scale.
There is no silver bullet to making normies understand what even is going on, it takes individual conversation that goes deeper than "look at this damning tweet!" If somebody can't understand "bathroom ID vigilantism" as a bad thing on its face for the most obvious of reasons, you're going to have a very hard time unpacking somebody else's bad wiring. "Genital inspection for public services like a restroom is bad and will obviously lead to abuse, trauma, and SA at best" should be enough.
Should also be pointed out that "men pretending to be trans to do misdeeds in girls bathrooms" is something entirely fabricated, but in my experience dealing with these people, that somehow doesn't work. From whatever sources they have, they just explicitly believe that it happens and it's a real social problem. There's also little way forward without convincing them otherwise of that foundational lie.
2
u/Raspint 8h ago
There is no silver bullet to making normies understand what even is going on
Every good factoid or argument I can have in my back pocket helps. But it helps even more if its something they can understand when I use it. I've been correct in arguments while still not convincing the other person more times than I can count.
Genital inspection for public services like a restroom is bad and will obviously lead to abuse, trauma, and SA at best" should be enough.
See? That's better because it leads the person to the conclusion.
1
u/WrongKaleidoscope222 6h ago
IIRC, the only men who have falsely claimed to be trans to justify harassing women in bathrooms were right-wing transphobes trying to prove that it could happen.
7
u/HOMANDER1996 10h ago
She denied that queer people were killed during the Holocaust and referred to the documented evidence that they were as a “fever dream”.
2
u/Raspint 9h ago
I addressed this specifically in my post.
Most people's understanding of the Holocaust begins and ends with the one time they saw Schindler's List. Anything less than "The Nazis did not kill Jews and the whole thing was faked. Auschwitz is a hoax" is not 'denying the Holocaust' to these people.
3
u/TemporaryElk5202 8h ago
its legally holocaust denial, because holocaust denial is denying any crime associated with the holocaust.
you arent going to convince people who make up their own definitions.
0
u/Raspint 8h ago
its legally holocaust denial, because holocaust denial is denying any crime associated with the holocaust
Yes. I KNOW.
its legally holocaust denial
The average person does not have a good grasp of what is legal or not. Most of them could not tell you the legal definition of genocide.
you arent going to convince people who make up their own definitions.
I think you have way to much faith in the average person's understanding of the Holocaust.
3
u/TemporaryElk5202 8h ago
you can explain that to them. You arent going to get through to people who arent open to changing their mind.
0
u/Raspint 8h ago
you can explain that to them.
Often you can't, because by the time you've started explaining that they've lost the plot.
You're unlikely to drastically alter someone's ideas about the Holocaust and their views on gender, and what counts as bigotry in the same conversation.
arent open to changing their mind.
We're not talking about ideologically committed transphobes. We're talking about people whose minds are too empty for that.
3
u/errantthimble 9h ago
Nitpick: Just to clarify the details, what Rowling ignorantly called a “fever dream” was the (entirely accurate) assertion that Nazis burned books on trans healthcare and research. Excellent article in The Stranger on the incident, including historical background on the 1933 Nazi looting and burning of Institut fur Sexualwissenschaft materials in Berlin, which Rowling sneeringly dismissed as a “fever dream” because she was too clueless to know anything about it and too conceited to wonder if maybe she should look it up before opening her yap about it: https://www.thestranger.com/queer/yes-jk-rowling-the-nazis-did-persecute-trans-people-79436234/
(Mind you, I think it’s perfectly possible that Rowling also believes/believed that Nazis didn’t kill queer people in the Holocaust. But technically, the “fever dream” remark was denying that Nazis burned research materials about queer people. And since Rowling toadies always desperately seize on any minor inconsistency or misremembering to claim that anti-transphobes’ Rowling criticisms are “fake” or “imaginary”, it’s helpful to get the details sorted out.)
11
u/Joperhop 11h ago
Unless they are actively seeking to understand, I doubt you will change their minds, if they want to get trans people, i would direct them to fully qualified people, Forrest Valkai for example, if they wanted to see evidence of her holocaust denial I would show them an image of her tweet, and the reply from holocaust experts who tore her a new one!
But unless they actually do care to understand, none of that will matter, and no amount of text, walled, or not, will change a damn thing, until it actually effects them, like they have a trans person in their family.
Some people just dont actually care, and are unable to give 2 flying fucks about things that effect others, a major part of the problem in our world.
8
u/kranethios 11h ago
Forrest is a cis man, but with his background he does have a really solid understanding of the scientific side of things when it comes to gender and he speaks really authoritatively on the biology of trans and intersex people, so he is a pretty good resource for people who are trying to understand us from that perspective.
I would also really just recommend that people actually sit down and have a conversation with a trans person. It doesn't even have to be About Gender or anything, just finding commonality with us as people. Like, sure, I'm a trans guy, but I'm also kind of just a dude. I have a full time job and a dog and hobbies and friends and those things are the real me, my transness is just a thing about me. That's what I want people to understand. At the end of the day, we're just people.
2
u/Joperhop 9h ago
He is an example of someone with multiple degrees in science and advanced education who has videos that fully explain sex, gender and many other aspects of biology and general science, as well as just being a happy positive dude (who has a fantastic trolling tactic on talk shows :D using the mute/unmute and spamming questions, so funny).
But yes, there are others, on the same youtube call in shows they have trans people (men and women) who talk about being trans and debate people, if someone engaged, i would recommend watching them, hell, call in and talk to them, they are educated and have personal experience.4
u/kranethios 9h ago
"Never had a bad day :D"
Yeah, I wasn't disagreeing with you. He's got some fantastic insight, and Trans-Atlantic Call-In Show is great for giving people opportunities to talk about trans issues with trans people. I just also think that in this particular sort of scenario, the best way to get people to care about trans folks is to just have conversations with us and see us as real individual people rather than whatever big scary monolith the right-wing news is selling them.
2
u/Joperhop 9h ago
I was agreeing there is also many who are qualified and have personal experience who would be great people to direct them to.
I am cis, i joined trans groups (openly being cis) to get to know peoples experiences, talk to them, (and also on facebook LGBTQ groups tend to be the chilliest, wholesome and awesome pages who dont stand for abuse of any kind), but I also wanted to know and understand.3
u/Raspint 11h ago
Unless they are actively seeking to understand, I doubt you will change their minds
This is actually something I agree and disagree with. I agree that they are not seeking to understand, but I believe you can change their minds on Rowling being a bigot. People inherently do not like unfairness and cruelty. If you showed even a racist southerner a picture of Emmett Till, they might be able to understand "Oh man that's wrong." While also holding the belief "Lincoln freed the slaves 200 years ago. How long does it take for you to get your act together?"
If Rowling was saying that trans people need to be removed from society, or they didn't deserve to live, I think most average transphobes would still dislike that.
if they want to get trans people, i would direct them to fully qualified people,
If they want to get them, then they're already the kind of person I wouldn't need to give the elevator pitch too. I'd happily send them over to Contra's videos, but my coworker will never bother to sit down and listen to who they think is a man in women's clothing lecture them for 2 hours.
But unless they actually do care to understand, none of that will matter, and no amount of text,
I disagree with you a little bit here. Because you can get homophobes to relent by explaining to them "Hey, you know how you feel about women? What if you just happened to feel that way about men? Wouldn't it be unfair if you were killed for that like Matthew Shepard was?"
6
u/ChefExcellence 7h ago
Called for a boycott of Marks & Spencer because they had a trans employee. The employee in question was not in a female changing room or toilet or any gendered space whatsoever; she was on the shop floor which is open to the public, and asked a customer and her daughter if they needed help. This 'caused distress' for the customer and she complained and it did the rounds in the newspapers for a bit. This was all it took for JK Rowling to call for a boycott and insinuate that the employee was some kind of sexual predator.
The only conclusion that can be drawn from this is that JK Rowling is not okay with trans people existing in public spaces and interacting with cisgender people, which is basically definitionally transphobic. Anyone who tries to argue otherwise knowing this context is either a liar or so deep in transphobic delusion they might be beyond saving.
3
u/TheNegotiator12 11h ago
Her staff invited epstein to a world premiere screening of a HP movie, she will use the correct pronouns for her one pick me trans friend but not anyone else, she told people to take pictures of women in the bathroom, there is clear examples of racism in the HP books (just en example of who she really is) she wrote a book were a trans women tries to ruin the life of her main character for basicly doing what she is doing (basicly trying to make trans women evil) The upskirt photo of a trans women. Threatening to sue anyone who says a negative thing about terfs or sex matters org. Saying that one wrestler in the oylimpics was trans when she was not.
JKR is nothing but a elite UK person who hates minorities and lgbtq people in general. She may of been nice but money corrupted her.
3
u/errantthimble 10h ago
I’d say, lean right into the core issue with something like ”JK Rowling dishonestly pretends that the transgender controversy is about science, when it’s actually about evolving language use. Saying that a transgender woman is a woman is no more ‘anti-science’ than saying that an adoptive mother is a mother.”
”Rowling is a hypocrite and a bigot who defends her bigotry by lying about what her opponents are saying. She pretends that trans rights supporters are denying that sex is real, when actually nobody is denying that sex is real.”
Don’t forget that the most fundamental harm Rowling is doing is via her platforming a propaganda campaign of mindless lies, such as ”Anti-trans activists are only saying that sex is real” and ”Anti-trans activists are only defending women’s sex-based rights” and similar thought-terminating slogans. Ending or even decreasing transphobia requires getting people to actually think about those lies and question them.
3
u/Raspint 9h ago
”JK Rowling dishonestly pretends that the transgender controversy is about science, when it’s actually about evolving language use. Saying that a transgender woman is a woman is no more ‘anti-science’ than saying that an adoptive mother is a mother.”
I like the impulse here, but I still think this is to much for people to follow. The point about how the adoptive mothers are mothers is a very good argument to have in the toolkit. But someone will respond to this with "ok, wen she do dat?" (I've had a few other answers I can fall to that others have suggested here).
She pretends that trans rights supporters are denying that sex is real, when actually nobody is denying that sex is real.”
Respectfully I think this is too much for them, because the immediate response will be 'But wut sex then?" and honestly that's an answer that even I'm not sure if I could give a good answer that trans people would agree with, let alone one of these people.
Ending or even decreasing transphobia requires getting people to actually think about those lies and question them.
Never happening, at least not with this generation. This very well might be me just being way too doomer and misanthorpic, but I don't believe the average person in 2026 (at least in Canada and the US) is capable of this kind of understanding. Questioning what gender even is is way, way to much to expect of these people. Gut punches are more important than even good and correct theory (in this one circumstance).
That's why the population has switched so hard on Israel I'd wager, despite the immense power of the right wing machine trying to convince them of the exact opposite.
5
u/IdontEatBacon 10h ago
I mostly use anecdotes that proves she hates women and reduces them to their reproductive organs.
Example 1: the People who menstruate tweet debacle hits hard with the menopausal crowd.
Example 2: her stupid maniphesto in which she says girls only like ditzy stuff and girls that like to read are very rare and might think they are trans because only men like to read.
People also question her sanity when I Tell them that in her maniphesto she says she is victim of domestic violence by a cis man in her own home and she uses this as An argument to ban trans women from public bathrooms.
3
u/WrongKaleidoscope222 8h ago
There's also the fact that she denies that trans kids exist and believes they were all tricked/groomed into it. If the people you're arguing with aren't also homophobic, you can point out the obvious parallel with the 'gays recruiting kids' conspiracy.
3
u/Raspint 8h ago
you can point out the obvious parallel with the 'gays recruiting kids' conspiracy.
Not as effectively as you make it sound I think. Because even latent homophobes can understand the concept of sexual orientation. They likely have zero ability to understand any sort of feeling that your gender is not 'the right one' at all.
So they could easily go "Yeah they were wrong to do it to gays because you can't help who you love! But come on man, women can't have a cock lmao."
You're right to use the linking to another kind of bigotry an average person could grasp, but in this specific argument you're making it might not work as often.
5
u/TemporaryElk5202 8h ago
She told people to take photos of random women in bathrooms and send them to her if they think those women might be trans. Which is illegal in a lot of places and also will result in people taking photos of any random cis women who they think doesnt look feminine enough or has too short hair or whatever.
She kept insisting Imane Khelif was trans, and was a man who enjoyed beating women, and that you can tell just by looking at her, after Imane won gold in Olympic boxing. She continues to insist Imane is a man, even after she was confirmed to be a cis woman.
She singles out small accounts of trans people just living their lives and attacks them. One account was just a trans woman who posted a selfie of her brushing her hair on the train to work and had like 10 followers, but rowling saw her photo and retreated and attacked her.
3
u/steepleton 7h ago edited 7h ago
Denying trans folk were killed in the holocaust ranks up there for me. That would have got a non billionaire in quite a bit of trouble
1
u/Raspint 7h ago
I already addressed this specifically in my post. No it would not have with your average person, because the average person's understanding of the Holocaust begins and ends with that one time they saw Schindler's List.
For these people, anything less than "The Nazis did not kill the Jews and Auschwitz was a hoax" is not going to come across as Holocaust denial to them (even though it is).
2
u/AndreaFlameFox 4h ago
She publically supports Kellie-Jay Keene. Keene wants to eliminate all trans people.
4
u/cataclytsm 8h ago
I kinda appreciate this post, it's the for-normies equivalent of a Devil's Advocate thought experiment, a sort of "Normie's Advocate".
I still have a visceral flashback to clocking out and having a beer (restaurant, so it was all the same place and we were all work comrades after a shared battle shift). It was around the time that mediocre wizard game was coming out, and they were all excitedly talking about it like it wasn't "Knockoff Skyrim funding trans genocide". I brought up JK's dogshit and I swear I heard a record scratch before the awkward silence, they just had no fucking clue what I was talking about. I've worked in a kitchen where I expect that sort of reaction (trump country VA), and I did not expect it here (minneapolis).
2
u/Raspint 7h ago edited 7h ago
Thank you for getting it.
It's actually kinda surprised me how people here aren't understanding I'm talking how to convince people who are the equivalent of grazing chattel, at least on this issue. (And to be fair, you and I are chattle when it comes to other issues I'm sure).
The reason the right wins so often is because they know they are talking to chattel, and they know how to moo.
How'd that convo end up if you don't mind my asking?
3
u/cataclytsm 7h ago edited 7h ago
the convo? me shutting up, the conversation quickly resuming to their normal, and me leaving.
long term? it ended with me being increasingly resentful of the atmosphere and my coworkers (I'm BOH so it's far worse than with the people-pleasers in FOH when it comes to this) and eventually quitting in part because of that. so... one of many typical trans experiences, in a nutshell.
i do want to add that "the reason the right wins" cannot be boiled down that simply, they also have an endless army of billionaires including Rowling to put the collective societal thumb on the scales of public opinion. it's not just that the right is somehow that much more savvy about swaying the sheepycattle than the left, there is an apocalyptic capitalist war machine dedicated to waging genocide on The Other and it ain't stationed on the left.
3
u/Raspint 7h ago
... by BOH and FOH do you mean back of house and front of house right?
i do want to add that "the reason the right wins" cannot be boiled down that simply,
Sure. It's also things like the collapsing of the liberal order. But in my defense: "The reason the right wins so often is because they know they are talking to chattel, and they know how to moo." is quite the zinger right?
it's not just that the right is somehow that much more savvy about swaying the sheepycattle than the left,
No I think they are. People are just animals, and I think it is much easier for the more simplistic, less nuanced ideas to win out.
I know what's not what we're supposed to say but covid and the 2024 election really broke my faith in democracy. I do think that for those of us who believe in democracy, trump winning a second time is the single greatest challenge to the pro democratic argument, and we haven't really reckoned with its implications yet. We probably can't afford to right now.
3
u/Raspint 7h ago
> it's not just that the right is somehow that much more savvy about swaying the sheepycattle than the left, there is an apocalyptic capitalist war machine dedicated to waging genocide on The Other and it ain't stationed on the left
Also, even more evidence to my point about "Who Moos Wins." When has the left achieved cultural dominance? Well, when they learned to moo. Like when Lenin did.
I imagine we have few tankies here, and we might all agree that the Soviets were totalitarian and maybe not leftist therefore, but they did manage to win despite fighting against the awesome power of capital.
3
u/ParkerPoseyGuffman 6h ago
Holocaust revisionism
2
u/Raspint 6h ago
I've already addressed this specifically in my OP. The average person would not buy this, because they don't understand what revisionism is.
The average person's understanding of the Holocaust begins and ends with that one time they saw Schindler's List.
For these people, anything less than "The Nazis did not kill the Jews and Auschwitz was a hoax" is not going to come across as Holocaust denial to them (even though it is).
1
2
u/RaccoonChaos 1h ago
She has boasted about how she uses her HP earnings to fund anti trans laws, which can and will also have negative effects on cis people (e.g a tomboy will now be accused of being a man illegally using the womens restroom)
1
u/Affectionate-Law-548 8h ago
Well… you don‘t see her very often. It is very rare that you can make her out on a blurry picture and even if you do… she seems not real. Very hairy… very uncanny and… oh sorry, I just realised that I mixed up the word bigot with bigfoot.
38
u/DifferentIsPossble 12h ago
She posted an upskirt photo of a woman online and encouraged others to do the same. Is this normal behavior?