Cancellations

padraig (u.s.)

a monkey that will go ape
This is so vague as to be meaningless
he's either arguing in bad faith or - the more I see, the more I believe - from a place of surprisingly thorough ignorance

gender-affirming in this case obviously refers to the affirmation of individual gender identity, which is the opposite of a stereotype
 

constant escape

winter withered, warm
Don't wanna put words in the mouth of @Benny B , nor do I necessarily agree, but I read that as saying that gender is largely/entirely comprised of the kind of social codes/behaviors that have come to define normal power relations regarding gender.

I think we can all think of at least some aspects of these codes/roles that we wouldn't want affirmed, no?
 

boxedjoy

Well-known member
I would speculate it's deliberate, the choice of pseudonym. There's enough to give it a veil of plausible deniability but someone who has spent the last year actively boosting their public persona as committedly transphobic stumbling upon the name of a conversion therapy supporter, hmm
 

Mr. Tea

Shub-Niggurath, Please
Staff member
Sorry, I'm not an 'intellectual powerhouse' like padraig.

I mean social roles which are imposed on us.
And where so those roles come from? They vary greatly from culture to culture but they weren't imposed on us by aliens.

Please tell me you're not going down some "No inherent difference between men and women" route...
 

padraig (u.s.)

a monkey that will go ape
gender is largely/entirely comprised of the kind of social codes/behaviors that have come to define normal power relations regarding gender
no one here, I'm pretty confident, would disagree with that

the point is that "affirming" here isn't affirming that, at all

it means affirming an individual's idea of themself

it affirms "I am a woman [or man]" or not "this is what what a woman is"

a very obvious distinction to anyone who has the remotest familiarity - which some people, tbf, do not, and that's a not a mark against them
 

constant escape

winter withered, warm
gender-affirming in this case obviously refers to the affirmation of individual gender identity, which is the opposite of a stereotype
But isn't the whole point behind social-construction theory that an individual's particular gender identity is informed by, and constantly grappling with, stereotypes? Constantly trying to maneuver between expressions to find the best fitting one? What category do I fall under, and what damage could be done if I am incorrectly/sub-optimally categorized?
 

boxedjoy

Well-known member
Rowling has stated her belief that trans women should be excluded from public spaces due the potential of them to commit sex crimes. Which is nonsense. It would be like me doing a four year undergrad in economics so I can work at a bank until I become the manager and then commit fraud. It isn't going to be worth the effort.

Rowling is afforded a respect and legitimacy of her stance, because she is rich, successful and famous. Her social circles are former prime ministers. Her career is based on publishing success which would suggest in the eyes of everyday people a degree of intelligence and ability, ie all of this nonsense she spouts has a level of influence. So to see her get challenged on this and called out for it I think is essential. She has the freedom to hold those beliefs and espouse them, I have the freedom to believe she needs to fuck off back to the regressive world she crawled out of with them.
 

constant escape

winter withered, warm
One's particular identity may not be reducible to stereotypes, but stereotypes are, to some extent, self-fulfilling in that they propagate and evolve through the landscape of social behavior, no?

Could be that my understandings of some of these terms aren't well enough calibrated to the mass conversation. Between semantic and ideological signal error, we've got enough to keep combusting for millenia.
 

padraig (u.s.)

a monkey that will go ape
isn't the whole point behind social-construction theory that an individual's particular gender identity is informed by, and constantly grappling with, stereotypes
sure, we all swim in the same sea

but see my last post

it's one thing to say everyone's identity is informed by the constructs of gender, race, sexuality, etc

it's another, different thing to say that affirming an individual's identity is an affirmation of everything about those constructs
 

constant escape

winter withered, warm
So to see her get challenged on this and called out for it I think is essential.
And your point about her influence is apt as well. I think its perfectly reasonable to change the standards/rules of expression when such a degree of influence is in question. In what ways? Not sure. Perhaps just being more critical.
 

vimothy

yurp
let us get away from the word "offended", please, first off

the issue isn't whether or not I like Robert Galbraith Heath

it's that he was a pioneer of gay conversion therapy, a thoroughly discredited pseudoscience that has done serious harm to many people

if she knowingly picked a name in homage to him - which again, I don't say she did - it would be a serious problem

imagine an author with a history of dubious comments about Jews choosing the pen name "Aribert Heim"
yeah but "Robert Galbraith" is hardly so distinctive. wouldn't it be a bit odd, from a motivational point of view, if jk Rowling was deliberately picking this name in order to make herself seem more reactionary and intransigent?
 

constant escape

winter withered, warm
it's one thing to say everyone's identity is informed by the constructs of gender, race, sexuality, etc

it's another, different thing to say that affirming an individual's identity is an affirmation of everything about those constructs
Ah, I see - I didn't grasp that in your previous post. Because not everyone registers and incorporates stereotypic codes into their own identity the same way. Think that clears things up for me a bit.

edit: this difference among incorporations of stereotypes could be responsible for the mutation of stereotypes over time, no?
 

boxedjoy

Well-known member
I simply don't believe the person who wrote a seven-series, thousands of pages series of novels, with consistent internal logic and a clearly mapped endgame narrative structure, doesn't know what she is doing when she picks that name then becomes the Twitterati terf icon
 

boxedjoy

Well-known member
Ah, I see - I didn't grasp that in your previous post. Because not everyone registers and incorporates stereotypic codes into their own identity the same way. Think that clears things up for me a bit.

edit: this difference among incorporations of stereotypes could be responsible for the mutation of stereotypes over time, no?
One of the things I say about my own queerness and masculinity: I may not understand football or Nuts magazine or Lynx Africa or lots of other traditional male signifiers, but it took balls to be this fabulous growing up in a small town in the West of Scotland
 

constant escape

winter withered, warm
Is her PR damage largely limited to the trans-exclusive/trans-inclusive feminist sphere?

edit: not sure how clear that is. Rephrase: Is her PR damage limited to certain sects of feminism?

Then again, with the actors speaking out against her, the damage is quite likely beyond such boundaries, no?
 

padraig (u.s.)

a monkey that will go ape
not everyone registers and incorporates stereotypic codes into their own identity the same way
that is true, but it's more than that

an AMAB person becoming a woman isn't an affirmation of the entire social construct of "woman"

(AMAB = assigned male at birth, AFAB = assigned female at birth, before someone asks. they're useful acronyms to know here)

it's part of this bizarre line of reasoning that trans women are somehow harmful to cis feminism simply by existing and asking to be included

or, that's where it always ends up if you follow it through, as we did with the "people with cervixes" thing a few pages back
 

vimothy

yurp
I simply don't believe the person who wrote a seven-series, thousands of pages series of novels, with consistent internal logic and a clearly mapped endgame narrative structure, doesn't know what she is doing when she picks that name then becomes the Twitterati terf icon
but what's the point of it? deliberately annoy ppl?
 

boxedjoy

Well-known member
At this point she is basically trolling. She's fallen so far down the trans-exclusionary rabbit hole that it makes sense. Remember, this all kicked off on a Saturday night at midnight during a global pandemic when she decided that was the best time to start sharing this with her millions of online followers. She is, to use a technical term, Absolutely at it
 

padraig (u.s.)

a monkey that will go ape
wouldn't it be a bit odd, from a motivational point of view, if jk Rowling was deliberately picking this name in order to make herself seem more reactionary and intransigent?
idk. @boxedjoy is more confident of it then I am but I wouldn't rule it out.

she's, as noted, obviously massively wealthy and influential, maybe she just doesn't give a fuck - haha fuck you haters trolling

it's not like she's suffered any real consequences for anything outside of social media, which doesn't impact her wealth etc

you asked two things tho: 1) did she do it deliberately? 2) leaving motive aside, why is it a problem?

the second question is more important than the first
 
Top