But the people trying to boycott the game couldn't leave it at that. They bullied and doxxed streamers just for enjoying a game without gender politics.
Because of perceived slights they resorted to becoming actual bullies.
We have come full circle.
JK is a 70's-era radical feminist who's always been a little transphobic (that was the era, everyone was) but in this decade got sucked into the feminist-lesbian-to-TERF pipeline and dug her heels in when people started calling her out for it. Ever increasing levels of escalation on both sides later she's weirdly become the most prominent transphobe in the English speaking world and throws her weight behind hate groups like the LGB alliance. She even got a shoutout from Putin for it which is kinda funny.
This is no way whatsoever justifies being mean to someone playing a video game but it's not hard to see how we got here. We live in a world where absolutely horrible people are so completely insulated from the consequences of their actions that the people who are harmed by them are pretty much powerless to do anything and have nowhere productive to direct that anger and frustration. In a less civilized time a mob would have shown up to her house with pitchforks years before it got to this point.
Given these facts, can you really not understand why people see that sentence as transphobic? It doesn't accurately describe our social landscape, and it hurts some of the more vulnerable among us.
What usefulness do objective facts and the truth hold?
>It is true that in our society some people who you'd socially describe as men are able to get pregnant
That is not true at all. It's actually a gross inversion of the truth, a foundational feature of Big Lies. There are trans-men, who are actually women, that may get pregnant, but they're by definition not men. They are human females, AKA women. No amount of cross-dressing and body mutilation will change that.
>because they have biologically female sex organs
Yes, they're women. Glad we agree.
>We also know that following their social wishes (i.e. referring to them as men) dramatically increases their quality of life.
"We also know telling schizophrenics that the coffee maker IS indeed an evil demon and removing them from the office will dramatically increase their quality of life."
No, feeding into delusions will not increase their quality of life.
>Given these facts
"Given the fact that the coffee maker is a demon".
>can you really not understand why people see that sentence as transphobic?
"can you really not understand why not believing that coffee makers are demonic is schizophobic?"
>It doesn't accurately describe our social landscape, and it hurts some of the more vulnerable among us.
It does accurately describe our social and biological landscape. If biological realities, truth, and objective facts hurt "the most vulnerable among us", it sounds like they have a mental illness.
No they haven't, and you don't need to be doctor to know that.
>I know that doesn't matter to some people, but a lot of us do care.
Lot's of people care about factually incorrect things that go against narratives for sure.
> No they haven't, and you don't need to be doctor to know that.
Do you have studies that indicate this, or do you just believe this to be true? The latter part of your response strongly points towards one side, but I'd like to give you the chance to send any contrary data, if you have it!
> That is not true at all. It's actually a gross inversion of the truth, a foundational feature of Big Lies.
Please read what I write carefully. I specifically said "socially describe". Do you walk through your whole life checking the genitalia of any person you interact with to make sure you refer to them by their biological pronouns? Or do you rely on social cues (e.g. their looks, outfit, hair, voice and so on) and assume their gender? I really hope it's the latter.
Now please read my earlier response again with the correct understanding of what the words I type mean.
>> We also know that following their social wishes (i.e. referring to them as men) dramatically increases their quality of life.
> "We also know telling schizophrenics that the coffee maker IS indeed an evil demon and removing them from the office will dramatically increase their quality of life."
> No, feeding into delusions will not increase their quality of life.
Can you show me studies that indicate this? I don't care for what you believe, I care about data and studies.
>> Given these facts
> "Given the fact that the coffee maker is a demon".
>> can you really not understand why people see that sentence as transphobic?
> "can you really not understand why not believing that coffee makers are demonic is schizophobic?"
Next time make sure not to go overboard with mocking the other person, or at least wait until you've made sure you understand them correctly. Since you fully misunderstood the opening of my earlier response this reaaaaally makes you look bad.
So look, I don't know, I obviously fall on one side of this issue but disagreement on it is more American than apple pie at this point. The idea that certain kinds of speech manifest in real life harm is the basis for hate speech laws around the world.
I'm just gonna quote Germany's legal code because they distill what hate speech is better than I could. "Assaults the human dignity of others by insulting, maliciously maligning an aforementioned group, segments of the population or individuals because of their belonging to one of the aforementioned groups or segments of the population, or defaming segments of the population." In my view you can only say "la la sticks and stones" up until the point where all the dehumanizing speech turns the political tide and the cultural forces that keep people from wantonly harming particular groups fall apart and we get articles like
* 2022 - https://reports.hrc.org/an-epidemic-of-violence-2022
* 2021 - https://reports.hrc.org/an-epidemic-of-violence-fatal-violen...
* 2020 - https://www.hrc.org/resources/violence-against-the-trans-and...
* 2019 - https://www.hrc.org/resources/violence-against-the-transgend...
* 2018 - https://hrc-prod-requests.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/files/a...
It's really depressing they can fill one of these articles out every year.
Also, 44 GNC or trans people were murdered in 2020 and I'm supposed to be concerned? How do we know they were killed because of their identity?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2021/09/09/pimmelgate-g...
What has she done to become the most prominent transphobe in the English speaking language?
This is the same woman who made Dumbledore gay to appease Twitter. Retconned characters to different races to appease Twitter.
What she took issue with was women being labeled as 'birthing person'.
I can see how we got here, and claiming either she or the game causes people real world harm isn't disingenuous, it's outright lying.
They also called her a literal nazi ti the point the BBC had to apologize after she had enough and sent lawyers after them.
Twitter isn't real.
That aside, I find it interesting that you're honing in on JK Rowling. If speech really does cause violence, then lots of speech is causing violence, including speech with which you agree. It seems notable, then, that you're going after speech with which you disagree. Makes me think the whole "speech causes violence" argument is a ploy to attack speech you dislike.