can you stop mocking christianity, it's so soo reddit

JK Rowling does not follow any form of feminism because feminism must include transwomen. Not to mention that she has directly, openly, aligned herself with Kelly J Keen who has repeatedly, without any hesitation, stated a desire for the death of transwomen. Her bestie Kelly has also openly allowed proud boys to speak at her events, endorses known antisemitic conspiracy theorist, and has gone on record to say she was willing to sell abortion rights to prevent legal adults from transitioning. . Rowling has also outright denied the burning of trans medical research and persecution of transgender people during the Holocaust. She has donated large sums of money to For Women Scotland who are ravenously anti-trans. She has dismissed ideas of discrimination with statements like "I would march with you if you were discriminated against on the basis of being trans." She has equated gender reassignment to conversion therapy. If you are defending her I know none of this matters to you but I wish this to be a known thing for anyone who tries to question whether or not Rowling is "actually just misunderstood."

Ignoring your own source where she has called for men to enter women's spaces arms to prevent what you see as "men invading your spaces" I see.

well I don't have to spell out why summarising that as "calling for trans women to die" is misleading as fuck. tho still too chudded out for my taste armed people are gay and self absorbed

JK Rowling does not follow any form of feminism because feminism must include transwomen. Not to mention that she has directly, openly, aligned herself with Kelly J Keen who has repeatedly, without any hesitation, stated a desire for the death of transwomen. Her bestie Kelly has also openly allowed proud boys to speak at her events, endorses known antisemitic conspiracy theorist, and has gone on record to say she was willing to sell abortion rights to prevent legal adults from transitioning. . Rowling has also outright denied the burning of trans medical research and persecution of transgender people during the Holocaust. She has donated large sums of money to For Women Scotland who are ravenously anti-trans. She has dismissed ideas of discrimination with statements like "I would march with you if you were discriminated against on the basis of being trans." She has equated gender reassignment to conversion therapy. If you are defending her I know none of this matters to you but I wish this to be a known thing for anyone who tries to question whether or not Rowling is "actually just misunderstood."

“Everyone around you, those whom you love, whom you hate, who you pass on the street and never see again, the distant stranger who you will never speak with, even the countless dead who came before you and the multitudes of those yet to arrive all have the same level of interiority as you have” is, I believe, the core ethical axiom and yet I’m not sure it’s possible to fully appreciate this, or at least outside of passing sublime moments

not true! you're not gonna convince me a novels and philosophy reader and a college graduate has as little interiority as the millions upon millions of virtually illiterate medieval peasants let's alone modern people whose access to those things don't push them to use them

imo the way you feel about groups it's fully socially acceptable to hate (like children or polyamorous people, among others) is the canary in the coal mine for underlying bigoted beliefs. if you're only supportive of marginalized groups when it's cool to do so, probably you don't actually care about marginalized groups, you care about other people thinking you care

like the social justice version of 'are they nice to the waiter'

imo the way you feel is completely immaterial. You don't have to personally like children in order to be supportive of their rights and invested in their safety and just treatment.

can i dislike trans women in general if I'm still supportive of their legal rights

On thought experiments: some of my most frustrating experiences in graduate seminars have been carefully constructing a thought experiment to provoke the relevant intuitions or highlight the relevant normative or descriptive features that I am talking about, only for my interlocutor to contrive some way of missing the point. And then you keep chasing your way up this tree where you restrict by further specification and they contrive some new way of missing the point. And you try to say "Surely you can see I can just keep adjusting the cases until you confront the intuition that I am actually trying to get you to address" and they say "I don't understand. It's about the deflationary thing that explained the first case." And you try to say "That might have worked five cases ago, but I have really been nailing down any way you could misconstrue this and you seem to be intentionally misunderstanding the cases." But eventually the instructor tells you to wrap this up and you decide that the person you're talking to is just stupid.

you're llm prompting a human at this point

I saw a terf say that the majority of the world's problems are caused by the fact that men want to have sex more than women do. of course this is a perfect example of terfs' bioessentialism, "tail wags the dog" view of gender, wholesale acceptance of misogynist myths, etc. however my first thought was just "can you speak for yourself?"

actually love the government and love the corporation. the people are the enemy

sometimes i stumble upon an account on this app that is just so hateful and miserable and spreading so much negativity and misinformation and i just watch it like a car crash