[ SECRET POST #6873 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #6873 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.


01.



__________________________________________________



02.



__________________________________________________



03.
[Cronos: The New Dawn]



__________________________________________________



04.



__________________________________________________



05.
[Quartet]



__________________________________________________



06.



__________________________________________________



07.




















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 07 secrets from Secret Submission Post #981.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

This is anti logic.
JKR is a bad person because of her beliefs and the movements she funds with her revenue, not for "killing" a fictional animal for dramatic effect.

[(Anonymous)]

I think the word choice makes this read more tongue-in-cheek than all that serious.

(frozen comment)

[(Anonymous)]

She believes, rightly, that in an environment where you have to take someone at their word when they say "I'm actually a woman," predatory men will take advantage and be able to more easily enter spaces that give them access to women and girls.

I don't know what's going to have to happen to make people like you understand that. Perhaps the only thing that will is having a frightening encounter with one of these individuals, but I doubt even that will sway you. I imagine you'll be like those weirdos a decade ago who said that we shouldn't teach women to defend themselves because their assailants will just go and attack someone else, so really shouldn't they take the hit instead of being so selfish?

(frozen comment)

[(Anonymous)]

Men can enter those spaces right now with no problem, no trans issues needed.

(frozen comment)

[(Anonymous)]

AYRT

If a man enters a women's locker room, a female-only naked spa, a female-only domestic violence shelter, or a female-only hospital wing, he will be kicked out. If a man enters either of those spaces and declares that he's actually a woman, it becomes much harder, and in some cases impossible, to kick him out. If a man requests to enter a woman's prison, he will not be allowed, because he's a man. If a man declares that he's a woman and then requests to enter a woman's prison, then he may very well be allowed to enter. And so on.

It's not that it's impossible for men to break decorum and enter places that are only supposed to be for women; it's that, when we all agree on what a man is, and don't take his word for it if he says that he isn't one, there's a way to eject them once discovered. If men cannot be questioned once they enter, then they have the run of the place.

I would also argue that taken to its logical conclusion, the "but people do it anyway" argument is an argument against having laws.

(frozen comment)

[(Anonymous)]

There are, in fact, many laws that prevent anyone from being a creep or predator in public or private spaces. None of them have to involve sleuthing out a person's chromosomes. Are you being a creepy weirdo? You get the boot. Are you attacking people? Congrats, you get jail! Are you just minding your own goddamn business and respecting other people's personal space? No problem.

As a cis woman and man-hating lesbian, I genuinely do not give a single fuck who is in what space, as long as they're being chill about it. It's why we're able to have mixed-gender nude beaches, bathhouses, saunas, and hell, nudist colonies. I've never understood why people get mad about bathrooms when I've never once had a burning desire to know what's happening in any other stall.

(frozen comment)

[(Anonymous)]

nayrt

Should I assume all cis women are creeps because of frightening encounters I've had with cis women? I've had bad experiences with trans and cis people, my takeaway from that is that some people are creeps and will take advantage of whatever they can to hurt others. That doesn't apply to the majority of people of any gender identity.

(frozen comment)

[(Anonymous)]

AYRT

No, you shouldn't, but this illustrates part of the problem, right? You assume that I'm talking about trans people in general, rather than men who pretend in order to take advtange. The conversation has been muddied to the point where people cannot tell the difference between the two, and often don't believe that the second group even exists, despite there being plenty of cases demonstrating that they do. JKR's issue has been with the latter group, and her warning all along has been that, in order to guard against the latter group, you can't just take people at their word; you have to be able to vet them. Those who argue against vetting are suspect.

(frozen comment)

[(Anonymous)]

TIL that the various meanings of “scale” in English are actually from very different derivations.

Oh, and that evidence suggests COVID has had a significant effect on people’s linguistic associations with words like “strain” and “wave”.

(frozen comment)

[(Anonymous)]

She believes, rightly, that in an environment where you have to take someone at their word when they say "I'm actually a woman," predatory men will take advantage and be able to more easily enter spaces that give them access to women and girls.

You're right, this was the main concern she initially espoused, and I feel like it's a distinction that was immediately lost or overlooked, back in 2020. Back then, her stance was never, "Trans women are a danger to women." It was, "Het men who want to harm women will use trans-inclusive laws to gain access to women's-only spaces," and yet so many people at the time clearly took her to mean the former and not the latter.

Unfortunately, I think JKR has been significantly radicalized since 2020, and is probably way more actively, deliberately trans-hating now than she was back then.

I also don't agree with her on what she actually did say, way back then. The way I see it, people who want to harm others will find ways of doing it. Not being legally permitted to enter a women's bathroom is not going to stop a cis man from harming a woman if he has it in his head to do so. But prohibiting trans women from using women's-only spaces absolutely will put them at significantly greater risk of harm.

(frozen comment)

[(Anonymous)]

+1000

(frozen comment)

[(Anonymous)]

tbh I agree she's become more radicalized but her initial point was worth a conversation about. How people took her words wasn't what she said, for that brief moment of time, and I always thought that original sentiment was the more interesting one than the transphobia people jumped to at that time. Some people ARE actually creeps who will take advantage, and that's just a fact.

(frozen comment)

[(Anonymous)]

"Het men who want to harm women will use trans-inclusive laws to gain access to women's-only spaces" was also, to be clear, always actually about trans women, because that was what transphobes did and still do believe all trans women really are. There were some people who took the talking point in good faith and really did believe real trans women also existed and were harmless, and JKR may have been one. But in order to believe both can be true at once, you would also need to be ignorant about the real trans people you were passively fine with.

(frozen comment)

[(Anonymous)]

AYRT. You're making a lot of assumptions about what I believe.
I disagree with modern gender politics a lot, but her cokeranting on Twitter and sucking up to right wing men makes her a loser in my book. I initially sympathized with her when she was "cancelled" and started being more open, but things went south fast. I'm tired of this slippery slope.

(frozen comment)

[(Anonymous)]

If, and it is a big if because I don't believe it is, what you are suggesting is actually happening, what is the solution? Send trans women to mens rooms where they will be harassed and assaulted? Or check everyone who is going into the restroom to make sure?

Any time people try to fix this supposed problem, or similar ones like trans women in sports, it ends up hurting cis women as much or more. Cis women are being told they must be trans just because they happen to have one particular feature that looks more masculine or have higher testosterone or something. And all cis women are being reduced to their body parts. I am a cis woman, and I take offense at the idea that I'm defined by my hormones or sexual body parts.

(frozen comment)

[(Anonymous)]

First off, cis men who are predators are going to just walk in, they aren't going to dress as a woman to do it. There are almost no credible stories of this happening.

Second, the fact that the same people worried over trans women at the same time would be horrified if trans men went into the women's room puts their claims as open lies. But then again, these people like to pretend trans men don't exist, because trans men make it obvious that nothing they say is true.

(frozen comment)

[(Anonymous)]

+100

(frozen comment)

[(Anonymous)]

Yup. Cis male predators aren't even punished as harshly for being predators as normal non-predatory trans women are just for being trans women.

(frozen comment)

[(Anonymous)]

Ah yes, so why even bother locking your doors if a criminal can just break a window to get in and rob you anyway?
Transmen are women. If they choose to put themselves at risk by using men's spaces, that is their problem. Transwomen are men and men are a risk to women. Men should stay out of women's spaces. But the social contract that enforced that has been broken for the sake of the mentally ill and fetishists. Well done.

(frozen comment)

[(Anonymous)]

"I imagine you'll be like those weirdos a decade ago who said that we shouldn't teach women to defend themselves because their assailants will just go and attack someone else, so really shouldn't they take the hit instead of being so selfish?"

I remember those conversations, and I find it fascinating that your takeaway was "people said they should take the hit themselves" and not the actual conclusion of "isn't it fucked up that we're essentially focusing on training women to Not Be The One That Gets Hurt instead of fixing the society that allows women to be hurt so often?"

(frozen comment)

[(Anonymous)]

If that was what those messages were intended to teach, it's really not a smart person's fault for not picking that up. The tweet I saw of it was horribly worded and definitely put the blame on the girl defending herself.

It's not even accurate either way, because most assault is targeted at a specific person, and if she manages to fight the guy off he's more likely to give up then and try again with her another day than go and find another girl. She, the individual, is his target, not "any girl I can find because I'm just dying to fuck RIGHT NOW."

(frozen comment)

[(Anonymous)]

Hm. Sometimes I wonder why FS is so much quieter these days, and then this kind of anon shows up and reminds me.

(frozen comment)

[(Anonymous)]

Honestly, don't even bother trying to convince these people. NOTHING will convince them. We have actual rapists being allowed to pretend they are women and getting placed in women's prisons. Risk assessments performed during this process are on the risk to the *rapist*, not the women they are being placed with. We have murderers, rapists, child predators and other violent criminals who were already pretending to be women when they committed their crimes going in there too. If that doesn't convince people this is a load of bunk, nothing will. No amount of careful wording, long explanations, or personal anecdotes will do the job either. Somehow these useful idiots have become convinced that men are more vulnerable than women; that their emotional pain, feigned or otherwise, is more important than that of multiple women and girls. Just a single woman saying "actually, I'm a kind and good person and am OK with this (so anyone who isn't is an inhuman monster)" makes it acceptable to ignore every other woman saying she isn't OK with it and un-persons those who object. They rewrite the meaning of words and think that changes reality. 2+2=5, and anyone who says it's 4 is a bigot, and you can do anything to a bigot and it doesn't count as violence. Words are violence though. Seriously, make it make sense.

(frozen comment)

[(Anonymous)]

We have actual rapists being allowed to pretend they are women and getting placed in women's prisons. Risk assessments performed during this process are on the risk to the *rapist*, not the women they are being placed with. We have murderers, rapists, child predators and other violent criminals who were already pretending to be women when they committed their crimes going in there too.

Source?

(frozen comment)

[(Anonymous)]

We have actual rapists who don't pretend just walking in and you'll ignore that because it doesn't fit your "women are uwu defenseless beans who need pwotecting fwom the big scawy menz who are pure evil always and forever" mentality