Ok, semi-serious suggestion. JK Rowling writes under the name Robert Galbraith. This is using a male persona and socially transitioning. As such, she is a trans man and should be banned from all bathrooms under the recent ruling.

You could 100% ban this Sex Matters activist from using the toilet, on the basis that she’s “presenting as a man” by having short hair and not wearing makeup.

🤦 christ, these fucking people. Gender nonconformity freedom for me, but not for thee.

She legit said in an interview that she wishes she could have become a man. So she has a male alter ego and acknowledges a past desire to transition. Soooo....

The "closeted phobe" trope is true way more often than it should be, sigh. Like, I am not saying JKR would be happier/less awful living her whole life as Robert Galbraith, but I do think she'd be happier/less awful if she had a more examined and secure relationship with that part of herself.

she only sees trans people as imitators to access female spaces because she pretended to be a man to make harry potter successful

I don't think she is trans, I think she had a similar experience to me. I was a tomboy who used to wish I was a boy. But in hindsight it was purely because I had figured out being a girl really sucks sometimes and I know my dad really wanted a boy. (1/2)

As I got older I learned I loved being a woman I just women were treated better. And I learned how that experience was different from the experiences of trans men by _listening_ to trans men, but unfortunately Rowling likely won't get to that step at this point. (2/2)

IMO a certain generation of non-conforming AFAB people formed their female identity by struggling against the constraints of the "female" social role. In that mindset, trans men are "traitors" taking the easy way out, and trans women are "appropriators" who can never understand what it was like.

They fear trans identities as a reification of the narrow binary "male" and "female" social roles that oppressed them, and as a weakening of the limited protections they carved out from the harmful impacts of those roles (e.g. "women-only" spaces).

What they don't see is that full trans freedom is really about the freedom to make gender into whatever each individual wants it to be for themselves, or even to dissolve it into nothing at all. It will break us all free from oppressive gender roles if we let it.

Like, it's incredibly freeing to just completely not give a shit about anybody else's genitals unless we're fucking or procreating or I'm their caregiver. If somebody wants me to call them "she" or "he" or etc, it's just politeness; why on earth would it matter to me what's in their pants?

But TERF types have spent so long caught up in an oppositional framework that they can't just chill the fuck out like this. They'd have to re-conceptualize their entire lives in order to make chilling out possible, and that's terrifying, so they violently reject it instead.

I think if she was actually trans she would pick a different name instead of basing it off of the inventor of conversion therapy

Since so much of transness is about internal self-perception, I would never call someone trans if they don't call themselves that. But I think it's pretty clear that she has often not been fully comfortable with all aspects of the gender role she understands society to have assigned to her.

And she doesn't seem to have developed a secure, self-grounded way of managing that discomfort. Instead of just fighting for the right to do her own gender the way she wants to, and treating other GNC people as comrades in arms, she just tries to make her vision of gender the new One True Faith.

Oh, I’m not saying she doesn’t absolutely have gender dysphoria, I’m just saying that in the better, alternate reality where she’s out and trans, her name does not take inspiration from a dangerous bigot.