Imaginary problems.
Medieval legends are full of knights slaying dragons. But we must ask ourselves a question: why should a knight try to kill a living being that has scales like anvils, spits flames and has a shit character? The answer is very simple: because dragons don't exist.
The invention of the imaginary problem, therefore, is not a novelty in history: the Persians were probably not what the Greek chroniclers painted, nor were the Spartans what historians paint, but it doesn't matter: even exaggeration of an enemy all in all at the limit of his projection capability is an easy way to gain easy glory. Defeating a real enemy, on the other hand, is a very different thing.
You understand now why Labor in England is so raging on the problem of transgender women. And understand why the Italian TERFs are following: they may focus on the fact that there are entire parties that propose to beat them to death, and whose voters are known for beating up lesbians and feminists, but those beating them. Better focus on the dragon.
Before talking about it, we need to make some parentheses. Rowling raised the issue of transgender women invading the women's restroom to rape and kill women. OBVIOUSLY, the fact that this is the plot of his mystery book, and that this controversy makes him sell more, IS RANDOM.
The second parenthesis is: how many cases of transsexual women entering women's public restrooms to rape and kill them? In Italy, zero. In Germany, zero . In the UK, zero.
That is, it is a dragon problem: it does not exist. And that's why solving it will be simple: if you can imagine a dragon, you can imagine that a knight killed it. Done.
Finally, let us ask ourselves: why are there so few cases of transsexual women who enter women's bathrooms taking advantage of their appearance, and then rape and kill there?
Well, it's simple: the transition from male to female consists in suppressing testosterone, which is one of the main culprits of violent aggression, and THE main culprit of SEXUAL aggression.
If we compare the decline in sexual aggression in the path of transsexuals to the so-called "chemical castration", we discover that for several reasons (chemical castration does not last long, and is easily reversible), the collapse effect of sexual aggression in women trans is practically four times stronger. This is because it is a therapy that lasts much longer, which has much stronger physical effects, up to a reduction in the size of the penis and testicles.
This collapse of sexual aggression explains why the number of transsexual women who rape other women is literally zero.
After all, the TERF solution is absurd. First, they derive the word "real woman" with some biological parameters. Including chromosomes (i.e. excluding that 1 per thousand of women who have XY because the SRY gene is not activated), having a vagina, which apparently must have menstruated (and possibly on the metro, says Michela Marzano here: https://www.repubblica.it/cultura/2022/06/09/news/dibattito_identita_genere_corpo_donna_sesso-353205046/ )
It seems to enunciate a sacrosanct truth… but. Meet "Buck Angel" who has two X chromosomes, having been a porn actor (after transition) left little doubt that he had a working vagina. And as if that weren't enough, given the age of her transition, we can be sure she felt the thrill of menstruation. I don't know about the subway, but having an account on twitter, Marzano could well ask him. He is polite and normally responds politely to anyone who asks questions politely.
There are many similar examples:
All the people in the photos have XX chromosomes, so they are "biologically" women, they have a vagina, they've had the thrill of menstruation. For statistical reasons, I would include the metro thing.
If you have any doubts:
And now therefore one would ask Rowling, or Marzano, what they would do if they found these "biological women" in the ladies' room.
What are you doing now? According to your definition of "biological woman" these people have to hang around the ladies' bathrooms.
Is your fear of a transsexual using her appearance to enter the women's restroom resolved by letting people who look like a man into the women's restroom?
And how would allowing male-looking people to enter by law would make women's restrooms safer, if I may ask?
The hallucinating paradox of this definition of a woman as "being that menstruates in the subway" is that in the end people would enter the women's bathrooms who every morning shoot themselves on the thighs of frightening pears of bovine testosterone, (with all the aggression, the steroid effect and the resulting sex drive), forbidding entry to people who actually have zero sex drives, and do the behavioral equivalent of four chemical castrations every morning, in pills of testosuppressants.
The feminist is stupid. Maybe that's why he earns less at work?
The point is that the problem of transsexual women walking into women's restrooms and raping / killing women doesn't belong in reality, except in Rowling's book, which is "casually" very involved in the cause. It is not clear whether "the cause" is the sales of his book, or not.
But the problem with inventing a problem that exists only in the book (of one that is famous for fantasy) is that if you invent a dragon, never mind. The dragon is cool: art, fantasy, and all.
But if you force the world to believe in dragons, then you have to answer ALL the dragon questions: What shits a dragon? And what does the male dragon emit in the magical moment? And the females? And what is a dragon "in heat" like? Etc. And you find yourself with all the thermodynamic contradictions of the case.
Likewise, having come up with absurd definitions of people who can enter women's restrooms, Rowling's detective story is okay. But if you force the whole world to believe it and make laws, then you will have to answer ALL the relevant questions.
What exactly do dragons shit?
Ah, yes: the singer of the following song is a man: they are called "countertenor". Transsexuals, at least for once, have nothing to do with it. The world is not as linear as you think.
