Jump to content

Bette Midler turns into Jk Rowling, post transphobic tweet


Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

 

Edited by DONTYELLATME

  • Replies 643
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Headlock

    90

  • Communion

    54

  • Brando

    26

  • Bey Admired

    24

Posted

She made a point though. The term "birthing people" is so extra, and nobody uses it outside of the internet. It's like the term "Latinx", which was invented by White SJWs on Twitter, and most Latinos refuse to use it in real life.:skull:

Posted

I don’t think Bette Midler is anywhere near JK Rowling.

 

Her tweet is obviously more in the context of Roe v Wade and bodily autonomy. I think you can still protect women and trans people together. 
 

Gay men definitely need to be careful with misogynism. Women and Queers need to tackle the real enemy - the straight man!  

Posted

I mean… calling women any of those terms is offensive :rip: 

Posted

She has a point. Those terms are dumb and not needed

Posted (edited)

I don't see an issue? Have I overlooked something?

Edited by ontherocks
Posted
Just now, Brando said:

She has a point. Those terms are dumb and not needed

those terms arent dumb, erasing trans people is dumb 

trans men for example might go through the same problems that better midler is complaining about and and they arent woman and shouldnt be called like that and also shouldnt be excluded from the group of people hurt by this decision 

Posted

that is nothing like jk :deadbanana2: and shes not wrong. those terms are ridiculous 

Posted

#imwithher

 

sick of the disrespect towards women, they have dealt with a lot in this country for centuries and it’s only getting worse… again

Posted

I’m pretty sure this is in regards to roe v wade… maybe it comes off as exclusionary but I think context is important here and it wasn’t intentional, just an oversight and a bit of ignorance in wording. 
 

Now if she does come out more explicitly as transphobic I will be heartbroken… the same way I have been over JK and her ruining if my childhood love in HP. Bette don’t ruin Hocus Pocus 2 for me :chick3:

Posted

The only people who have any kind of problems with what she said are the people who literally never get off Twitter for 2 minutes and stay being offended by just about anything :rip:

Posted
3 minutes ago, kyliefever2002 said:

ttrans men for example might go through the same problems that better midler is complaining about and and they arent woman and shouldnt be called like that

You’re apart of the issue with statements like this.

 

the level of delusional is just unreal to me.

Posted

She's right :clap3:

Posted

People losing it in her quotes when she didn’t say anything wrong. 

Posted

I have to agree with her on this! 

Posted
5 minutes ago, Mistah.Beyonce said:

You’re apart of the issue with statements like this.

 

the level of delusional is just unreal to me.

you thinking transphobia is excusable means youre apart of the issue baby :rip: 

literally why would you wanna exclude trans people from a fight thats also theirs :skull: 

Posted

Trans men and gender non confirming individuals can give birth, menstruate etc and it really does cost nothing to use inclusive language alongside the word woman/women.

 

It’s got nothing to do with the erasure of womanhood and the female… but acknowledging queer/non cis people as part of the wider conversation is perfectly valid.

 

So many bigger things to get upset over. Go touch grass.

 

 

Posted
10 minutes ago, kyliefever2002 said:

those terms arent dumb, erasing trans people is dumb 

trans men for example might go through the same problems that better midler is complaining about and and they arent woman and shouldnt be called like that and also shouldnt be excluded from the group of people hurt by this decision 

there's no need to erase a term for 99.999% of the population just to sound "inclusive" for some singular cases. 

Posted

Obviously this isn't JK Rowling level ignorance, but I have yet to hear a good argument as to why we shouldn't use more inclusive language when referring to pregnancy. 

Posted
2 minutes ago, Brando said:

there's no need to erase a term for 99.999% of the population just to sound "inclusive" for some singular cases. 

yeah but when youre dealing with a number as high as a POPULATION youre literally talking about a million people

how is a million a "singular case" 

Posted
1 minute ago, kyliefever2002 said:

yeah but when youre dealing with a number as high as a POPULATION youre literally talking about a million people

how is a million a "singular case" 

there's a million trans men in the US? :huh:

Posted

So many just want an excuse to other lgbtq people

 

It’s just inclusive language. Women are not being erased 

Posted
5 minutes ago, kyliefever2002 said:

you thinking transphobia is excusable means youre apart of the issue baby :rip: 

literally why would you wanna exclude trans people from a fight thats also theirs :skull: 

Asking for women to not be referred to as "birthing people" is not excluding trans men :rip: What are you talking about? :skull:

Posted
2 minutes ago, Miichael said:

Asking for women to not be referred to as "birthing people" is not excluding trans men :rip: What are you talking about? :skull:

no wonder the left keeps losing at elections. the far-left completely hijacked all the talking points and shuts down anyone who disagrees with their ridiculous beliefs :toofunny3:

Posted
2 minutes ago, Brando said:

there's a million trans men in the US? :huh:

well even if its 500k, 200k, 100k does that mean that they shouldnt be included? 

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.