J.K. Rowling has slammed Doctor Who star David Tennant following his pro trans speech at an LGBT awards ceremony because he said trans critics were a “tiny bunch of little whinging f***ers” who will “all go away soon”. The Mail has more.
After winning celebrity ally at the LGBT Awards for being one of “the community’s most fierce allies and supporters”, the Scottish actor was asked to relay a message to trans youth backstage.
During his interview the Timelord said trans youth should not feel unloved or not accepted as “most people in the world don’t really care”, later adding that opposers would “all go away soon”.
However Rowling has since criticised him, implying he had a lack of concern for women’s welfare suggesting the actor wanted “a lot of people to cease to exist” following his comments.
In particular she appeared to imply Tennant had no concern for women who would like to opt for “female-only” spaces in prisons, at work or in crisis centres.
During the interview, the 53-year-old actor said: “Everyone’s so self-obsessed that really, the sort of noise that comes from a certain area of the press and of the political class is… it’s a minority. It really is.
“And please don’t let that make you feel diminished or dissuaded or discouraged, because, you know, you have to be allowed to be yourself, and you are, and you are yourself and you must thrive and flourish, and we’re all here for you.”
Tennant added: “It’s a tiny bunch of little whinging f****** [that] are on the wrong side of history and they’ll all go away soon.”
Rowling has since responded to his comment on X (formerly Twitter), writing: “This man is talking about rape survivors who want female-only care, the nurses currently suing their health trust for making them change in front of a man, girls and women losing sporting opportunities to males and female prisoners incarcerated with convicted sex offenders.”
Worth reading in full.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
As usual they accuse others of exactly what they are guilty of – it’s actually a tiny minority who go on about “trans rights” (whatever the hell they are).
I’m not sure describing Rowling as a “trans critic” is accurate. My understanding is she just wants to keep women-only spaces and correctly accepts that sex is immutable. I’m not even sure I would call myself a “trans critic”. I think choosing to believe in “gender”, pretending you are a different sex and all of that stuff is pretty mad, unlikely to make you happy, but it’s just a lifestyle choice that has nothing to do with me, as long as they don’t want taxpayers money for it, or extra “rights” that are not enjoyed by the rest of us.
Well all hail the indefatigable JK and all the other sensible people who are on the *right side of history*. Tennant is an outspoken supporter of the child abusing woketard cult, therefore is part of the problem. Basically he is complicit in the abuse of children, vulnerable adults and is no supporter of female sex-based rights. I hope to god he has no female loved ones to suffer his virtue signaling toxic garbage.
Not sure if this has already been shared but this is where we are and it’s appalling;
”A 12-year-old schoolboy has been investigated by counter-extremism officers after he declared there ‘are only two genders’.
The child made a video, posted online, in which he also stated: ‘There’s no such thing as non-binary’.
And in response to school bullies who mistakenly believed he supported transgender ideology, he said: ‘[I’m] gay not queer.’
Originally a homophobic slur, trans activists claim the word ‘queer’ now describes people who don’t adhere to ideas of sex or gender.
But the school told the boy’s mother they would refer him to Prevent, the Home Office programme that attempts to stop people becoming terrorists, amid fears he could be at risk of being radicalised by the far-right.”
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13581155/Boy-12-referred-counter-extremist-Prevent-officers-school-declaring-two-genders-Im-gay-not-queer.html
The disproportionate response to this child is a good example of the benefits of status that Rowling has and the level of protection that seems to provide.
But of course they do expect “rights” the rest of us cannot have. They want us to pay for their lifestyle choice and the NHS pays up handsomely.
it uses tax payers money to fund consultations, treatments and ongoing medication. The money was provided by taxpayers to deal with illness and injury.
What is the significance of ‘Gender’….We have two sexes. Cultural Marxism at play.
“all go away soon” – sinister, that seems very certain. Anticipating a Labour win?
Something doesn’t come from nothing. Everything is a product of something. Holding two contradictory and hypocritical arguments at the same time e.g. women must have their own spaces but men must not, will only ever conclude in one outcome – confusion, bitterness and division; the goal of our self-appointed elites.
If you’re a straight-talking woman who unapologetically shares her opinion, you’re evidently seen as a threat by some. So here’s another one who calls a spade a spade;
”German MEP Christine Anderson: “If a man thinks he is a woman, that’s fine, I don’t have a problem with that. He has the right to think whatever the heck he wants. But he does not have the right to make me part of his delusion…”
https://x.com/ImtiazMadmood/status/1807024784238060024
Transgenderism cannot be sustained by natural reproduction, it can only replicate through artificial indoctrination.
I understand the point you are seeking to make but transgender people will be born to every generation. Whatever the cause of transgenderism it is clearly built in to the human state of being. Transgender people have existed at least as long as our historical records.
Live and let live but do not seek to force minority lifestyles on the majority.
Without media and medical encouragement the number of such unfortunate people would be tiny as it was before the left decided to use the condition as another way to modify language and dominate the agenda.
Exactly. It’s been turned into a fashion which dickheads like Tennant are all too happy to encourage. They are screwing kids lives and don’t even care.
I have to disagree because Scientifically it is not, and cannot be, “built in”. It is impossible to deny there are, biologically, only two sexes. This has been confirmed time after time and is, to be honest, pretty damn obvious.
Trans / gay etc. are not Biological and, therefore, cannot be “built in” in any way whatsoever. It simply is not possible.
Everything other than the sex you actually are is down to hormones and psychology. One of my sons is gay, he isn’t a woman and he’d laugh at you if you said he is.
Other people choose to wear dresses, they feel a need for something pretty or different. Mens clothes are boring.
Others are predatory and know that saying they are female means they get into the hen house.
There are numerous derivatives but they are not, in any way, “built in”. There are only two built in states: Male and Female.
Gay is sexuality not sex. It occurs in the animal kingdom for one reason or another, but, as you say it is not cooked in.
I strongly disagree.
“There are numerous derivatives but they are not, in any way, “built in”.”
Transgenderism has existed as long as we have been on this planet. I do not deny that predominantly there are only two sexes – male and female although hermaphrodites do exist. Whatever the cause or reason transgender people are born to every generation and every race on the planet therefore transgenderism is part of the human condition.
It would appear that you are confusing transgenderism with the desire to change sex and if so then I would recommend further research. The number of transgender people who actively pursue surgical solutions is remarkably small as a percentage of the transgender population as a whole.
Codswallop.
I think you might be confusing transgenderism with transvestism, huxley. Correct me if I am wrong.
“I think you might be confusing transgenderism with transvestism”
Not at all. There are significant differences between those who consider themselves transvestites and those who believe they are transgender. I’m sure you don’t need me to labour through the differences and to be honest given the bigotry some on here are displaying I’m not sure I want to.
This book is a useful and extremely well written exploration of the trans way of life. It does not make for comfortable reading but it is hugely informative and Helen Boyd comes across as a wonderful lady. Betty I believe eventually went on to have SRS.
(Other books are available).
https://www.amazon.co.uk/My-Husband-Betty-Crossdresser-December/dp/B00854CRUE
Are you suggesting that the current epidemic of transgender wannabes has been the result of some change in the genetic makeup of people, because I don’t think there is much support for that view.
I think it is much more likely to indoctrination by social media and the teaching profession i.e. it is a state of mind induced by external factors, not some innate physiological condittion.
I do not wish to be rude but I have stated in two earlier posts that transgenderism is as old as mankind, it is not some aberration which developed in the 20th century Western world. It has been with us since long before we developed the written word. There is no indoctrination in transgenderism. It is a state of being. Ninety nine point five percent of the population are never touched by transgenderism.
The problem with all the transgender publicity flooding our media is that those doing the shouting are nothing but publicity seekers. The vast majority of the trans population definitely do not seek the limelight.
“…it is a state of mind induced by external factors, not some innate physiological condition.”
Categorically and completely wrong. If anything transgenderism is innate which is why it appears generation after generation. Everywhere.
I think the historical evidence is far from clear on this topic. Many of the examples from SE Asia are apparently of a Third Gender which appears to confer a special religious status on those people. There are of course also examples of gender dysphoria, no different from today.
I am unable to find any references to mass outbreaks of transgenderism amongst the common people as seems to be happening today, especially with the young, before they reach the age of puberty.
There are no “mass outbreaks of transgenderism amongst the common people as seems to be happening today.” You are being fooled by a surfeit of MSM publicity which is pushing the issue of transgenderism. As I understand it there has been a serious move in schools to promote alternate sexual lifestyles which has led to growing confusion amongst children and youths.
Too many people fail to understand that the venomous push behind the alphabet movement is intended to undermine notions of family and the sanctity of family life. The promotion of anything but family life is being used to disrupt and confuse not just our children but the whole of society. All part of Agenda 2030.
The current percentage of people who identify as trans is 0.5% as I have posted in previous threads and I suspect if records were available this figure is no higher today than it was five hundred or fifteen hundred years ago.
“Many of the examples from SE Asia are apparently of a Third Gender which appears to confer a special religious status on those people.”
In many societies and particularly looking back in history in those societies where some came out as transgender they were revered by their contemporaries and many became shamen. Throughout history transgenders have been both reviled and venerated.
“Gender dysphoria” is a 21st century psycho-sexual term which is largely interchangeable with the term transgender and has usurped the term ‘gender identity disorder.’
I’m sure that it has always e isted, but it has never dominated political and cultural discourse the way it does now.
Transgender people have existed at least as long as our historical records.
Our oldest historical record is the Codex Hammurabi. The full text is available here:
https://avalon.law.yale.edu/ancient/hamframe.asp
And it certainly doesn’t mention ‘transgender people’.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-48442934.amp
Another woke polit-o-crap article from the BBC is hardly a counterargument to the fact that ‘our oldest historical record’ goes to great length codifying rules for family relationship but doesn’t even mention gays, let alone transgenderists.
The repackaged Christian body/ soul dichotomy at the base of this also still hasn’t become logically more consistent. If we assume that nothing is supernatural, than, there’s nothing to people except their bodies and this means each conscious self belongs exactly to the body it developed in, just like fingers and toes also belong to it. Otherwise, we’re entering religious territory and can propose the transgender daemon God – pretty similar with the Christian devil – who pairs souls with ‘wrong’ bodies just to make them suffer. That’s a religion everyone’s free to believe in who wants that. And everybody who doesn’t want that is as free to disbelieve in it.
“our oldest historical record’ goes to great length codifying rules for family relationship but doesn’t even mention gays, let alone transgenderists.”
So, at the time of writing gays and transgenders did not exist. A rather selective approach. Unlikely in the extreme.
As for the rest of your comment, you’ve lost me.
Your statement was
Transgender people have existed at least as long as our historical records.
but said historical records contain nothing on this. Hence, there’s no proof for your claim. The notion that you’re a contemporary of Hammurabi who survived for about 4000 odd years due to transhumanist superpowers can, I think, be safely discarded. Which leaves us with: It’s an article of faith, as befits a religion. As I already wrote: You’re entitled to believe in whatever you want to believe in. And everybody else is entitled to ignore this, no matter how dear it might be to you.
A dangerously underweight anorexic who believes she is fat is clearly delusional – which doesn’t mean we can’t have sympathy or be kind to them – so it’s reasonable to regard anyone who believes that a man is actually a woman, or that a woman is actually a man, as also delusional, which is what David Tennant appears to be.
And he also appears to be further delusional in believing that the “tiny bunch of little whinging f******” will “all go away soon”, as the evidence is in the opposite direction. According to the British Social Attitudes survey published last September:
https://natcen.ac.uk/news/britains-attitudes-towards-moral-issues-have-become-much-more-liberal
“The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.”
I think what David Tennant must have in mind is a belief that it’s mainly only old people who have ‘gender critical’ or, what he would call, ‘transphobic’ views – and he’s hoping they’ll all die soon.
So he is apparently finding comfort in the hope that a lot of people will die soon and cease to exist. What a kind man he is!
Reality Checkpoint on Parkers Piece in Cambridge, is also a good choice. 4 in 1. I met my wife there when I was on my last posting in the Army. Whatever Wikipedia says, all very high brow, according to her it was named by the hippies and druggies because it was between the town, and the Police Station, on the other side. This is where you straightened up and flew right before going to your accomodation past that.
Might I say that there’s nothing “tiny” about us.
There now, that’s more like it! Two Indigenous Scots battling it out, choosing “Pistols or Claymores”, as one Scotsman explained the traditional method for settling disputes.
In Tennants case more likely to be a handbag; as long as it was soft.
Ha-ha!
Can you just picture the scene: out there on the moors, the two clans glowering at each other behind the duellists, J.K. fiercely brandishing her claymore, Tennant scowling at her while preparing his handbag for battle…
Why on earth did DS remove my previous post? Am I in the crosshairs of ‘Herr Flick’ of the mod gestapo once again? Maybe the meme is deemed a wee bit offensive, in which case I’ll ”play it again, Sam”…Hail Christine Anderson, J.K Rowling and all other unapologetically opinionated women;
”German MEP Christine Anderson: “If a man thinks he is a woman, that’s fine, I don’t have a problem with that. He has the right to think whatever the heck he wants. But he does not have the right to make me part of his delusion…”
https://x.com/ImtiazMadmood/status/1807024784238060024
I think it was probably my suggestion that David was in line for a blue plaque (national treasure) on lamppost 33b on College Green, wot did it.
What a pr*ck.
I’m sorry but why is what this attention seeking pretender important to anyone?
Tennant is ofcourse wrong. Most people are not critical of Trans people. They are critical of them being allowed to compete against women at sport or being allowed into women’s toilet or changing room. I have no problem with someone living how they want to live. If they want to live as a woman that is up to them, but they cannot come into my daughters changing room or compete against her at running or swimming and if Tennant thinks my opinion is being a “Trans Critic” then so be it.
I don’t believe much in the press but if true that DT has a young child he has encouraged to think of itself as Trans then he has to stamp down on anyone who may question his (DTs) choices.
He’s not a Timelord he’s a very naughty boy.
Diddy David is chipping in because his 11 year old has long hair and doesn’t want to be a boy’s boy.
God gave all humans, male and female, the ability to grow their head-hair very long, like the warriors of Germanic tribes and Oriental tribes, to name but a few.
There’s nothing “boy’s boy” or “manly” about chopping off your hair instead of letting it grow to its natural length. Even Royal Navy sailors used to have their traditional long pigtails, and men in previous times wore their hair long, as you well know.
People need to get over this ridiculous idea that men and boys must cut their hair short in order to be considered “manly”. It’s like the stupid idea, hammered into men from infancy, that they must “Never hit a woman”, which has resulted in many men being killed or maimed.
The rule should rather be:
“Never hit a woman unless she hits you first. She won’t do it again.”
That rule about men never hitting women has also caused severe injuries to women themselves, as in the case several years ago, when a gang of four Muslim women in their 20s followed a young Englishwoman walking home from the pub with her Englishman boyfriend at night. The four Muslim women, all from Pakistan if I remember correctly, screamed “Kill the White Bitch!”, knocked the English girl to the ground and beat her up, raining down kicks and punches.
The CCTV street video showed the young man trying to protect her while refraining from actually hitting or kicking the 4 attackers, which, as you can imagine, was pretty ineffectual.
The judge let them all off without any prison sentence, and refused to call it a “hate crime”, because their bent lawyers claimed they had done it because “they were not used to drinking alcohol”, which, as you know, makes everyone rush out and attack strangers. (???) The young English couple were unknown to their attackers.
Young Wilfred has grown their hair to reflect their non-binary status, Daddy Tennant thinks that he is standing up for his young them.