The “Harry Potter” author slammed a newly enacted hate-crime law in Scotland in a series of posts on X in which she referred to transgender women as men.
J.K. Rowling shared a social media thread on Monday, the day a new Scottish hate-crime law took effect, that misgendered several transgender women and appeared to imply trans women have a penchant for sexual predation. On Tuesday, Scottish police announced they would not be investigating the “Harry Potter” author’s remarks as a crime, as some of Rowling’s critics had called for.
“We have received complaints in relation to the social media post,” a spokesperson for Police Scotland said in a statement. “The comments are not assessed to be criminal and no further action will be taken.”
Scotland’s new Hate Crime and Public Order Act criminalizes “stirring up hatred” against people based on their race, religion, disability, sexuality or gender identity.
The laws don’t apply to rich people
True, but she also isn’t breaking any laws in this case.
Do you people legitimately believe others should be arrested because they don’t call you the words you want? Wow.
This comment was removed for saying: True, but she also isn’t breaking any laws in this case. Do you people legitimately believe others should be arrested because they don’t call you the words you want? Wow.
The reason given was saying “you people.” It’s painfully clear there is a a biased mod or group of mods on the mod team that wants to censor anything critical of the trans agenda.
Here’s another comment with someone calling me a “weird little goblin”, but they support the trans agenda so their comment gets to stay: https://lemmy.ca/comment/8395791
Lol. It’s so transparent it’s actually sad. I hope we get a new news community to replace this one.
Removed by mod
A law is a strong as its enforcement. Without enforcement, it’s just political posturing.
You are correct, but laws like this do not need to be enforced. This is draconian.
What makes laws strong is precedent and this law doesn’t have any. Her case is too flimsy and we don’t want her to set precedent since she has infinite lawyers to defend her. Its better to get more solid cases first and then go after her when there is solid precedent.
It’s better not to persecute people just because you disagree with them.
It’s sad how you people are literally pushing for a world where someone can get arrested for not calling a trans woman a woman.
You’re going to make way more enemies than friends with that rhetoric, trust me.
Hello baby account that was created in order to comment on this thread but is also asking me to trust you.
The bill does not say that people will be arrested for “Not calling trans women women”. it’s the fucking Jordan Peterson thing again. You need to make clear threats towards the group and calling for the group to be abused to the same standard required by individual harassment charges.
So what’s the problem? She’s not making clear threats to the group or calling for them to be abused, but people in this thread still think she should be arrested.
Why do you think I want to defend the opinions of people that isn’t me? Go reply to their comments instead you weird little goblin.
Why are you insulting me? Lol.
If you don’t agree with them, then why are you commenting?
I think you’re just upset because I don’t offer unwavering support for your agenda.
Bingo. Just wanted to thank you for saying this
But will she continue bitching about it like Jordan Peterson still does about the law in Canada that he didn’t get arrested for supposedly violating?
She did send Harry Potter into the ladies toilet though 🤔
She also said she created Harry because she wanted to be a boy.
If She is not against transgender men. Then she may want everyone to be a boy.
https://medium.com/queertheory/harry-potter-transgender-hero-83094e02cd25
“I was supposed to be a boy,” she notes in A Year in the Life, a 2007 documentary
It’s sad watching you people twist your brains into knots to avoid realizing that some people don’t agree with you.
This has nothing to do with not agreeing with people.
Oh, it’s the trans version of being gay is a choice i guess…
Would explain a lot, because to most transppl the thought of someone wanting to be what they were assigned at birth makes no sense whatsoever. But regardless it’s not hard to accept that others might feel like you do but in reverse. Shows one hell of a lack of empathy to then conclude that must mean anyone claiming they do want to must have ulterior motives.
Maybe that at least means there’s hope for her to realize what kind of bs she’s spouting, but she’s probably a lost cause.
Oh my goodness, that’s a tragic tale that explains so much. Back story really does make a difference in perspective, but she’s still a massive anal fissure of a person for alienating others and perpetuating the suffering she was passed.
Yeah if the most dramatic interpretation of all that is true, and I’m not saying it is, it’s not an excuse. A lot of the worst things done at anti gay conversion groups are done by people who objectively experience significant same gender attraction. That doesn’t absolve the straight people who taught them to hate themselves but their self hate manifests as torturing those who don’t hate themselves. It’s still evil to torture them no matter why you do it.
Misinterpreted the law and went on a campaign about how he’d protest it and go on some sort of hunger strike like a martyr. Everyone that platformed him during that time owes everyone an apology.
100%
So many bigots suffer from perpetual victimhood.
Now have a poor person say the exact same shit and report that
While i agree with the sentiment i am concerned by this idea of policing how other people talk to each other. It seems completely insane that a government should be able to legally punish people for talking disrespectfully with each other. That is the essence of freedom of speech. People are able to express themselves freely without fear of the state punishing it.
Freedom of speech isn’t freedom of consequences.
Freedom of speech is, very much so, the freedom of consequences from the government for anything you are saying. In fact that is pretty much the textbook definition.
The consequences are for other citizens to mete out, like ostracizing bigots. But fundamentally the government has no right to police what anyone says, aside from inciting of violence and such.
Would you still say this if some rando inspired by this cunt’s incessant endorsement of anti-trans rhetoric assaults or murder someone?
I’d say that’s a matter for civil courts and the legal system to deal with. Not the government
And that wasn’t a hypothetical scenario.
Newsflash: The government passes the laws that are interpreted by the legal system.
So telling an entire group of people, who some of them used your books as a safe escape from the bullying they suffered in the real world, that you think they are vile, disgusting and shouldn’t exist, is just simply being disrespectful?
I believe that once you become part of the global zeitgeist you should be held more accountable for your words and actions, like old racist Jimmy Noneck down at a local bar can’t encite hate and violence on the same level as a global household name can.
Freedom of speech isn’t freedom from consequence.
It isnt freedom of consequence. It is freedom from the government interfering or penalizing you for what you are saying. The consequences are for the civil society to determine, but never the government.
Hate crime laws were because of civil society, that’s how this system works, these laws always came after some sort of civil unrest.
Plus we’re not talking about a random normal person like us, were talking about someone who has a global reach and some power to wield, they should be held responsible for what they say, she can get someone hurt or killed way easier than you and I could.
Yeah the law could be tweaked a bit, like all laws, but to leave it up to society to dish it out is, in my opinion, a bit more dangerous.
Not everyone is a free speech extremist like many Americans. When the idea of free speech was developed, it was to protect political speech from legal consequences, not to guard some kind of right to incite hatred or violence towards minorities. These ideas are very different and shouldn’t be conflated.
I am not an American, in fact I am German, a country which actually has restrictions on free speech in place.
Nowadays we use it to squash anti Israel protests.
They are cracking down on the anti Israeli protests because antisemitic hate crimes have doubled.
So its only antisemitic if its against Israel? We are arresting and silencing other Jews and Israelis who are against this campaign of genocide. That’s okay with you?
That’s exactly how I’d expect a government to use this. It’s not a good path
I fully support Palestine and yet I’m 100% OK with Germans having the sense to keep their opinions to themselves on the matter.
We don’t keep our opinions to ourselves, we dissolve demonstrations for Palestine and arrest even Jews who speak out against the genocide. We also confiscate their assets.
Good. Germany’s input on this one matter isn’t helpful.
So we should oppress citizens and their rights if they do a public wrongthink. Gotcha
Yeah thats not a free speech issue, that’s a German national guilt gone mad issue.
Indeed, which only strengthens my point.
We have hate speech laws where I live. 99% of us don’t even realize it because 99% of us aren’t running around being bigots and calling for the extermination of groups of people based on race, gender, etc. You only need to worry about those laws if you’re the kind of person who those laws are in place for. Nobody is gonna arrest you if you’re a bigot, but if you’re standing on a street corner calling for blood you just might
The issue with this thought is that when the party you hate comes into power they just might decide to add their own groups to these type of laws. Would you be ok if people got arrested for protesting against Trump?
That’s a stupid-ass take, as they could do it regarless…
Lol no it’s not, it’s why no one dumb enough is willing to pack the courts. They know what happens if the other side gets in control again. Might work out for 2-4 years but after that it’s anyone’s guess on how much damage the other side will do.
That’s why you have multiple instances such laws have to go through. It would all work so much better if people would vote, too.
Denying somes’s personhood is more than speech. It’s dangerous, and can cause actual harm, especially for someone with such a huge platform, with special influence over children
While I want to agree with the sentiment behind what you said I find it really hard to get behind government legally telling people what they can and can’t say. I personally feel like it’s every skinhead assole’s right to say racist awful shit. I also feel like if you’re going to exercise that right with reckless abandon, you’re gonna get fucked up by some people who don’t take kindly. As detrimental as their regressive views may be, I believe we simply cannot have legal punishments for saying something the government doesn’t agree with. It’s a very slippery slope.
So you’re saying we should form a mob and fuck her up then, that’s your preferred solution to this problem?
I’m tired of having to do this work and it never ending. Get a law passed and start enforcing. People are being harmed and it shouldn’t be this much work to defend them. Perhaps absolute free speech regulated by individuals was scalable when not every deplorable pos had a worldwide megaphone.
I personally feel like it’s every skinhead assole’s right to say racist awful shit. I also feel like if you’re going to exercise that right with reckless abandon, you’re gonna get fucked up by some people who don’t take kindly.
Is that what happened in 1930s Germany or the 1950s U.S. South?
Racism is an implicit call to violence. Suggesting that it can also be solved by violence is not borne out by history.
Racism isn’t an implicit call to violence. Violence is one of the ways it can manifest if it’s deranged enough, but most racism is just sorta quiet and often unconscious.
It’s not a good idea for the government tell you what you’re allowed to say - that change has to come naturally from the bottom up, not artificially from the top down
that change has to come naturally from the bottom up, not artificially from the top down
Cool, when is that change going to happen? Because from what I’ve seen, there’s still a vast amount of racism in this world.
Why do you trust powerful governments so much?
You didn’t answer my question.
You said change has to come naturally from the bottom up in order to stop bigoted attacks. Bigotry has been around for a very long time.
So… when is that natural change going to happen? Are we talking centuries?
While this specific case may even be somewhat justified, where does it end? What constitutes an insult so grievous that the government should punish you for it?
Misgendering, alright. Attacking someone’s honor? Probably. Putting together an angry, slur-filled rant? Perhaps. Insulting someone’s parents? Hmm.
And so forth. This is an incredibly slippery slope, one that virtually all democracies currently existing have avoided to go down because it inevitably leads to oppression.
This “slippery slope” of yours has not been a problem in the many countries that have adopted it.
Not even in Brazil under Bolsonaro.
I am German. We have restrictions on free speech in place, primarily around Nazism and Israel.
Our government is literally curbing anything critical of israel with those restrictions at this very moment.
Sounds like a reason to make the law better, not throw it out.
I don’t think that’s the lesson here. More that even the most well intentioned restrictions can and will be abused by the government once they have that power. If our far right gets into the government I cant imagine what kind of dystopian crap they will try to do with it.
I am similarly very sceptical of the constant debate for more surveillance and online control in the name of ”protecting the children”. Another very worthy, and very emotionally charged cause where most people will instinctively agree before even thinking about the consequences.
Again- that did not happen when Bolsonaro took power in Brazil.
So maybe the problem is your laws, not hate speech laws in general.
You’re acting like Germany is the only country in the world that has these laws.
Hilarious that this wretched lump of hate is being a crybully about how she’s supposedly putting herself in legal danger, even though she sends legal threats to people in the UK who call her a TERF. And I do mean people posting shit on Twitter, not newspapers publishing stories about her. “Free speech” (the right to incite hatred against minorities) for me but not for thee.
She sends legal threats to people who write books about child wizards going to wizard school.
She wants to invent news laws to push on others and make herself a martyr against one that already exists.
Does she think there weren’t wizard school books until she had the idea of one???
Apparently.
She knows there were some, if I’m not mistaken, she admits she was directly inspired by one. I guess she just wants more money and power over people.
Why would she object to being a TERF? Isn’t she pretty open about her beliefs?
She’d rather be remembered as the biggest FART in history.
Fascism-Affinitized-Radical-Transphobe?
TERFs love to play this game where TERF is actually a misogynistic slur, even when it completely accurately describes their bigotry. It reframes them as victims of misogyny instead of bigots.
Do they pretend that they don’t hate trans women? Is this like the “I’m not racist, but…” people?
No. They pretend that acknowledging trans women erases womanhood itself and is the ultimate mysogyny.
Do they pretend that they don’t hate trans women?
Rowling has done that, yeah.
She’s literally said that she’d march with trans people if our rights were under attack, whilst attacking our rights.
Depends on the audience, very often they will pay lip service to the idea that trans people shouldn’t be criminalized out of existence, and then with a more fashy audience just start goose stepping and talking about all the ways trans people should be criminalized out of existence. Even JKR has done that song and dance, saying that “if trans people were oppressed” she would march for them. 🙄
“I disagree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.”
This whole law is absurd and draconian.
I strongly disagree. some opinions are literally harmful to express. the narrative that trans women are dangerous, predators, or not really their gender, is hate speech. it is statistically linked to increased violence against trans people, especially when coming from someone with a huge platform. it’s unclear whether Rowling actively intends to cause harm, but she has been associating with literal Nazis lately. we should respect each other’s opinions, sure, but when people hold exclusionary opinions, we have to decide whether their right to spout hatred is more important than trans people’s right to safety, comfort, and wellbeing. I choose the wellbeing of the trans community over Rowling’s right to bigotry.
“we have to decide whether their right to spout hatred is more important than trans people’s right to safety, comfort, and wellbeing.”
In no uncertain terms, it is imperative that we do not allow any governing body to decide what we can and can not say. What is and isn’t dangerous, what is and isn’t hate, can not and should not be legislated, or we will be robbed of our voices lest dissent be considered dangerous, or hatred. It won’t be long until calling the police “pig” is a hate crime and criticizing your leaders sedition.
Shun them, malign them, discredit, and mock them publicly, but I can never see the good in giving the government the ability to punish someone for their speech, no matter how vehemently it goes against modern paradigm.
so you suggest completely deregulating hate speech, then? how about direct incitement of violence? how about slander and defamation?
there are many restrictions on “freedom of speech” already, and it’s not like anyone is complaining that people calling in bomb threats shouldn’t get arrested. there NEED to be restrictions on speech. imagine if advertisers could just lie with no repercussions, or if you could state your intent to kill someone and it would be illegal to arrest you until you actually do it.
calling a policeman a pig is not hate speech. it is hateful, but there’s a big difference between calling a cop a pig and misgendering or using slurs against trans people.
minority groups are especially vulnerable to hate speech and there are already laws in place to protect them from certain kinds of speech. this is especially true with trans people, as we have seen their suicide rate linked very clearly with the presence of hate and absence of support.
we can say “the repercussions must only be social” but that leaves it up to the people to enforce it. what about minorities living surrounded by people who don’t support them? are they supposed to just grin and bear it? for a trans person, this could easily and quickly drive them to suicide.
I will never advocate that simple (especially accidental) misgendering should be grounds for arresting somebody. but these acts, when done intentionally, actively spread hate, misinformation, and tangible harm which touches the lives of trans people. this is why we must choose which is more important: the lives and safety of these trans people, or the comfort and “freedom” of people who want to see them eradicated. your freedom ends where it would violate another person’s freedom or basic rights.
this choice has been made on many other matters, which I touched on before. we have repeatedly found that certain kinds of speech are harmful enough to warrant legal repercussions. refusing to regulate this kind of hate speech just takes the side of the oppressor; it means trans people have no recourse and it becomes easy to spread massive misinformation campaigns (as Republicans are currently doing) which directly leads to people dying (dozens of anti trans laws have been passed in dozens of states, and those states have extremely high trans suicide rates).
why do we need to respect the opinion of someone whose opinion is “trans people should die or go to jail”?
She should really check on the other laws to see if they’ll be enforced, too.
She looks like Putin in a wig and seems to share his views too.
Coincidence?
This TERF needs to just accept that she’s not relevant anymore. She is just a washed up, miserable person and not even her bottomless wallet can bring her happiness.
You say this yet people keep throwing money at her. Studios and HP fans alike.
She is still unfortunately relevant to a huge swath of people
That’s why I sail the seven sees, especially if it’s about content she might get royalties from.
But also, there hasn’t been anything good since the first fantastic beasts movie…
Also also, I made harry potter themed fuck JK pins, so a few lgbtq friends of mine could still wear their hp merch without endorsing her.
Crazy how many people in here agree that you should be punished by the government for things you say
This is literally not news. It’s literally not something happening.
So the new law is not enforce? or is it only for the plebs?
TL;Dr like everything else TERFs whine about the law doesn’t mean what they think it means
This is a good thing, the law is draconian. Thatcher would have loved it.
Thatcher hated trans people and Rowling is a Holocaust denier. what do we gain by allowing her to continue spewing hateful rhetoric to a massive audience?
We have far too much to lose by allowing the government to dictate what people can and can not say.
so you’d rather lose the trans people to violence or suicide than regulate hate speech against them?
“Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.”
I don’t wish anyone harm, but I will always choose the right to speak freely over what a governing body considers “safe”.
I’ll risk the downvotes. I actually agree with her. It feels like mockery of my gender when men dress and present as female. They don’t have periods. They don’t experience child birth. They don’t have the risk of ovarian cancer, ovarian cysts, fibroids, and other health conditions. Many of them did not have to suffer the same gender discrimination in childhood, that I, and other born females, experienced. If they traveled to a foreign country, like Saudi Arabia, or Egypt, all they would need to do is dress differently to suddenly have more rights than women who are born female. My mom (woman who raised me) had a male relative that would dress as her and often pretend to be her. I don’t know where she would go, when he was around all of us, but he honestly did not care about women, or women’s rights. He would mock feminism and bully my older sister for being very feminine. For him, it seemed to just be a costume he would wear in order to sponge off of my mother’s role. As her, he would drive her car, use her bed, eat her food, and bully both my older sister and I. Everyone just seemed to think it was funny. I thought it was cruel and disturbing. His sexuality wasn’t changed by his choice of costume. I walked into my mother’s bedroom, when I was a teen, and saw him standing by the bed, in her clothing, with his male appendage protruding upward from the underwear he was wearing. It was her underwear. He didn’t apologize, or cover himself. He had left the door wide open, knowing everyone else was home. He wanted to be seen like that. I think it was his way of trying to assert his dominance. Maybe he thought I would run away from home. Looking back at it, I should have. That would have forced everyone in town to alert the police, and investigate why I had left. I was focused on maintaining my grades and playing sports, as a teen, and didn’t want to sacrifice my future by running away from home, so I stayed.
And now society wants to give that man in a dress the same gender recognition as me. I’m sorry, but I don’t think he deserves it. I don’t think I should have to call him, a “her”.
You have my sympathy, but it sounds like you had a super fucked up childhood and you’re now externalizing that trauma onto an unrelated group of people.
Your uncle was a sexual predator, not a trans woman. Trans people are not usually gender fluid so they don’t switch back and forth like your uncle and they certainly don’t pretend to be a real relative to bully that person’s children!?
Honestly it sounds like your uncle had serious issue with your mother, probably stemming from his own childhood abuse. Abusers are often abused. You don’t mention them, but I’d bet your mothers parents were not great either.
I am truly sorry for what happened to you growing up. That’s really fucked and no one deserves that.
I would caution that you are using this experience to shape the definition of all transgender people in your mind. There’s all types of people, good and bad, this is the same with transgender people. This is assuming the person you described is even transgender, which they may not be.
I’d point out that all of the struggles that you face as a biologically born woman, aren’t erased because somebody else has joined your gender. There are plenty of cis women who don’t experience childbirth, periods, ovarian cysts, fibroids, etc… they’re still women. Your struggles in these areas don’t gatekeep other people from experiencing womanhood. If a country achieves true gender equality, are the cis female population of that country no longer able to call themselves women because they didn’t experience discrimination growing up?
All the things you’ve mentioned aren’t things that define womanhood. They define individual women’s struggles. Just because there are members of the gender that have never experienced this, does nothing to undermine these struggles. Feminism exists to help ameliorate the various struggles that affect women disproportionately. That’s not being threatened here. If anything it’s bringing more attention to it.
A person rejecting the identity of their biology and often their whole social life to be identified as another gender is not done as a mockery. Maybe this did happen in your case. But I assure you that the majority of transgender people want to celebrate the best parts of the gender they are transitioning into and be another person to stand up for them and fight for their equality.
The struggles women are subjected to are brutal. Don’t reject an ally who wants to join you.
I’m sorry you had a bad apple around you when growing up, but please do not think every trans person is like that. A lot just want to live their lives and wear what they think looks good on them. Nobody is taking your right to food away just because you didn’t suffer through famine like a lot of poor people either. You’re rightfully mad about male privilege in society, while insisting on your own privilege of being born female.
The person you are arguing with has a nazi dogwhistle username and a post history full of the same…
