this post was submitted on 02 Apr 2024
219 points (91.0% liked)

News

23408 readers
5496 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

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.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] FlyingSquid 138 points 7 months ago (3 children)

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?

[–] [email protected] 38 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (4 children)

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

[–] EmpathicVagrant 20 points 7 months ago (1 children)

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.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] LwL 10 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

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.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 25 points 7 months ago

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.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 7 months ago (1 children)
[–] FlyingSquid 23 points 7 months ago

So many bigots suffer from perpetual victimhood.

[–] [email protected] 84 points 7 months ago (2 children)

A law is a strong as its enforcement. Without enforcement, it's just political posturing.

[–] [email protected] 74 points 7 months ago (6 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 20 points 7 months ago

Bingo. Just wanted to thank you for saying this

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 72 points 7 months ago (2 children)

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.

[–] FlyingSquid 48 points 7 months ago (1 children)

She sends legal threats to people who write books about child wizards going to wizard school.

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2003/06/harry-potter-and-the-international-order-of-copyright.html

She wants to invent news laws to push on others and make herself a martyr against one that already exists.

[–] [email protected] 23 points 7 months ago (2 children)

Does she think there weren't wizard school books until she had the idea of one???

[–] FlyingSquid 7 points 7 months ago

Apparently.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Omegamanthethird 19 points 7 months ago (3 children)

Why would she object to being a TERF? Isn't she pretty open about her beliefs?

[–] [email protected] 41 points 7 months ago (1 children)

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.

[–] Omegamanthethird 10 points 7 months ago (3 children)

Do they pretend that they don't hate trans women? Is this like the "I'm not racist, but..." people?

[–] Hackerman_uwu 21 points 7 months ago

No. They pretend that acknowledging trans women erases womanhood itself and is the ultimate mysogyny.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 7 months ago

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. 🙄

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 52 points 7 months ago (3 children)

The laws don’t apply to rich people

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] SkyeHarith 43 points 7 months ago

Notice how they said

Not assessed to be criminal

And not

Assesed to be not criminal

Scottish Cops are still Cops I guess

[–] [email protected] 39 points 7 months ago (26 children)

The tweet makes it plainly obvious where she stands regarding trans people. Disgusting.

Im ashamed to admit that I thought the previous allegations against her were wrong and only based on maliciously misinterpreted tweets.

[–] tekila 39 points 7 months ago

Yeah, two years ago I was kinda not sure what the issue was not actually following the thing too closely. Then I watched Shaun's video essay on YouTube, discussed with some trans friends about the issue and started checking her twitter.

She literally only tweets about trans people all day every day and often insinuates they are rapists/pedo etc.

She's crazy.

load more comments (25 replies)
[–] alquicksilver 25 points 7 months ago (1 children)

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.

[–] glimse 23 points 7 months ago (1 children)

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

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Gradually_Adjusting 23 points 7 months ago

Now have a poor person say the exact same shit and report that

[–] Zachariah 21 points 7 months ago

She should really check on the other laws to see if they’ll be enforced, too.

[–] [email protected] 20 points 7 months ago (17 children)

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.

[–] kaffiene 19 points 7 months ago (1 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (9 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 7 months ago

That's exactly how I'd expect a government to use this. It's not a good path

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] [email protected] 11 points 7 months ago (2 children)

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

[–] A_Toasty_Strudel 13 points 7 months ago (18 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.

load more comments (18 replies)
[–] [email protected] 7 points 7 months ago (1 children)

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.

[–] FlyingSquid 7 points 7 months ago (1 children)

This "slippery slope" of yours has not been a problem in the many countries that have adopted it.

Not even in Brazil under Bolsonaro.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_speech_laws_by_country

[–] [email protected] 11 points 7 months ago (11 children)

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.

load more comments (11 replies)
load more comments (15 replies)
[–] fiend_unpleasant 18 points 7 months ago (7 children)

So the new law is not enforce? or is it only for the plebs?

[–] [email protected] 6 points 7 months ago

TL;Dr like everything else TERFs whine about the law doesn't mean what they think it means

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] recapitated 7 points 7 months ago

This is literally not news. It's literally not something happening.

load more comments
view more: next ›