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
[–] 138 points 2 years ago (9 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?

  • source
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 38 points 2 years ago* (5 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

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 2 years 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.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (2 replies)
  • [–] 25 points 2 years 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.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 86 points 2 years ago (8 children)

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

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 74 points 2 years 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.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • load more comments (5 replies)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 72 points 2 years ago (12 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.

  • source
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 48 points 2 years ago (3 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.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 19 points 2 years ago (7 children)

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

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 41 points 2 years ago (4 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.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 2 years ago (3 children)

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

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 16 points 2 years 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. 🙄

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (2 replies)
  • [–] 52 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    The laws don’t apply to rich people

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • load more comments (3 replies)
    [–] 43 points 2 years ago

    Notice how they said

    Not assessed to be criminal

    And not

    Assesed to be not criminal

    Scottish Cops are still Cops I guess

  • source
  • [–] 39 points 2 years 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.

  • source
  • hideshow 26 child comments
  • [–] 39 points 2 years 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.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (25 replies)
    [–] 25 points 2 years ago (2 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.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 23 points 2 years ago

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

  • source
  • [–] 21 points 2 years ago

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

  • source
  • [–] 20 points 2 years ago (60 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.

  • source
  • hideshow 60 child comments
  • [–] 19 points 2 years ago (10 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.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 2 years ago (33 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

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 33 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 2 years 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.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 18 child comments
  • load more comments (18 replies)
  • [–] 7 points 2 years ago (13 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.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 2 years ago (12 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

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • load more comments (15 replies)
    [–] 18 points 2 years ago (7 children)

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

  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • load more comments (7 replies)
    [–] 7 points 2 years ago

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

  • source
  • [–] 6 points 2 years ago

    Arrest her anyway, call it the Rowling challenge.

  • source
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›