[jlisenbe]

We'll see if J.K. Rowling's challenge to this ridiculous law will stand up. I can hardly wait to see how the government decides which speech "stirs up hatred".

J.K. Rowling, the author of the "Harry Potter" book series, challenged Scotland’s new hate speech law on Monday, and police have declared they will not prosecute the author.
Scotland’s new Hate Crime and Public Order Act was activated on April 1. The text of the bill, originally introduced years before, warns against acts that "stir up hatred against a group of persons" of certain protected characteristics, including age, disability, religion or, in the case of a social or cultural group, perceived religious affiliation, sexual orientation, transgender identity, and variations in sex characteristics. The maximum penalty is a seven-year jail sentence.
Rowling, who lives in Scotland’s capital city of Edinburgh, began an April Fool’s Day social media thread by listing multiple biologically male criminals who claimed to be transgender just prior to being sentenced for various horrific crimes, expressing mock relief their avowed gender identities were being respected. She then switched her rhetoric and declared, "Only kidding. Obviously, the people mentioned in the above tweets aren't women at all, but men, every last one of them."

After slamming Scotland’s new hate speech bill directly, Rowling declared, "if what I've written here qualifies as an offense under the terms of the new act, I look forward to being arrested when I return to the birthplace of the Scottish Enlightenment."
The BBC reported on Tuesday afternoon that "Social media comments made by JK Rowling challenging Scotland's new hate crime law are not being treated as criminal, Police Scotland has said.

[tomder55]

I did address the issue here

Why do Dems hate women ? (askmehelpdesk.com)


She stood up to the nonsense and now Scotland is backing down

J.K. Rowling will not face action under Scottish hate crime laws, police say | Reuters

[jlisenbe]

But the really interesting part is that Rowling says she will repeat any statement that another woman makes and is charged with, and will then essentially dare the Scottish officials to do something about it. We'll see.

[Curlyben]

Clearly too many snowflakes in Scotland: More than 3,000 hate crime complaints made to Police Scotland

[tomder55]

If you ask JK Rawling what is a woman ;she has an answer .She posted this on Twitter (X )

You’ve asked me several questions on this thread and accused me of avoiding answering, so here goes.I believe a woman is a human being who belongs to the sex class that produces large gametes. It’s irrelevant whether or not her gametes have ever been fertilised, whether or not she’s carried a baby to term, irrelevant if she was born with a rare difference of sexual development that makes neither of the above possible, or if she’s aged beyond being able to produce viable eggs. She is a woman and just as much a woman as the others.I don’t believe a woman is more or less of a woman for having sex with men, women, both or not wanting sex at all. I don’t think a woman is more or less of a woman for having a buzz cut and liking suits and ties, or wearing stilettos and mini dresses, for being black, white or brown, for being six feet tall or a little person, for being kind or cruel, angry or sad, loud or retiring. She isn't more of a woman for featuring in Playboy or being a surrendered wife, nor less of a woman for designing space rockets or taking up boxing. What makes her a woman is the fact of being born in a body that, assuming nothing has gone wrong in her physical development (which, as stated above, still doesn't stop her being a woman), is geared towards producing eggs as opposed to sperm, towards bearing as opposed to begetting children, and irrespective of whether she's done either of those things, or ever wants to.Womanhood isn't a mystical state of being, nor is it measured by how well one apes sex stereotypes. We are not the creatures either porn or the Bible tell you we are. Femaleness is not, as trans woman Andrea Chu Long wrote, ‘an open mouth, an expectant , blank, blank eyes,’ nor are we God’s afterthought, sprung from Adam’s rib.Women are provably subject to certain experiences because of our female bodies, including different forms of oppression, depending on the cultures in which we live. When trans activists say 'I thought you didn't want to be defined by your biology,' it’s a feeble and transparent attempt at linguistic sleight of hand. Women don't want to be limited, exploited, punished, or subject to other unjust treatment because of their biology, but our being female is indeed defined by our biology. It's one material fact about us, like having freckles or disliking beetroot, neither of which are representative of our entire beings, either. Women have billions of different personalities and life stories, which have nothing to do with our bodies, although we are likely to have had experiences men don't and can't, because we belong to our sex class.Some people feel strongly that they should have been, or wish to be seen as, the sex class into which they weren't born. Gender dysphoria is a real and very painful condition and I feel nothing but sympathy for anyone who suffers from it. I want them to be free to dress and present themselves however they like and I want them to have exactly the same rights as every other citizen regarding housing, employment and personal safety. I do not, however, believe that surgeries and cross-sex hormones literally turn a person into the opposite sex, nor do I believe in the idea that each of us has a nebulous ‘gender identity’ that may or might not match our sexed bodies. I believe the ideology that preaches those tenets has caused, and continues to cause, very real harm to vulnerable people.I am strongly against women's and girls' rights and protections being dismantled to accommodate trans-identified men, for the very simple reason that no study has ever demonstrated that trans-identified men don't have exactly the same pattern of criminality as other men, and because, however they identify, men retain their advantages of speed and strength. In other words, I think the safety and rights of girls and women are more important than those men's desire for validation.I sincerely hope that answers your questions. You may still disagree, but as I hope this shows, I’m more than happy to have this debate

J.K. Rowling on X: "You’ve asked me several questions on this thread and accused me of avoiding answering, so here goes. I believe a woman is a human being who belongs to the sex class that produces large gametes. It’s irrelevant whether or not her gametes have ever been fertilised, whether or not… https://t.co/X6mbdJ0YVm" / X (twitter.com)

[Curlyben]

Extremely well put, but wouldn't expect anything less.
Watch her get roasted for taking this stand.

Very similar to the vegan activists approach.
Those with the differing point of view appear to be the loudest in any debate, but not necessarily with actual verifiable facts or a solid position.

[jlisenbe]

Was never a fan of her books, but we could use a boatload more of people like her.