JK Rowling hate law posts not criminal, police say

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:She’s simply speaking out against men who decided they’re women to get into women’s spaces. Women’s prisons, women’s shelters, keeping sex offenders away from women and girls, and men/boys out of women’s/girls sports. And being able to keep the freedom of speech to do so.

I applaud her for not towing the (celebrity) company line, pretending it’s okay.

+1
I'm grateful that she's using her platform for this issue

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They couldn’t go after her because the publicity would slaughter them. They’ve gone after other people in the UK for speech issues.

They arrested an autistic teenager for commenting that a police officer looked like her lesbian grandmother.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/autistic-teenage-girl-police-tiktok-b2391163.html

And they went after another guy for retweeting a limerick. https://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/transgender-tweets-harry-miller-high-court-ruling-hate-crime-free-speech-a4362181.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am glad it played out as it did -- I don't think Rowling's positions on this matter are grounded in hate, and while I don't always agree with her or what she says, it would be a real strike against free speech to prosecute her for her opinions.

She disagrees with some of the prevailing attitudes on gender and the law. A decent number of people agree with her. She doesn't invoke violence against trans people, though she does engage in behavior like deadnaming or questioning the gender someone says they are. I personally wouldn't engaging in those activities but the idea that they would be considered illegal is actually kind of scary to me.

So some hate speech is ok?

In this country, all hate speech is okay. I don't cheer on the European hate speech laws, personally. While I understand that there are differences in culture and in history, I don't think hate speech laws are a great idea for any country. YMMV

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am glad it played out as it did -- I don't think Rowling's positions on this matter are grounded in hate, and while I don't always agree with her or what she says, it would be a real strike against free speech to prosecute her for her opinions.

She disagrees with some of the prevailing attitudes on gender and the law. A decent number of people agree with her. She doesn't invoke violence against trans people, though she does engage in behavior like deadnaming or questioning the gender someone says they are. I personally wouldn't engaging in those activities but the idea that they would be considered illegal is actually kind of scary to me.

So some hate speech is ok?

In this country, all hate speech is okay. I don't cheer on the European hate speech laws, personally. While I understand that there are differences in culture and in history, I don't think hate speech laws are a great idea for any country. YMMV

Agreed. After seeing what happens in the UK, I’m grateful that our forefathers had the foresight to protect speech in this country.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Hate speech is hate speech.

Absolutely. JK Rowling funded a women's shelter for victims of domestic violence and sexual assault. And, gasp, the shelter won't allow biological men who identify as women to room with victims of male violence. Clearly, JK Rowling is a horrible person. Anyone that creates a safe space for women is obviously engaging in hate speech and needs to be cancelled and endlessly harassed. Thank goodness for our online social justice warriors.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:She’s simply speaking out against men who decided they’re women to get into women’s spaces. Women’s prisons, women’s shelters, keeping sex offenders away from women and girls, and men/boys out of women’s/girls sports. And being able to keep the freedom of speech to do so.

I applaud her for not towing the (celebrity) company line, pretending it’s okay.

+ 1

She's a true feminist, not to mention one of the few self-made billionaires, a philanthropist, and a brave BAMF. One of the most inspirational women alive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am glad it played out as it did -- I don't think Rowling's positions on this matter are grounded in hate, and while I don't always agree with her or what she says, it would be a real strike against free speech to prosecute her for her opinions.

She disagrees with some of the prevailing attitudes on gender and the law. A decent number of people agree with her. She doesn't invoke violence against trans people, though she does engage in behavior like deadnaming or questioning the gender someone says they are. I personally wouldn't engaging in those activities but the idea that they would be considered illegal is actually kind of scary to me.

So some hate speech is ok?

The line is fuzzy, PP.

I wouldn't purposefully deadname someone, because I believe we all have the right to choose own names, but I generally feel that JK Rowling is a humane individual and she makes good points. She has done many wonderful things in her life, has supported a lot of charitable causes, and like PP, I feel she's demonstrated her worth as a person enough times that I can ignore this difference we have.

Frankly, she isn't killing 32K civilians like Netanyahu or trying to topple democracy like Trump. Give her a break. Not everyone needs to agree with you on absolutely everything.

Her other actions and the actions of others are irrelevant.

Hate speech is hate speech.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She’s simply speaking out against men who decided they’re women to get into women’s spaces. Women’s prisons, women’s shelters, keeping sex offenders away from women and girls, and men/boys out of women’s/girls sports. And being able to keep the freedom of speech to do so.

I applaud her for not towing the (celebrity) company line, pretending it’s okay.

+ 1

She's a true feminist, not to mention one of the few self-made billionaires, a philanthropist, and a brave BAMF. One of the most inspirational women alive.

And using her platform to spread anti-trans hate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She’s simply speaking out against men who decided they’re women to get into women’s spaces. Women’s prisons, women’s shelters, keeping sex offenders away from women and girls, and men/boys out of women’s/girls sports. And being able to keep the freedom of speech to do so.

I applaud her for not towing the (celebrity) company line, pretending it’s okay.

+ 1

She's a true feminist, not to mention one of the few self-made billionaires, a philanthropist, and a brave BAMF. One of the most inspirational women alive.

And using her platform to spread anti-trans hate.

No, she's not doing that. Nor is she "stirring up hate". She is being controversial and, apparently, offensive. Not the same thing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hate speech is hate speech.

What part of what she said is “hate speech”?

She’s a bigoted bulky who uses her platform to spread hate.


Katie Neeves, a trans woman who was appointed a UN Women UK delegate, was mentioned by Ms Rowling in a previous thread on X.
The author claimed Ms Neeves "switched from straight man to lesbian at the age of 48".
Ms Neeves told BBC News she was "very disappointed" with Police Scotland.
She said: "JK Rowling is a bully and this act was designed to stop bullying, and if they're not going to enforce it then that's very disappointing."
"She listed me and some other trans people along with some sex offenders and put it out to 14 million of her followers.
"That was inciting hatred and it resulted in me receiving thousands of messages of hate. So it's done what she set out for it to do."
Ms Neeves said the story had been published all over the world and was "all misinformation about me".
She added: "It's horrible and it's really harmful."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She’s simply speaking out against men who decided they’re women to get into women’s spaces. Women’s prisons, women’s shelters, keeping sex offenders away from women and girls, and men/boys out of women’s/girls sports. And being able to keep the freedom of speech to do so.

I applaud her for not towing the (celebrity) company line, pretending it’s okay.

+ 1

She's a true feminist, not to mention one of the few self-made billionaires, a philanthropist, and a brave BAMF. One of the most inspirational women alive.

And using her platform to spread anti-trans hate.

Only if you consider it anti-trans hate to say that transwomen are human males, aka men.

It also happens to be truth.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am glad it played out as it did -- I don't think Rowling's positions on this matter are grounded in hate, and while I don't always agree with her or what she says, it would be a real strike against free speech to prosecute her for her opinions.

She disagrees with some of the prevailing attitudes on gender and the law. A decent number of people agree with her. She doesn't invoke violence against trans people, though she does engage in behavior like deadnaming or questioning the gender someone says they are. I personally wouldn't engaging in those activities but the idea that they would be considered illegal is actually kind of scary to me.

So some hate speech is ok?

The line is fuzzy, PP.

I wouldn't purposefully deadname someone, because I believe we all have the right to choose own names, but I generally feel that JK Rowling is a humane individual and she makes good points. She has done many wonderful things in her life, has supported a lot of charitable causes, and like PP, I feel she's demonstrated her worth as a person enough times that I can ignore this difference we have.

Frankly, she isn't killing 32K civilians like Netanyahu or trying to topple democracy like Trump. Give her a break. Not everyone needs to agree with you on absolutely everything.

Her other actions and the actions of others are irrelevant.

Hate speech is hate speech.

To a rigid mind, or if this was court proceedings, you'd be right. But you're wrong, because we're not in court, and we are intelligent people who can cut a break to good people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She’s simply speaking out against men who decided they’re women to get into women’s spaces. Women’s prisons, women’s shelters, keeping sex offenders away from women and girls, and men/boys out of women’s/girls sports. And being able to keep the freedom of speech to do so.

I applaud her for not towing the (celebrity) company line, pretending it’s okay.

+ 1

She's a true feminist, not to mention one of the few self-made billionaires, a philanthropist, and a brave BAMF. One of the most inspirational women alive.

And using her platform to spread anti-trans hate.

No, she's not doing that. Nor is she "stirring up hate". She is being controversial and, apparently, offensive. Not the same thing.

Of course she is.

“ "She listed me and some other trans people along with some sex offenders and put it out to 14 million of her followers.
"That was inciting hatred and it resulted in me receiving thousands of messages of hate. So it's done what she set out for it to do."
Ms Neeves said the story had been published all over the world and was "all misinformation about me".
She added: "It's horrible and it's really harmful."”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She’s simply speaking out against men who decided they’re women to get into women’s spaces. Women’s prisons, women’s shelters, keeping sex offenders away from women and girls, and men/boys out of women’s/girls sports. And being able to keep the freedom of speech to do so.

I applaud her for not towing the (celebrity) company line, pretending it’s okay.

+ 1

She's a true feminist, not to mention one of the few self-made billionaires, a philanthropist, and a brave BAMF. One of the most inspirational women alive.

And using her platform to spread anti-trans hate.

It's not "hate" to point out that trans women are not cis-women. It's just a fact.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hate speech is hate speech.

What part of what she said is “hate speech”?

She’s a bigoted bulky who uses her platform to spread hate.


Katie Neeves, a trans woman who was appointed a UN Women UK delegate, was mentioned by Ms Rowling in a previous thread on X.
The author claimed Ms Neeves "switched from straight man to lesbian at the age of 48".
Ms Neeves told BBC News she was "very disappointed" with Police Scotland.
She said: "JK Rowling is a bully and this act was designed to stop bullying, and if they're not going to enforce it then that's very disappointing."
"She listed me and some other trans people along with some sex offenders and put it out to 14 million of her followers.
"That was inciting hatred and it resulted in me receiving thousands of messages of hate. So it's done what she set out for it to do."
Ms Neeves said the story had been published all over the world and was "all misinformation about me".
She added: "It's horrible and it's really harmful."

So it’s considered hate to say that a transgender person transitioned?

Interesting