this post was submitted on 01 Apr 2024

0 points (NaN% liked)

News

35821 readers

1868 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 biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.

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. Clickbait titles may be removed.

Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.

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, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.

7. No duplicate posts.

If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. 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 or news aggregators.

All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.

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 2 years ago

MODERATORS

JonsJava@lemmy.world

gedaliyah@lemmy.world

little_cow@lemmy.world

JK Rowling in ‘arrest me’ challenge over Scottish hate crime law (www.bbc.com)

submitted 2 years ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world

12 comments fedilink hide all child comments

JK Rowling has challenged Scotland's new hate crime law in a series of social media posts - inviting police to arrest her if they believe she has committed an offence.

The Harry Potter author, who lives in Edinburgh, described several transgender women as men, including convicted prisoners, trans activists and other public figures.

She said "freedom of speech and belief" was at an end if accurate description of biological sex was outlawed.

Earlier, Scotland's first minister Humza Yousaf said the new law would deal with a "rising tide of hatred".

The Hate Crime and Public Order (Scotland) Act 2021 creates a new crime of "stirring up hatred" relating to age, disability, religion, sexual orientation, transgender identity or being intersex.

…

Ms Rowling, who has long been a critic of some trans activism, posted on X on the day the new legislation came into force.

all 13 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] kellyaster@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago

Rowling quote from the article:

Scottish lawmakers seem to have placed higher value on the feelings of men performing their idea of femaleness, however misogynistically or opportunistically, than on the rights and freedoms of actual women and girls.

It's difficult to accept that someone I used to respect could say such hateful things about people like me. I'm not gonna lie, it hurts to read. What the fuck, Joanne? Is that all I am to you... just a man "performing" my idea of femaleness? Well, fuck you, then. Should I wish for you to feel the same pain you've inflicted on others? To be honest, judging by your "performance" in the media the past several years, I don't think you're resilient enough to survive it.

[–] niva@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

This is mental illness by now! Seriously wtf? Why is this so important for her that she can't stop talking about it? If I had some irrational hate for trans woman, I would not go on about it in public all the time.

Don't we have more important problems then to bash people that are so unhappy with their body that they are willing to take hormones and let people operate on their genitals?

This is such a simple thought, everybody should be able to think it, right? But on the other hand, she is not the only one hating transgender women or men. I mean it is not right to hate people for that. But if I would hate trans people then I would just not invite them for dinner and would stop talking about them all the time.

It must be some form of mental illness I have no other explanation.

[–] kescusay@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I am so fucking sick of these bigots pretending the science of "biological sex" is on their side.

In recent years, multiple studies of the brains of trans people have revealed areas of differentiation from those of cisgender people. And unless these bigots are prepared to argue that brains are not part of biology, they only have two choices: Deny the science somehow or accept that they're just bigots who want to hate, regardless of the science.

And because unlike bigots, I like to back my shit up:

On top of that, there's some indications of oligogenic causes resulting in various allele differences that wouldn't necessarily show up on a brain scan.

In conclusion: Fuck bigots and their attempts to co-opt science in order to support their bigotry.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago

I'm glad you're backing it up, but honestly, the answer to this whole "biological science" bullshit is simper- it's none of their fucking business how someone else identifies. I don't care what "science" says is a man or a woman. If someone says they're a woman, it's not my fucking business to tell them they aren't.

[–] BertramDitore@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

OR, and hear me out, you could just not be a total asshole? Maybe have a baseline of tolerance and respect for the people who made you a billionaire? No? Then fuck right off and accept the consequences of your hatred.

[+] ogmios@sh.itjust.works 0 points 2 years ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (1 children)

[deleted]

[–] BertramDitore@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

No, not even a little bit. There is a difference between being an asshole and committing a hate crime. Hate crime laws, when properly crafted and enforced, are an important component of a functional society. They can act as a deterrent, but they are also a way for those materially harmed by a hate crime to get justice. Free speech is never a universal right, anywhere in the world. There are always legitimate restrictions to ensure the public's overall health and safety.

[–] bostonbananarama@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

No, not even a little bit. There is a difference between being an asshole and committing a hate crime.

I'm not sure there is a difference with this law.

Hate crime laws, when properly crafted and enforced, are an important component of a functional society.

I'm not sure that's true. Freedom of speech is an important component, and sometimes that means tolerating distasteful speech.

They can act as a deterrent, but they are also a way for those materially harmed by a hate crime to get justice.

What constitutes harm though? The UK tends to include offense (or offence) as a harm.

Free speech is never a universal right, anywhere in the world. There are always legitimate restrictions to ensure the public's overall health and safety.

Absolutely, but being offended by a bigot probably shouldn't be criminal without some component of advocacy for violence.

A person commits an offence if they communicate material, or behave in a manner, "that a reasonable person would consider to be threatening or abusive," with the intention of stirring up hatred based on protected characteristics.

[–] GnomeKat@lemmy.blahaj.zone 0 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

We don't have to tolerate the intolerant, they refuse to abide by the mutual contract of tolerance so they don't deserve the protections of a tolerant society.

JKR isn't just doing a little bit of free speech she is a billionaire advocating for hate on a massive platform and donating to hate groups, she has influence and power. She is absolutely advocating for the restriction on trans peoples rights, that is violence. Especially in a time when anti trans hate is on the rise we should be even more skeptical of claims of free speech, right now across the world hate crimes against trans people are going up and our rights are being stripped away.

Arguments about free speech are just a way to ignore the issue and do nothing as transphobia continues to thrive and spread. Stop defending hate.

[–] aidan@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Until the intolerance of the intolerant is applied to not tolerate you... You see hate crime laws being used to defend religions from criticism for example.

[–] GnomeKat@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 2 years ago

Oh my what ever might that be like, having to deal with intolerance. I never have to deal with that nope. Nope it's definitely not a daily occurrence for pretty much all trans people.

But the transphobes get to advocate for my erasure and that's just free speech.. yep makes sense.. totally fair and balanced

[–] Wayren@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Can we just hold one big public figure accountable to the law? Please?

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world -1 points 2 years ago

No.