J.K. Rowling and the TERF wars

[fusnik]

From what little I know about it, it sounds awful. Sadly par for the course for that particular part of Idaho.

And yet you don’t worry the police have spent hundreds of hours policing speech.

Throw in some transgenders and add another country and we are on the verge of full on 1984!

While not totally the same I think what JKR does is adjacent to what those individuals in Idaho did. Where we may find sympathy is I don’t think the truck dude in Idaho should go to jail for 5 years, nor do I think JKR should go to jail for 7.

[Jeff Lebowski]

And yet you don’t worry the police have spent hundreds of hours policing speech.

Throw in some transgenders and add another country and we are on the verge of full on 1984!

While not totally the same I think what JKR does is adjacent to what those individuals in Idaho did. Where we may find sympathy is I don’t think the truck dude in Idaho should go to jail for 5 years, nor do I think JKR should go to jail for 7.

Ha. "While not totally the same" is doing some awfully heavy lifting here.

[tooblue]

So scary!

Wait til you hear that the law passed in Scotland also included religious persecution.

Im sure folks calling Muslim’s, Sikhs, are in real danger of being thrown to the gulags.

You don't even know what you're arguing and why you are even arguing it primarily because you are arguing from a place of ignorance. lol

[fusnik]

Ha. "While not totally the same" is doing some awfully heavy lifting here.

So exactly how much jail time do you think JKR should get for correctly identifying the biological sex of those rapists and pedophiles?

I’m not going to defend rapists and pedophiles.

This is a directly from the Scottish government website:


The 2021 Act maintains the existing stirring up of racial hatred offence, with some minor modifications.

The test for the offence remains the same as it is under the Public Order Act 1986, so that for a stirring up racial hatred offence to be committed, a person must behave in a manner that:

• a reasonable person would consider to be threatening, abusive or insulting, or communicates to another person material that a reasonable person would consider to be threatening, abusive or insulting, and
• either–
  • in doing so, the person intends to stir up hatred against a group of persons based on the group being defined by reference to race, colour, nationality (including citizenship), or ethnic or national origins, or
  • a reasonable person would consider the behaviour or the communication of the material to be likely to result in hatred being stirred up against such a group.

The 2021 Act also creates new stirring up of hatred offences for each of the following characteristics:

• Disability,
• Religion,
• Sexual orientation,
• Transgender identity,
• Age,
• Variations in sex characteristics.

According to Copelius our hate crime statues read similarly.

I don’t think misgendering someone purposefully is a hate crime, neither do Scottish police.

I do think JKR, if she really wanted to help move the discussion surrounding trans folks, has the sway to help with real issues facing Scottish youth and families. Instead she’s decided to turn this into a culture war which you were more than happy to oblige.

[Jeff Lebowski]

I’m not going to defend rapists and pedophiles.

Yet you mock JKR for raising legitimate concerns about them.

I don’t think misgendering someone purposefully is a hate crime, neither do Scottish police.

And yet we had a top SNP official explicitly say that could potentially fall under the new law. Something you ignored.

I do think JKR, if she really wanted to help move the discussion surrounding trans folks, has the sway to help with real issues facing Scottish youth and families. Instead she’s decided to turn this into a culture war which you were more than happy to oblige.

Would be nice if you made even the slightest effort to learn about her history as an abuse survivor and the reasons she has taken the stands she has for women's rights instead of just making dismissive statements like this.

Time to agree to disagree and move on.

[fusnik]

Yet you mock JKR for raising legitimate concerns about them.



And yet we had a top SNP official explicitly say that could potentially fall under the new law. Something you ignored.



Would be nice if you made even the slightest effort to learn about her history as an abuse survivor and the reasons she has taken the stands she has for women's rights instead of just making dismissive statements like this.

Time to agree to disagree and move on.

Yes because it’s obvious instead of reading the GD bill and having a rational discussion you’ve jumped down the culture war abyss.

You started with this salvo:

In case you missed it, Scotland recently passed a new law that made it a hate crime to misgender someone, with a jail sentence of up to seven years if convicted.

Absolutely false and inflammatory.

She is forcing the Scottish government to arrest her and defend the law in what would be a trial of the century, or not arrest her and thereby effectively nullify the law, given that everyone else thereafter could point to her case and argue selective enforcement.

Absolute bonkers take.

It really is shocking how freedom of speech is less protected/valued in Europe. Of all people, they should know better.

This in response to this bill which adds a few minority classes to a law already on the books for almost 30 years. Have you in the last 30 years even given more than 5 secs of your brain power to hate speech law in the UK?

Nobody claimed that the law was exclusively targeted to gender issues, so let's put that straw man to bed.

Except that’s what you wrote in your first sentence. You crafted a narrative where somehow a billionaire was possibly going to be a martyr for free speech by punching down on a group of people that comprise of .5% of the British populace.

She has now forced the police to issue a clarification and ensure it won't be applied that way.

The SNP you keep referencing explicitly stated that matters regarding the investigation of hate speech would be left to the police. There’s valid criticisms of this.

The 1986 law effectively bans hate speech. We have no such laws in the US because of our belief in and our commitment to freedom of speech. With very narrow exceptions, US courts have repeatedly rejected attempts to define hate speech or to curtail it.

Except we do as Copelius explained, we just call them harassment laws.

It seems if you call someone the n word once, no cops. If you call someone the n word and rev your engine and drive by that person your speech may be criminal in America.

If you misgender and insult a trans person to millions of people online, no cops. Maybe if she continues to target specific trans folks through misgendering, escalates her harassment, and directs her followers to someone’s location, her speech may be criminal in Scotland.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Carry on, brother. I am out.

[tooblue]

Carry on, brother. I am out.

.
The challenge of this discussion is it only seen from through an American first amendment lens. The rest of the world does not see free speech through that same lens. You made a reasonable effort to point that out.

[Bo Diddley]

.
The challenge of this discussion is it only seen from through an American first amendment lens. The rest of the world does not see free speech through that same lens. You made a reasonable effort to point that out.

Yep. The 1st Amendment is sacred in the US.

[Bo Diddley]

It really is shocking how freedom of speech is less protected/valued in Europe. Of all people, they should know better.

The Belgium mayor used police to shut down a "right-wing" conference. There was no threat to public safety, and I think all he's really done is given the conference attendees free press and a bigger stage.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-68826577