J.K. Rowling and the TERF wars

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Jeff Lebowski
    Corporate lackey for Jesus
    • Nov 2008
    • 69407

    #106
    Let's examine Scotland's recent track record in policing speech:

    In 2016, Scottish comedian Mark Meechan decided to pull a prank on his girlfriend who was always raving about how cute and adorable her little pug was, so he secretly taught the dog to do a Nazi salute and filmed the dog doing the salute with a tiny Hitler mustache and put it on Youtube. Most people thought it was hilarious, but he was arrested, tried, and convicted in 2018 and fined 800 pounds for violating hate speech laws.



    Don't worry Scottish women! Something like this could never happen to you.
    "There is no creature more arrogant than a self-righteous libertarian on the web, am I right? Those folks are just intolerable."
    "It's no secret that the great American pastime is no longer baseball. Now it's sanctimony." -- Guy Periwinkle, The Nix.
    "Juilliardk N I ibuprofen Hyu I U unhurt u" - creekster

    Comment

    • Bo Diddley
      Senior
      • Jul 2012
      • 18675

      #107
      Originally posted by Jeff Lebowski View Post
      Let's examine Scotland's recent track record in policing speech:

      In 2016, Scottish comedian Mark Meechan decided to pull a prank on his girlfriend who was always raving about how cute and adorable her little pug was, so he secretly taught the dog to do a Nazi salute and filmed the dog doing the salute with a tiny Hitler mustache and put it on Youtube. Most people thought it was hilarious, but he was arrested, tried, and convicted in 2018 and fined 800 pounds for violating hate speech laws.



      Don't worry Scottish women! Something like this could never happen to you.
      Holy crap! That's nuts. Money well spent.

      Comment

      • fusnik
        Senior Member
        • Nov 2008
        • 4475

        #108
        Originally posted by Jeff Lebowski View Post

        They are easy to find. Google some BBC articles if you like.

        Fascinating how you are such an apologist for free speech restrictions. So those women in Scotland should just shut up and trust that the government will not infringe on their rights and every decision they make on which cases to prosecute will be correct and fair, right? Just ignore the cases where the government allows rapists to go to a women's prison because of their preferred gender identity. The government is always right! Unless of course, the government decides put restrictions on life-altering surgeries and hormone treatments to minors. You can't trust them with that decision.
        WTF are you going on about?

        I’m literally the only one on this website who in the last week has spoken with an actual lawyer and psychologist in Scotland about this.

        Both said there are pros and cons of this new law. Neither seemed bothered that their free speech rights were being infringed, in fact the lawyer told me there’s an argument to be made that the new law enhances and clarifies a decades old free speech law. Primary concern they had was clogging up police resources when the police recently announced they would stop investigating low level crimes. The psychologist expressed concerns about Scotlands liberal and extreme posture towards trans healthcare, specifically in youth (which I’ve already posted in this thread), and their hopes going forward in regard to vulnerable folks and how to carve a path forward. They hoped this law would further shine light on a complex problem.

        The biggest concern they both had was, what happens when Celtic and Rangers fans fight, could it be misconstrued as a religious squabble and have criminal enhancements added to any charges.

        Most articles from reputable news sources mirror what they told me.

        But I’ll leave you to educate yourself with Elon and Ian Miles Cheong and JKR and the trans activists online.

        Comment

        • falafel
          loves to talk on things
          • Mar 2009
          • 37836

          #109
          Originally posted by fusnik View Post

          WTF are you going on about?

          I’m literally the only one on this website who in the last week has spoken with an actual lawyer and psychologist in Scotland about this.

          Both said there are pros and cons of this new law. Neither seemed bothered that their free speech rights were being infringed, in fact the lawyer told me there’s an argument to be made that the new law enhances and clarifies a decades old free speech law. Primary concern they had was clogging up police resources when the police recently announced they would stop investigating low level crimes. The psychologist expressed concerns about Scotlands liberal and extreme posture towards trans healthcare, specifically in youth (which I’ve already posted in this thread), and their hopes going forward in regard to vulnerable folks and how to carve a path forward. They hoped this law would further shine light on a complex problem.

          The biggest concern they both had was, what happens when Celtic and Rangers fans fight, could it be misconstrued as a religious squabble and have criminal enhancements added to any charges.

          Most articles from reputable news sources mirror what they told me.

          But I’ll leave you to educate yourself with Elon and Ian Miles Cheong and JKR and the trans activists online.
          Ain't it like most people, I'm no different. We love to talk on things we don't know about.

          Dig your own grave, and save!

          "The only one of us who is so significant that Jeff owes us something simply because he decided to grace us with his presence is falafel." -- All-American

          "I know that you are one of the cool and 'edgy' BYU fans" -- Wally

          GIVE 'EM HELL, BRIGHAM!

          Comment

          • Jeff Lebowski
            Corporate lackey for Jesus
            • Nov 2008
            • 69407

            #110
            Originally posted by fusnik View Post

            WTF are you going on about?

            I’m literally the only one on this website who in the last week has spoken with an actual lawyer and psychologist in Scotland about this.

            Both said there are pros and cons of this new law. Neither seemed bothered that their free speech rights were being infringed, in fact the lawyer told me there’s an argument to be made that the new law enhances and clarifies a decades old free speech law. Primary concern they had was clogging up police resources when the police recently announced they would stop investigating low level crimes. The psychologist expressed concerns about Scotlands liberal and extreme posture towards trans healthcare, specifically in youth (which I’ve already posted in this thread), and their hopes going forward in regard to vulnerable folks and how to carve a path forward. They hoped this law would further shine light on a complex problem.

            The biggest concern they both had was, what happens when Celtic and Rangers fans fight, could it be misconstrued as a religious squabble and have criminal enhancements added to any charges.

            Most articles from reputable news sources mirror what they told me.
            So you talked to two people? Cool. I guess that settles it.

            Originally posted by fusnik View Post
            But I’ll leave you to educate yourself with Elon and Ian Miles Cheong and JKR and the trans activists online.
            Oh brother.
            "There is no creature more arrogant than a self-righteous libertarian on the web, am I right? Those folks are just intolerable."
            "It's no secret that the great American pastime is no longer baseball. Now it's sanctimony." -- Guy Periwinkle, The Nix.
            "Juilliardk N I ibuprofen Hyu I U unhurt u" - creekster

            Comment

            • Maximus
              Senior Member
              • Sep 2009
              • 5997

              #111
              so youre calling out incidents which have nothing to do with this topic?

              Comment

              • fusnik
                Senior Member
                • Nov 2008
                • 4475

                #112
                Originally posted by Jeff Lebowski View Post

                So you talked to two people? Cool. I guess that settles it.

                Oh brother.
                I talked to two people in country who happen to be experts in their fields, read mutilple different articles granted I’m super ignorant when it comes to law and rely heavily on the views of others to synthesize info, and listened to a couple podcasts from Scottish people.

                When you were pressed on your understanding of the topic you posted this:

                Originally posted by Jeff Lebowski View Post

                Which is exactly what it was widely assumed to cover following the recent changes. Again, as evidenced by the words of countless trans activists.
                A ‘widely’ assumed understanding of a law evidenced by ‘countless’ trans activists.

                Honestly one of the and funniest things ever written on this board.

                You've now pivoted to free speech advocacy. I’d be interested to hear your thoughts on something relevant to Utah:




                Comment

                • Jeff Lebowski
                  Corporate lackey for Jesus
                  • Nov 2008
                  • 69407

                  #113
                  Originally posted by fusnik View Post

                  I talked to two people in country who happen to be experts in their fields, read mutilple different articles granted I’m super ignorant when it comes to law and rely heavily on the views of others to synthesize info, and listened to a couple podcasts from Scottish people.
                  Trust me, bro.

                  Originally posted by fusnik View Post
                  When you were pressed on your understanding of the topic you posted this:

                  A ‘widely’ assumed understanding of a law evidenced by ‘countless’ trans activists.
                  This is what I actually said:

                  The law was ambiguous and there was a wide perception that the law would apply to misgendering as evidenced by the countless trans activists saying that exact thing before her April 1 thread and then insisting that she be charged.
                  I stand by that statement.

                  Furthermore, perhaps in all of that "research" you have been doing you may have missed this one: The Scottish Government's minister for victims and community safety publicly stated that misgendering someone could potentially lead to prosecution under the new law:

                  The Scottish Government's minister for victims and community safety appeared on BBC Radio 4 to defend the hate crime law, and insisted that it is up to Police Scotland to decide what is, and isn't a crime.


                  An SNP minister has warned that Scots could face a criminal record if they are found to have misgendered someone online under the new hate crime laws. Siobhian Brown, who is the minister for victims and community safety, admitted that the likes of JK Rowling could be subjected to numerous police complaints if she made gender critical comments.
                  But concerns have been raised that this will have a "chilling" effect on free speech as complainants will be allowed to anonymously report someone online, or at one of hundreds of reporting centres across Scotland. This can include comments made on social media.
                  But go on and gaslight us into believing it was never a real concern and it was just a few kooks on twitter.

                  Originally posted by fusnik View Post
                  You've now pivoted to free speech advocacy.
                  How in the hell is that a pivot? The entire issue is free speech.
                  "There is no creature more arrogant than a self-righteous libertarian on the web, am I right? Those folks are just intolerable."
                  "It's no secret that the great American pastime is no longer baseball. Now it's sanctimony." -- Guy Periwinkle, The Nix.
                  "Juilliardk N I ibuprofen Hyu I U unhurt u" - creekster

                  Comment

                  • falafel
                    loves to talk on things
                    • Mar 2009
                    • 37836

                    #114
                    Originally posted by Jeff Lebowski View Post

                    How in the hell is that a pivot? The entire issue is free speech.
                    Massive flip-flop from JL on this one. Not that long ago he was 100% for state-sponsored censorship of dissenting opinion.
                    Ain't it like most people, I'm no different. We love to talk on things we don't know about.

                    Dig your own grave, and save!

                    "The only one of us who is so significant that Jeff owes us something simply because he decided to grace us with his presence is falafel." -- All-American

                    "I know that you are one of the cool and 'edgy' BYU fans" -- Wally

                    GIVE 'EM HELL, BRIGHAM!

                    Comment

                    • tooblue
                      Senior Member
                      • Nov 2008
                      • 5097

                      #115
                      As the only individual here who actually lives in a country (common wealth) where similar legislation (Bill C-63) is being put in place, and as a post secondary professor who interacts daily with a variety of LGBTQ2S+ individuals, and as someone who sleeps in the same bed with a psychotherapist I can sincerely state that the Scottish legislation is frightening. Chilling. Reprehensible.

                      Comment

                      • fusnik
                        Senior Member
                        • Nov 2008
                        • 4475

                        #116
                        Originally posted by tooblue View Post
                        As the only individual here who actually lives in a country (common wealth) where similar legislation (Bill C-63) is being put in place, and as a post secondary professor who interacts daily with a variety of LGBTQ2S+ individuals, and as someone who sleeps in the same bed with a psychotherapist I can sincerely state that the Scottish legislation is frightening. Chilling. Reprehensible.
                        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.

                        Comment

                        • fusnik
                          Senior Member
                          • Nov 2008
                          • 4475

                          #117
                          Originally posted by Jeff Lebowski View Post

                          Trust me, bro.



                          This is what I actually said:



                          I stand by that statement.

                          Furthermore, perhaps in all of that "research" you have been doing you may have missed this one: The Scottish Government's minister for victims and community safety publicly stated that misgendering someone could potentially lead to prosecution under the new law:

                          The Scottish Government's minister for victims and community safety appeared on BBC Radio 4 to defend the hate crime law, and insisted that it is up to Police Scotland to decide what is, and isn't a crime.






                          But go on and gaslight us into believing it was never a real concern and it was just a few kooks on twitter.



                          How in the hell is that a pivot? The entire issue is free speech.
                          Again I’ll ask about the Lady Utes.

                          Comment

                          • Copelius
                            Maker of eyeballs
                            • Dec 2012
                            • 4014

                            #118
                            Originally posted by fusnik View Post

                            Again I’ll ask about the Lady Utes.
                            It would appear to me that the initial pass by the rednecks in their truck was not a violation, but I think a good prosecutor could use the second pass as a threat under the Malicious Harassment law on the books. That is up to a 5 yr prison sentence as well as a civil cause for the Lady Utes. An extremely subjective statute, that the legislature has inserted a savings clause into in the event that my analysis is incorrect.

                            18-7902. MALICIOUS HARASSMENT DEFINED — PROHIBITED. It shall be unlawful for any person, maliciously and with the specific intent to intimidate or harass another person because of that person’s race, color, religion, ancestry, or national origin, to:
                            (a) Cause physical injury to another person; or
                            (b) Damage, destroy, or deface any real or personal property of another person; or
                            (c) Threaten, by word or act, to do the acts prohibited if there is reasonable cause to believe that any of the acts described in subsections (a) and (b) of this section will occur.
                            The second pass can give reason to believe that there is a potential for physical injury, so long as it is more than just a drive by yelling stupid _________, or whatever. I think there has to be something more communicated to be a threat, which can be as simple as go home you _______, or get out of our town _______, etc.
                            “Every player dreams of being a Yankee, and if they don’t it’s because they never got the chance.” Aroldis Chapman

                            Comment

                            • falafel
                              loves to talk on things
                              • Mar 2009
                              • 37836

                              #119
                              Originally posted by fusnik View Post

                              Again I’ll ask about the Lady Utes.
                              The alleged crimes committed against them is covered by normal harassment laws. This has been the debate for years regarding hate speech laws.
                              Ain't it like most people, I'm no different. We love to talk on things we don't know about.

                              Dig your own grave, and save!

                              "The only one of us who is so significant that Jeff owes us something simply because he decided to grace us with his presence is falafel." -- All-American

                              "I know that you are one of the cool and 'edgy' BYU fans" -- Wally

                              GIVE 'EM HELL, BRIGHAM!

                              Comment

                              • Jeff Lebowski
                                Corporate lackey for Jesus
                                • Nov 2008
                                • 69407

                                #120
                                Originally posted by fusnik View Post

                                Again I’ll ask about the Lady Utes.
                                From what little I know about it, it sounds awful. Sadly par for the course for that particular part of Idaho.
                                "There is no creature more arrogant than a self-righteous libertarian on the web, am I right? Those folks are just intolerable."
                                "It's no secret that the great American pastime is no longer baseball. Now it's sanctimony." -- Guy Periwinkle, The Nix.
                                "Juilliardk N I ibuprofen Hyu I U unhurt u" - creekster

                                Comment

                                Working...