The Harry Potter author described several transgender women as men in a series of social media posts.

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.

  • porous_grey_matter
    35·
    3 months ago

    The government deciding what ideas should be banned is pretty typical in Germany lol

      • porous_grey_matter
        6·
        3 months ago

        Ok, so which is it? I’m arguing it’s fine to ban ideas if they’re bad enough, like holocaust denial in Germany.

        • gapbetweenus@feddit.de
          19·
          3 months ago

          And I’m arguing that it’s a bad idea. Germany is a good example, banning holocaust denial did not stop AFD from raising and getting political power. We were not even able to forbid the damn NDP.

          • porous_grey_matter
            9·
            3 months ago

            That’s not a great argument, there is no evidence those things are somehow connected or not. For all you know it would have been straight back to fascism 60 years earlier if it wasn’t banned. The reason AfD has power is that the courts and government support them and let them get away with crime. If the law was actually applied it would have banned that party.

            • gapbetweenus@feddit.de
              37·
              3 months ago

              So it’s about how a law is applied. And you still don’t see the potential danger of a law regulating speech? Guess we won’t agree on this one.

              I don’t really see a benefit in people being forced to phrase their hateful opinions in a way to circumvent laws. In the end, Rowling won’t stop spreading her bigoted hateful bullshit - in best case she will just phrase it a bit different, which actually might get some stupid moderates on her side.

              • BreakDecksEnglish
                41·
                3 months ago

                in best case she will just phrase it a bit different, which actually might get some stupid moderates on her side.

                Look in the mirror. She is framing this issue in a hyperbolic way and you’re siding with her.

                • gapbetweenus@feddit.de
                  36·
                  3 months ago

                  Dude, I’m not siding with her on any issue besides freedom of speech - which just happen to be my opinion.