JK Rowling and chamber of the new Scottish Laws

I have few heroes. JK Rowling is one.

UK is bizarre these days.

It wasn't happening in England despite that ambiguity

If you think it's the same law, you don't understand it.

Thank you for the full and interesting replies but they miss the point. I was inviting you to consider how these 'victories for free speech' will feel when they are turned on you, as inevitably they will.

You weren't, you were badly misunderstanding the Forstater judgment.

Ah yes, of course.

The idea that women should be allowed to have some spaces for themselves and a word for themselves and generally the right to say no to penis people is not one that would ever have occurred to us had we not been radicalised by the American evangelical right.

I think if that was not their intention, they would have clarified that it was not their intention when they were specifically asked to do so. Instead, they refused.

I don't see what JK Rowling has said that could possibly be considered hate speech. She holds the position that biological sex can't be changed which is hardly controversial, even if some disagree. She supports the rights of transpeople to live as they choose and to not be discriminated against. She cautions against irreversible medical treatments in children.

Everything she says seems measured, calm, well thought out.

If I am wrong perhaps someone can provide evidence. All I see is people claiming she said things such as advocating discrimination or inciting hatred, which I can't find any evidence for.

I think if the intent of the HCB was to criminalise misgendering, then it would have surely included legislation that made it abundantly clear misgendering constituted a Hate Crime?

Thank you for the full and interesting replies but they miss the point. I was inviting you to consider how these 'victories for free speech' will feel when they are turned on you, as inevitably they will.

This whole sorry barrage of hate-filled spite, on all sides, is recent, an invention of the American evangelical right who deliver their agenda by whipping up division. The same organisations are rolling back women's rights across America, using the exact same playbook.

You can choose to play their game, or not. Be careful what you wish for

Ambiguity within English police forces perhaps, which still doesn't explain the constant narrative North of the border for the past few months that Police Scotland would be marching off people left and right come 01/04.

It wasn't happening in England despite that ambiguity, wasn't happening in Scotland prior to 01/04, so why would it happen after a Bill that changes nothing about that particular aspect of HC law came into force?

Exactly.

But I don't think that was what the lawmakers intended. Quite the opposite, in fact.

Anyone who thinks this law wouldn't have any effect either isn't paying attention or isn't being truthful. The chilling effect of the police overreach in parts of the UK where we don't have this law has been stunning enough, let alone what could have happened in Scotland had JKR not been mistress of the situation.

This.

More evidence the law is working as intended then.

It's been demonstrated that the kind of things many TRAs see as hate crimes don't meet the criteria. All to the good, I'd say.

This is hilarious.

You think people ever stopped discriminating against and persecuting women?! If you honestly believe women are less effective than men in your industry then go ahead and so, all the men there are already saying it I promise you.

54,000 women a year are forced out of their job because of pregnancy discrimination, and one in five mothers are harassed at work because of their pregnancy.

Less than 1% of rapes result in a conviction. 3 women are killed each week by a man in the UK. 1 in 4 UK women are raped or sexually assaulted.

I really don’t think JKR standing up for women is going to make things worse for women 😂

Exactly. Women in England have had the police at their door to 'check their thinking' for questioning gender ideology. Or for taking a photo of a sticker. Or for 'being untoward about paedophiles'. Or had their tech seized and been taken away by the police in front of their children and subjected to Draconian restrictions, because a TRA accused them of being a poster they aren't on a website. And all of these things happened in England, where we don't even have this law.

Anyone who thinks this law wouldn't have any effect either isn't paying attention or isn't being truthful. The chilling effect of the police overreach in parts of the UK where we don't have this law has been stunning enough, let alone what could have happened in Scotland had JKR not been mistress of the situation.

They were corrected. But the fact that they said it at all shows that there is plenty of ambiguity over this issue. Mainly thanks to Stonewall being paid to train every Tom, Dick and Harry about equality law and teaching them the Stonewall version of the law rather than the actual law.

Then of course they needed corrected, especially since the HCB brings Scots approach to HC broadly in line with that of England.

She's also said that if Police Scotland try to prosecute someone else, she will say the same words as that woman so they can both be charged together

Is she talking in absolute terms here?

Willoughby already reported her to police, and tried again today. TRA Katie Neeves gave a radio 4 interview saying that JK had committed a hate crime and KN was thinking of reporting

Willoughby diving right in was an inevitability. I think this is as much a barometer for the Bill as anything, because it ably demonstrates that things which were not Hate Crimes prior to 01/04, for example IW's recent complaint about being misgendered, are still not Hate Crimes, as was evident to anyone who had been paying attention.

Sophie Sparkles, the male TRA partner of male Scottish TRA Heather Herbert also reported Glinner and Wings Over Scotland and received a visit, in which Sophie claims they said nothing could be done.

More evidence the law is working as intended then.

JKR is a national treasure

Some English police forces (without even the backing of this new Scottish law) have been known to tweet - completely erroneously - that misgendering is a hate crime.

Unfortunately IW is (or was) taken seriously enough to be wheeled out repeatedly on media outlets that should have known better, and encouraged to air his views.

@XDownwiththissortofthingX

Perhaps you can't see it because you're not very well informed about what's been said about it in various quarters.

She did tweet something that she thought might be used to prosecute her, she said she would ahead of time. She's also said that if Police Scotland try to prosecute someone else, she will say the same words as that woman so they can both be charged together.

Willoughby already reported her to police, and tried again today. TRA Katie Neeves gave a radio 4 interview saying that JK had committed a hate crime and KN was thinking of reporting.

Sophie Sparkles, the male TRA partner of male Scottish TRA Heather Herbert also reported Glinner and Wings Over Scotland and received a visit, in which Sophie claims they said nothing could be done.

@FairCat Your erm “legal analysis” is so off it requires correction. Recent judgements (i assume you are referring to Forstarter et al) established that a belief described as critical of gender ideology is a a protected belief, as long as that belief is not expressed in such a way as to disadvantage a person who falls within the protected characteristic of being transgendered.

that is by no means a license to discriminate against anybody with a protected characteristic so you are wrong, legally speaking.

I personally stand by freedom of speech so you can insult, upset, and offend anyone.

The laws are a terrible idea, I find them quite sinister. It will stifle free speech- people are likely to simply stay silent because of it for fear that someone may make a complaint and what could happen if that happens. An investigation like this, even if spurious, could have significant social and professional consequences, even though they have not done anything wrong. People will be intimidated. A complaint can be made anonymously, after all, and remain so until point of charge.

I think it highly likely that there will be a lot of petty and vindictive complaints made- in particular from certain particularly aggressive activists. A vast amount of police/cps etc time will be wasted. We already have legislation to protect people, it wasn’t necessary.

Not only that but should a complaint be made and investigated, but no case to answer/does not meet the threshold for prosecution, your details can still be held ok file. There will be some sort of record/list held centrally. It is not clear why such a “list” is required, what they plan to do with the information and how it can be used (e.g. is it going to show in PVG certification?).

The difference is that your examples are beliefs, based in bigotry, whereas gender critical feminists are merely stating facts.

For me, the problematic part of the judgment in the Maya Forstater case was that gender critical feminist views were characterised as beliefs. Protected beliefs, yes. Beliefs we are entitled to hold, and to express. Fine, whatever. But this shouldn't need to be protected, any more than expressing one's "belief" in gravity should need to be protected.

If anything, the belief that male people can become women is a belief that should be protected in law, in the sense that you shouldn't be discriminated against for holding it, the same way you should not be discriminated against for believing in God. But not being discriminated against for believing in God does not mean you get to force other people to believe in God. The same should be true of gender identity theory.

We should not even be having a debate about whether it's OK to say that trans women are male, or humans can't change sex. It isn't bigoted to state the truth, or acknowledge biological reality. (If it were, the Equality Act itself would be a bigoted piece of legislation.)

When politicians start trying to criminalise the speaking of truth, we truly are in 1984 territory.

This jaw droppingly insane piece of legislation needed shooting down in flames at the first opportunity. JK Rowling has proven herself more than equal to the task, and made the Scottish government look very stupid indeed.