Lilly Wachowski accused J.K. Rowling of "funding trans genocide" and compared her to the Nazis — and now, the author is responding to the Matrix filmmaker's criticism.

If, as some claim, there is a genetic component to trans identity, they are indeed the subject of genocide.

By the very people who recommend surgery that removes reproductive ability as "trans healthcare".

Gender affirming surgery is actual genocide.

Indeed. Neil Blair has issued statements before when the attacks have been in the media. If it’s like anything else,the process will be

1. idiot TRA makes overblown claim
2. media approach JKR’s representatives for comment
3. her agent releases a statement

Which SLAPP lawsuits are you alleging JKR has used? I’m not aware of any at all, so what is your basis for saying this?

Rivkah Brown, Nicola E Spurling, and then there was some other person who had to apologise because he couldn't afford to fight back. The point is she has used her wealth to silence critics. But when the critic is someone who could call her bluff and engage her in a legal battle that would likely require her to go under oath in filmed depositions - then she doesn't take legal action. Whatever your views on JK - any wealthy person silencing critics in this way is outrageous. It's not acceptable.

Rivka Brown.

Rowling (or rather her lawyers) forced an apology from the Metro for making the seriously defamatory claim that she was a Holocaust denier. I doubt the Metro are short of a bob or two.

Oh, and alcove, your homework today is to go away and learn the difference between “criticism” and “defamation.”

I dare say it will take a few hours, but feel free to come back when you’ve understood it, and ideally no sooner.

Of course they are! In any case they wouldn't be the ones making the decision - that would be down to the managing editor in consultation with the legal department and their insurers.

Do you understand what a SLAPP is?

ETA: Because a multi-millionaire hasn't been sued for the saying the same thing that someone who couldn't afford to fight back has said. What is your explanation why?

Porn addled pair of creeps, as I recall. I’m pulling a disgusted face as I remember it 🤢

who had to apologise because he couldn't afford to fight back

Or, had to apologise because they were chatting shit?

DMGT (who own the Metro) have annual revenue of around £1 billion. Prince Harry could also testify that the company (and their subsidiaries) aren’t shy of defending a lawsuit.

You’ve no clue what is going on behind the scenes.

And the legal department would have advised the decision-makers that they would lose any defamation case. Hence the apology.

If Rivkah Brown and Novara Media had the sense to consult lawyers, they would undoubtedly have received the same advice. Hence the apology.

They would both have lost because they published defamatory material. Challenging defamatory material is not silencing.

What are you talking about 'had to apologise because he couldn't afford to fight back'?

If someone had done nothing wrong they wouldn't have had to apologise would they?

Are you arguing that wealthy people should accept defamation from less well off people as some kind of democratic right? Why shouldn't she have the same rights and protections as anyone else?

Irs really very simple: if you don't want to be taken to court, don't say anything defamatory/ illegal in the public sphere - the same laws apply however much wealth you do/ don't have.

Could you imagine the amount of money Jolyon could grift if he chose to represent someone poor downtrodden TRA who was being threatened with legal by JKR for making a truthful statement about her?

Do you understand what SLAPP is? It's literally an explanation.

In SLAPP cases the plaintiff does not expect to win.

In the Metro and Rivkah Brown/Novara Media examples the plaintiff would have won.

So emphatically not examples of SLAPP.

A multimillionaire claiming she's committed genocide and is a literal Nazi, is not going to lead to a slapp lawsuit, is it. Claiming she generates slapp lawsuits could also be defamatory.

She lets hundreds upon hundreds of things ride.

But if a powerful person is going to tell the whole world that she's committed genocide, is literally a Nazi, and recommend people boycott her product, then go figure.

And boy, are you quacking and walking like a duck now.

Perhaps these (had they gone to court) would have been good examples of an reverse-SLAPP - vigorously defending a position in court that has no chance of prevailing?

I do understand what a SLAPP is, but it’s quite clear you don’t - or that you’re pretending not to, it’s hard to say.

JKR is constantly subjected to unpleasant and offensive criticism on social media - my facebook feed is filled with endless crappy takes from so-called influencers about what a terrible person she is. She is also, as we know, on the receiving end of vast numbers of death and rape threats.

She ignores most of this. If she wanted to, she could easily silence people by setting her lawyers on them - she is, after all, vastly more wealthy than most people. To her credit, she doesn’t. If it amuses her, she’ll sometimes take the piss out of people like India Willoughby or other idiots.

But if someone makes a statement that is obviously defamatory, and that person has some public influence (eg they’re a journalist), then she puts her lawyers on the case and extracts a grovelling apology.

Calling someone a Holocaust denier is extremely defamatory. Do you really need me to explain why?

Again, I'm not really understanding your point. Would you rather she bankrupted people who don't have money? Do you think she is trying to make money?

I do see from other posts that you have misunderstood the concept of a SLAPP.

Yes the article is weird. The first two thirds are even and balanced, then the last paragraph looks like the TRA who usually does the tea jumped on the keyboard and posted a load of bad faith reddit "fact" dribble.

Yes. So often, what trips the type of posters you describe up is that statements made about beliefs, sympathy or reasons for posting on one thread don't line up with behaviour and snide remarks when they get frustrated on another.