Two-part documentary on J.K. Rowling announced by BBC Factual and BBC Scotland

I would bloody love to watch this one!

My side?

My argument?

What are you going on about?

Other than saying I'm thankful for JK raising awareness and her drought comments on the case being a perfect example of her being it to wider attention. I love what she has done despite being bullied.

What a bizarre response to you misunderstanding what the AI fabrications were in the Judge Kemp judgment. The AI fabrications supported your side!

JK wasn't actually involved in this case. She may have commented on it, as did many other people who believe the opposite of JK, i.e. that biological male Beth Upton should be allowed to make women feel uncomfortable in the women's changing rooms.

Any fraughtness and division was created by NHS Fife, which was found to have unlawfully harassed Sandie Peggie.

You're really not helping your argument, whatever it is.

I’m a bit worried about it. I see “her own words” as “taking her tweets out of context” without mentioning the shit that comes back in her direction…

Do you not think JK brought the situation to a much wider audience with her comments, because I do, her fraught comments towards court in highlighting the situation were very helpful?

And again they arenot negative words they are true.

I watched the case live and reported what was happening on one of the threads by the way.

Yes, I am also aware of how good JK was through that whole case. Once again.

Exactly

Her beliefs are mainstream.

She has been relentlessly bullied because she's a woman in the public eye and demonstrably good with her philanthropy and tax paying. She makes the people whose goodness starts and ends with virtue signalling look bad.

And FFS the "divisive dialogue" was started and maintained with misinformation by the press. Just as they do for various other political hot topics.

You’d hope, wouldn’t you? But it hasn’t happened yet. Certainly not at the bloody BBC.

I just hope they show some basic journalistic integrity and ask anyone who complains that JKR is transphobic exactly how they can justify that position. Generally it is just repeated like a mantra.

JKR said she first spoke out because she could see women losing their jobs, being harassed etc. She said she couldn't keep quiet anymore. We know JKR doesn't appear in the doc, but is it too much to hope that the BBC might speak to some of the other women who have been impacted?

All these people hear is "something something JKR, something something made up AI, something something and some trans people are sad"

They can never be bothered to read or think about what was actually said or done, because their made up version of events provides 'evidence' for their foregone conclusion and allows them to keep spreading bile with impunity. While patting themselves on the back for being the 'good guys'.

This is the crux of it, isn't it.

Funny how the people shouting 'trans rights are human rights' can never quite bring themselves to say 'Trans identified men should have the right to pretend to be women and also have women's rights, because they want them'.

Not quite as catchy, I suppose.

If they go into any detail it will be quite difficult to avoid mentioning her impressive and politically neutral philanthropic spending, as well as the feminist activism like the legal fund.

Now that should be a facinating tale of our times. The view point the BBC takes will be interesting because I still trust them to least try and be neutral in their serious reporting.

"especially after the probably AI generated Sandie Peggie judgment with made up quotes"

You're aware that the potentially AI-created bits I the Peggie Sandie judgement were in favour of the trans, right? The fabricated AI quotations were in fact used to deny some of Peggie's claims. This is in fact another example of how pro-trans arguments are based on lies and fabrication, which is what creates a fraught and divisive situation.

For example:
"Mr Kemp cited a Supreme Court case called Lee v Ashers Baking Co Ltd as he discussed how the protected characteristic of being a woman did not take precedence over that of being a trans person.

"He said the case “highlighted the necessity of balancing competing human rights without holding that one has priority over any other”.

"However, as with the Forstater example, this quote does not appear in the Lee v Ashers Baking ruling. The second quote appeared again in the amended version of the ruling issued on Thursday afternoon."

https://archive.is/erbJS

And used this and other fabricated quotations to claim that biological men such as Beth Upton do have the legal right to use women's changing rooms, when they don't.

What you are pointing to is in fact an example of how the trans and their allies in places like the judiciary lie, fabricate and distort.

I saw her in the very early Harry Potter days at the Edinburgh Book Festival. Lovely woman. Genuine and thoughtful answers to children asking questions.

How so? What rights have transpeople lost and how is she responsible? I mean, TIF now have their rights to maternity, pregnancy, abortion and access to female RCC set in stone thanks to the SC judgement. Surely that’s a win for trans rights?

She never set back trans rights, she called out trans gressions.

Probably another loon who believes the Supreme Court Judgment for FWS was "bought".
There's a lot of it about.

Why do you think that?

In other words, you haven’t got a clue.

Hahaha!

I would watch that and record it for future inspiration.

These are not negative words, she has been fraught and divisive, especially after the probably AI generated Sandie Peggie judgment with made up quotes, in getting a very wide audience to see what happened.

Transwomen don't have women's rights because they are not women