JK Rowling tweeting now about 3 actors who revealed her home address on Twitter

[SocialConnection]

The police are involved and all three have locked their accounts.

I hope their agents will take note.

mobile.twitter.com/jk_rowling/status/1462758324177444870

Peaked By Pie

Oh yes!

@SpindlesWhorl

From her website: ________

[email protected]

or

J.K. Rowling
c/o Box 2, 44-46 Morningside Road
Edinburgh
EH10 4BF

Thanks @SpindlesWhorl, I've sent an email

Are these people aware of the 'sissy porn' culture? What are they on about? I would really like to ask them.

Graham Linehan is very knowledgeable about "sissy hypno porn", he often talks about it on his substack page.

The one about mocking people by using "cissy" [being] transmisognystic is puzzling but I guess it makes sense to someone out there...

I get it but it will be very hard to explain without a deletion! Here goes:

I infer that this person falls into the same category as Andrea Long Chu, the acclaimed TW writer on trans issues who wrote "Sissy Porn made me trans." And therefore this person is sensitive about "cissy" being used as an insult for women because it implies that there might be something negative about sissy porn. They're claiming it's transmisogynistic (hateful towards TW) because they believe that many other TW are also trans because of sissy porn.

@allmywhat

The one about mocking people by using "cissy" [being] transmisognystic is puzzling but I guess it makes sense to someone out there...

I get it but it will be very hard to explain without a deletion! Here goes:

I infer that this person falls into the same category as Andrea Long Chu, the acclaimed TW writer on trans issues who wrote "Sissy Porn made me trans." And therefore this person is sensitive about "cissy" being used as an insult for women because it implies that there might be something negative about sissy porn. They're claiming it's transmisogynistic (hateful towards TW) because they believe that many other TW are also trans because of sissy porn.

The fucking ego on that! Everything's about meee.

@allmywhat why would mumsnet censor this? Why is this offensive to say?

“ It is understood that the actors committed no criminal offence”

Yes as I previously said it's about as illegal as taking a selfie in front of Buckingham Palace then putting it online and someone reporting you for "doxxing" the Queen.

I'm a fan of JKR since before the gender stuff yet I had no idea where she lives. If somebody had asked me, I'd have said "Scotland I think". I probably could have found out where she lives if I'd wanted to go looking for it, but it never occurred to me.

However, now I know where she lives, as this information was thrust into my Twitter timeline.

Any comparison with the Queen, a ruling monarch with an official residence and a flag on the roof, is completely risible. JKR is a private individual and the two things are not remotely the same.

why would mumsnet censor this? Why is this offensive to say?

Posts that imply a link between trans identity and fetish are heavily reported by lurkers who don't like this possibility being mooted.

If you write carefully and caveat at all times that you are neither generalising about the whole group, nor talking about anyone in particular, then sometimes posts that allude to the possiblity, where it's relevant to the thread, stay up.

@MargaritaPie

“ It is understood that the actors committed no criminal offence”

Yes as I previously said it's about as illegal as taking a selfie in front of Buckingham Palace then putting it online and someone reporting you for "doxxing" the Queen.

Yes. Quite.

Except, wait. Did they have posters? Did they have a set goal? Did they encourge others to do similar? Did their actions and explicit words online encourage others to act, send death threats?

Most of all - what had she done, specificall , that deserved such spite?

Marg you could put a stop to all this JKR support if you would just post her words, the ones that caused all of this.

I can wait...

MargaritaPie what's your address? If posting JKR's address online is no big deal then surely you won't mind sharing yours?

Emma: "we do and will continue to talk about the topic..." 😊

Clap 👏

@MargaritaPie

“ It is understood that the actors committed no criminal offence”

Yes as I previously said it's about as illegal as taking a selfie in front of Buckingham Palace then putting it online and someone reporting you for "doxxing" the Queen.

It was a shit and irrelevant point the first time you made it. I can't think why you thought it was worth making again.

[quote Franca123]@allmywhat why would mumsnet censor this? Why is this offensive to say?[/quote]
The precise phrasing in the post was seen as 'a sweeping generalisation' and so was deleted.

So, explain cissy/sissy but don't make generalised points about any individual or group of individuals!

Be careful in here!

Seriously MPie, stop digging your hole.

It is never acceptable to take photos of anyone's private house that you have a disagreement with (or worse) and post online.

Anyone arguing that it's ok has a warped sense of boundaries.

Ok, so cissy is an insult about cis people which trans people calls anyone who isn’t trans?

And cissy/sissy porn is also pornography involving transwomen with penises. And some transwomen are extremely keen on this kind of porn to the point that one prominent trans woman, Andrea Long Cho, wrote a book that this was the reason they became trans; sissy/cissy porn?

And we are not allowed to talk about it? This is quite sinister. I am always a bit suspicious when I not am allowed to talk about something.

@allmywhat

why would mumsnet censor this? Why is this offensive to say?

Posts that imply a link between trans identity and fetish are heavily reported by lurkers who don't like this possibility being mooted.

If you write carefully and caveat at all times that you are neither generalising about the whole group, nor talking about anyone in particular, then sometimes posts that allude to the possiblity, where it's relevant to the thread, stay up.

Anybody who is any doubt about the link just needs to look at the "GirlsLikeUs" hashtag on Twitter, but don't do it at work, and make sure you've got plenty of eye bleach.

The original pic with all the details removed. This is what this was all about. Right outside her house, four people (there was a photog too, bet they're relieved they seem to have got away with it).

@Franca123

Thank you. I suspect that that is probably what they were going for. 'Cis' is certainly a derogatory term in my opinion. Bonkers!

I think they have realised that no one is particularly bothered about being called a TERF,* so they need to come up with a new word.

*In as much it is just water off a duck's back

I am always a bit suspicious when I not am allowed to talk about something.

Yes. I suggest reading this article which clarifies a lot of things. It's a chapter out of Helen Joyce's book.

quillette.com/2021/09/07/the-truth-about-autogynephilia/

It was a shit and irrelevant point the first time you made it. I can't think why you thought it was worth making again.

It's literally all they have.
Can't answer what a woman is. Can't answer what gender is. Says that lesbians are lying when they give their accounts of sexual coercion. Won't say that same-sex attraction is valid.

Just pretends that Buckingham Palace is the same as a member of the public's house.
This is all they have.

So we have someone on this thread sho doesn’t quite have the critical thought to understand that Joanne Rowling is NOT the queen. That protesting in front of her office or a bookshop or theatre… fine. In front of her family house with her address visible… not fine.

Please name any public figure in a private residence not supplied by the public that this would be acceptable for (unless it was a planning permission incident maybe).

I will wait too. Because I am keen to see where posters will dredge up answers from.

And I can't think of a way of interpreting "don't be a cissy" that isn't either homophobic or derogatory to gender non-conforming boys/men. Vile.

And now MargaritaPie think that if a woman is wealthy, it is ok to take pictures of her house and address and post this online?

Because she doesn’t want teenaged girls to shower with people with penises?

Even if this woman lives with her family and has received multiple death threats?

Because some other, unrelated woman allegedly at some point considered posting someone’s phone number? Even though they didn’t?

I am just trying to clarify the thinking here?

PS I have asked MN if it ok for the original picture minus details to be up.