JK Rowling has sadly opened her mouth again

[DayAndAge]

How the metro can put out this tweet which effectively suggests a woman shouldn't be allowed to speak is beyond me. Shocked but not surprised. Comments are heartening though, as is the ratio.

How we have got to this point is beyond me. A woman, who has suffered domestic abuse, who has supported women who have suffered the same, calling out threats to women. Which make no mistake, this is what someone like this is , man or woman. The fact os that most violent crimes against women are perpetrated by men. This was no different.

@Helleofabore

The initial headline can not be parsed in any other way. Saying a woman discussing something is ‘destabilising’ is just trying to obfuscate the resultant outcome. Controlling how that person speaks. So to is trying to pass off such a headline as being about the ‘content’.

It is just another way to say ‘She can speak, no one will stop her, but she deserves to be abused if she speaks about this topic that we don’t think she should speak about. Because we don’t like it when she does, so we will point out how she deserves all that abuse, and we will use phrases abusers use while we do it.’

By saying they were 'destabilising,' I was really meaning 'thought-provoking' and 'provocative'. Because JKR is influential, her tweets can drive conversation across the globe. No, she does not deserve to be abused. No-one does.

Surely the professional phrasing for a journalist is just 'JK Rowling has criticised Sky News for describing Scarlet Blake, who is transgender, as a woman.'

The writer should have left out 'sadly' and 'opened her mouth' and preferably have toned down 'attacked'.

And do you agree that the wording of the headline was using the words that abusers use? To tell people to shut up.

Do you believe it was ever an appropriate headline to use?

@Helleofabore

And do you agree that the wording of the headline was using the words that abusers use? To tell people to shut up.

Do you believe it was ever an appropriate headline to use?

I think it could have been phrased better. It's inelegant at best.

So, was it or wasn't it used in attempt to shame a woman, one with a known history of domestic abuse to stop talking about something the headline writer wanted her to shut up about?

@Helleofabore

So, was it or wasn't it used in attempt to shame a woman, one with a known history of domestic abuse to stop talking about something the headline writer wanted her to shut up about?

Not particularly, no. This is JKR we are talking about. Like I said, she has a massive audience and support base. It is unlikely she would even give this the brain space you have. I do think it was an awkward, sloppy headline; it does point to the fact that JKR has said something potentially uncomfortable. However, it isn't implying she should stop talking. (And why the 'known history of domestic abuse' all the time? I'm not sure of the relevance here?)

Agree on all points. I think it's clear that the person with the Twitter Password on this occasion was not professional, nor were they a journalist.

Sorry, it is not about what YOU want it to be or what I want it to be.

It is about the intention of the person who wrote that headline. Can you tell us why someone would write that headline for any other purpose but to express their disgust that she spoke? NOT how you interpreted it when you have looked at whether you feel she even bothered to look. But the writer's intention.

Plus if you cannot understand the relevance of using an abuser's tactic towards someone who is an abuse victim and would be all too likely to now recognise the tactic, then I don't think me explaining that aspect is going to enlighten you.

@windowframer has sadly opened his/her mouth again

Thoughts? I feel wrong writing that as I have never conversed with windowframer. It sounds patronising to me. The ‘sadly’ and ‘opened her mouth’. Certainly not something I would write in a position as a journalist. It’s like something Malcolm Tucker would say but not write down as he knows how it reads.

All of it is wrong as everyone is writing not speaking, unless they write with their mouth open.

However, it isn't implying she should stop talking.

Good God, when you say someone has sadly opened their mouth again, of course you're saying they should stop talking. You know it, I know it, you and another poster complained about silencing when I merely called a post "pompous", ffs. Do you actually think you're fooling anyone? Even Rita Skeeter wouldn't try to pretend that "she sadly opened her mouth" isn't a clear implication that a woman should stop talking. Do us a lemon!

@Helleofabore

Sorry, it is not about what YOU want it to be or what I want it to be.

It is about the intention of the person who wrote that headline. Can you tell us why someone would write that headline for any other purpose but to express their disgust that she spoke? NOT how you interpreted it when you have looked at whether you feel she even bothered to look. But the writer's intention.

Plus if you cannot understand the relevance of using an abuser's tactic towards someone who is an abuse victim and would be all too likely to now recognise the tactic, then I don't think me explaining that aspect is going to enlighten you.

Did I say it was about me? Honestly. And I am an abuse victim, so you can get off your high horse there. I'm also a writer. What I see there is lazy writing rather than intentional, biting, incisive writing. Not a great deal of care was taken with that headline and I don't see how it got past the subs.

It does express disgust that she has an opinion, yes; I agree with you there.

nonplayer

Apparently, it doesn't mean what we think it means because JK Rowling has money, and a platform and someone writing this as a headline has no power really so therefore it is not really them telling JK Rowling to shut the fuck up. Because JK Rowling will just ignore it.

I mean, apparently, the intention of the person writing the headline has no impact whatever on the message itself. Just someone reacting to discomfort. They don't REALLY mean that THEY wish she would shut the fuck up. And by extension any other woman who dares to open their mouth to say such things.

I mean, no other woman who read that fucked up headline should even give it a thought. It wasn't even about sending a message to other women that they could expect the same treatment for pointing out the absurd and harmful practice of effectively telling the world that a sexual sadist and horrific animal killer was 'female' when that person was male.

So, nothing to see here....

@NonPlayerCharacter

Good God, when you say someone has sadly opened their mouth again, of course you're saying they should stop talking. You know it, I know it, you and another poster complained about silencing when I merely called a post "pompous", ffs. Do you actually think you're fooling anyone? Even Rita Skeeter wouldn't try to pretend that "she sadly opened her mouth" isn't a clear implication that a woman should stop talking. Do us a lemon!

It's an opinion. It may not be the correct one according to your worldview, but it is an opinion. Is that okay?

You are telling us YOUR interpretation. So, yes. You have also made it about you.

You are honestly here trying to say that that headline was not intentional? Was not biting? (I would say it was a lot more than biting) It was clearly not meant to be incisive, I agree.

Honestly, Helleofabore, your hyperbole is off the charts. You've extrapolated what I noted about one headline about JKR to - all women?

I think you must be not much of a writer if you don't quite understand the outcomes of headlines such as that. And the messages that words and particularly headlines convey - explicitly and implicitly.

A writer you say?

Hilarious. People have explained why what you're saying is wrong, as if you didn't know, and your response is to try to imply that this is an attempt to silence you ("it is an opinion, is that OK")... but you pretend you can't see that same implication in "has sadly opened her mouth again".

It's as dishonest an attempt at deflection as it is piss poor. "It's my opinion, is that ok" is an empty catch all that you can stick on the end of anything to bypass what was actually said and pretend the issue is you being silenced. I repeat, you are not fooling anyone. You're boring people, though.

I cannot parse or interpret it any other way than, "Christ, why doesn't she keep her gob shut?"

I've tried, but it doesn't work.

I certainly thought it was that simple, Sinner. If it quacks like a duck...

Imagine getting into work and having to delete that tweet, change the Twitter and other Socials passwords, send the new ones out to the remaining people you trust to actually Adult on the Socials, all that before you get your first coffee. I'd be raging at the wee gobshite that went rogue on the Twitter account.

That’s best case scenario. What if Wasn’t a wee work experience with blue hair gobshite?

I’d bet on an established male staff member. Member.

I'm giving them the most charitable explanation, assuming the place is a professional outfit. Maybe I'm an optimist

The Metro is as charitable as HSBC.

Well, the comments on the Metro's actual article seem to be virtually 100% in support of JK.

https://metro.co.uk/2024/02/27/jk-rowling-attacks-sky-news-describing-transgender-killer-a-woman-20352816/