JKR vs Police Scotland?

[IcakethereforeIam]

Tras are trying to get JKR arrested.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/03/10/trans-activists-scottish-police-arrest-jk-rowling-crime/

https://archive.ph/5TEU4 highland fling yourself over the paywall, cos Scottish!

Thought to give IW a break.

The Hate Crime...crime(?) comes into force on 1st April, according to the article. The SNP has not engaged with any of the organisations who have expressed concerns and no-one knows what, if any, training the Police have been given.

As you are on this thread, I assume you already know, agree with it, and because you can't possibly be transphobic, it isn't. We'll just have to agree to disagree.

Once again, JKR is not transphobic, has not made comments that could be classed as transphobic.
Thank you.

We don't have to agree anything. I'm asking which bit was "transphobic".

There's 1 million pounds up for grabs for anyone who can prove JKR's transphobia.

Transphobic Outburst.

I mean come on, really? IW's twitter history in IW's own words, show that everything she said is BABANG on the money. It's got nothing to do with transphobia, it's that IW is a narcissitic rage filled person who cannot control women, and is clearly very very angry about that. I have nothing nice to say about IW.

Yes @DadJoke which bit was transphobic. Spell it out or shut up.

You won't get a definition of transphobia because it wouldn't stand up. I suspect it's rather like woman essence. It isn't something anyone not a part of this belief system could possibly understand, and you're just supposed to accept unquestioningly what a believer tells you.

Basically it will be regarded as any failure to absolutely accept that someone is whatever sex they tell you that they are, and to indulge that belief without limits.

Libel (written) and slander (spoken) are both forms of defamation. Truth is a defence to a claim for defamation. So (putting on pedant's hat) technically words can be both defamatory and true. And yes, discovery of relevant documents is a thing in a civil action in England and Wales. Don't know about the Scottish system but would be surprised if there wasn't similar.

In the unlikely event of a libel action I think the, ahem, bundle of IW's relevant tweets would need one of those luggage trolleys to wheel it into the court room.

Trans women are 'cosplaying a misogynistic male fantasy of what a woman is,' surely passes the very high bar for what even gender critical people think is transphobic?

Afaik that comment was specifically re one individual who is male and has a track record for extremely misogynistic opinions and views on who is and isn't a proper woman that seem entirely based on a their appearance.

That's not quite what was posted was it? It sort of leaves off that it was directed at a single individual, and then substitutes in all "Trans women" instead.
That's a very different meaning between being addressed to one specific individual, and all individuals who share one trait among many traits.
Sort of dishonest when you compare it to the original.
The entire source of the bit you snipped and changed the context of is this:
"India didn't become a woman. India is cosplaying a misogynistic male fantasy of what a woman is."
If you need to be dishonest to try and make your point, it is the dishonesty that I notice the most.
Source: https://twitter.com/jk_rowling/status/1764637389958357095

IWs tweet re Hayton though...

Have you seen what Willoughby has said about women who don't wear dresses and have long hair?

Willoughby says they're blokes or closeted transmen. Willoughby seems to think any woman who doesn't fit Willoughby's stereotypical ideal isn't actually a woman. So 'cosplaying a misogynistic male fantasy of what a woman is' is bang on the money.

India thinks women are 'dirty' if they don't shave their legs, but that hairy men are just fine. India is the epitome of a misogynistic male chump, whatever India's gender identity.

Nope

Since you've set aside the context and made it into a negative generalisation, I'll confirm this was related to one specific person in one specific context, and in that context that seems highly accurate to me. But taking on board the minnie mouse performance the other day, it's not an isolated event.

"sort of dishonest" yeah that covers it really.

IW might not be (debatable) but at the very least, some are. Here's a delightful collection of some of the TRA leading lights, in their own words...

IW is not a hill I would die on (NATWANHIWDO)

Forging the receipts @dadjoke? Dear, dear.

imagine thinking 'oh this will do' and posting that...

It's just as transphobic when applied to Willoughby alone. IW is an attention-seeker, but that doesn't deserve transphobic abuse.

Is there a single gender critical person on this board who thinks it was transphobic?

Trans women are 'cosplaying a misogynistic male fantasy of what a woman is,'

IW (true - just one individual)
is cosplaying (true - not female but pretending to be)
a misogynistic (true - see IW's tweet history)
male (true - IW is of the male sex)
fantasy (true - it's not reality)
of what a woman is (true - again, see IWs tweets about butch women being men)

None of that is transphobic. They are statements of fact. They are not hate, discriminatory or aimed at a group of people.

I would like to see IW try to prove transphobia from JKR in a court of law under oath.

Transphobia is not illegal per se. Neither are racism, homophobia or ableism.

Not a criminal court obvs.