The Harry Potter author described several transgender women as men in a series of social media posts.

JK Rowling has challenged Scotland’s new hate crime law in a series of social media posts - inviting police to arrest her if they believe she has committed an offence.

The Harry Potter author, who lives in Edinburgh, described several transgender women as men, including convicted prisoners, trans activists and other public figures.

She said “freedom of speech and belief” was at an end if accurate description of biological sex was outlawed.

Earlier, Scotland’s first minister Humza Yousaf said the new law would deal with a “rising tide of hatred”.

The Hate Crime and Public Order (Scotland) Act 2021 creates a new crime of “stirring up hatred” relating to age, disability, religion, sexual orientation, transgender identity or being intersex.

…

Ms Rowling, who has long been a critic of some trans activism, posted on X on the day the new legislation came into force.

  • gapbetweenus@feddit.de
    3·
    9 months ago

    I’m from Germany, the only way insulting someone is going to be a criminal case is if you insult police. Otherwise it gets almost always dropped.

    So you want the government to decide which ideas are ok and which should be banned? How could this ever go wrong.

          • gapbetweenus@feddit.de
            1·
            9 months ago

            And I’m arguing that it’s a bad idea. Germany is a good example, banning holocaust denial did not stop AFD from raising and getting political power. We were not even able to forbid the damn NDP.

            • porous_grey_matter@lemmy.ml
              9·
              9 months ago

              That’s not a great argument, there is no evidence those things are somehow connected or not. For all you know it would have been straight back to fascism 60 years earlier if it wasn’t banned. The reason AfD has power is that the courts and government support them and let them get away with crime. If the law was actually applied it would have banned that party.

              • gapbetweenus@feddit.de
                3·
                9 months ago

                So it’s about how a law is applied. And you still don’t see the potential danger of a law regulating speech? Guess we won’t agree on this one.

                I don’t really see a benefit in people being forced to phrase their hateful opinions in a way to circumvent laws. In the end, Rowling won’t stop spreading her bigoted hateful bullshit - in best case she will just phrase it a bit different, which actually might get some stupid moderates on her side.

                • BreakDecks@lemmy.mlEnglish
                  5·
                  9 months ago

                  in best case she will just phrase it a bit different, which actually might get some stupid moderates on her side.

                  Look in the mirror. She is framing this issue in a hyperbolic way and you’re siding with her.

                  • gapbetweenus@feddit.de
                    3·
                    9 months ago

                    Dude, I’m not siding with her on any issue besides freedom of speech - which just happen to be my opinion.