UK JK Rowling in ‘arrest me’ challenge over hate crime law - JK Rowling described several transgender women as men on the day of the new hate crime law

Archive (live)

1711985846901.png

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.

The law does not protect women as a group from hatred.

The Scottish government is expected to include this later in a separate misogyny law.

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

She wrote: "Scottish lawmakers seem to have placed higher value on the feelings of men performing their idea of femaleness, however misogynistically or opportunistically, than on the rights and freedoms of actual women and girls."

She added: "It is impossible to accurately describe or tackle the reality of violence and sexual violence committed against women and girls, or address the current assault on women’s and girls’ rights, unless we are allowed to call a man a man.

"Freedom of speech and belief are at an end in Scotland if the accurate description of biological sex is deemed criminal."

Ms Rowling highlighted some criminal cases, including transgender rapist Isla Bryson and Andrew Miller, who abducted and assaulted a girl in the Scottish Borders.

She described them as men in a series of posts, that also included transgender campaigners and other individuals.

Ms Rowling said: "I'm currently out of the country, but if what I've written here qualifies as an offence under the terms of the new act, I look forward to being arrested when I return to the birthplace of the Scottish Enlightenment."

Police Scotland said it had not received any complaints over the posts.

1711985867892.png

The maximum penalty under the new act in Scotland is a jail sentence of seven years.

A person commits an offence if they communicate material, or behave in a manner, "that a reasonable person would consider to be threatening or abusive," with the intention of stirring up hatred based on protected characteristics.

Hatred based on race, sex and religion was already illegal in Great Britain under the Public Order Act 1986, but that will also now fall under the new act in Scotland

The bar for this offence is lower than for the other protected characteristics, as it also includes "insulting" behaviour.

In England and Wales stirring up hatred over race, religion or sexual orientation by threatening behaviour remains illegal.

1711985891501.png

In Scotland, the new act also consolidates existing laws on crimes which are "aggravated by prejudice" towards a protected characteristic.

This can be taken into account by a judge who might issue a longer sentence or a higher fine.

A protest group of around 200 people gathered outside the Scottish Parliament in Edinburgh on the morning the new law came into effect.

The Scottish government said the Hate Crime Act would provide protection from hate and prejudice without stifling individual expression.

First Minister Humza Yousaf said it was designed to deal with what he called a "rising tide of hatred" in society.

In response to general criticism of the act, he said: "Unless your behaviour is threatening or abusive and intends to stir up hatred, then you have nothing to worry about in terms of the new offences being created."
 
I don't agree with everything Rowling does, but it speaks volumes that a literal billionaire is willing to stand up and risk losing her lofty station in defense of liberty.

Without Harry Potter the Bongs would lose half the islands income tax
That's passive "residual income".
They don't have to concern themselves with her pesky freedoms, and can easily claim vast quantities of her wealth as a "Fine"

Hate Crime Act would provide protection from hate and prejudice without stifling individual expression.
"Hate" is an expression.
Nobody is entitled to NOT be hated.
It is your job as a human being to choose whether or not you deserve to be hated.
I personally am fine being "hated" by communists and shitbags.
 
She said "freedom of speech and belief" was at an end if accurate description of biological sex was outlawed.
She is correct. Knowing the current state of our fair land, they won’t arrest her but they will arrest the next non-rich-n-famous woman who insults a Troon. The law is worded so insulting someone is a crime. Offence is anything anyone deems offensive for any reason.
We are truly lost if this gains traction. And people cannot, will not listen to me when I tell them that this is how their freedom dies - laws put in to ‘protect the marginalised’ and they all clap for it like seals.
I hope Rowling lets whoever the poor sod who does get arrested borrow her lawyer
Transwomen are men.
 
The Scottish government said the Hate Crime Act would provide protection from hate and prejudice without stifling individual expression.

First Minister Humza Yousaf said it was designed to deal with what he called a "rising tide of hatred" in society.

In response to general criticism of the act, he said: "Unless your behaviour is threatening or abusive and intends to stir up hatred, then you have nothing to worry about in terms of the new offences being created."
Nothing to worry about guys, just do as we say.
 
while this is based and all I hope she'll commit to funding the people that the police do go after, they won't do shit to JK because she can afford to fuck them over in court. they will hang the little fish though as an example.

I don’t know shit about UK law but I wonder if they use legal precedent? If I was being arrested for wrongthunk I’d just point to JK Rowling…
 
It’s a weasels way of saying they won’t do shit to her. They can’t say ‘we don’t arrest her’ because that means they’re not applying their law. ‘We have no complaints’ is a get out
Maybe we should do a little Freedom of Information to see if the police have been contacted by any members of the public in connection with any of her statements.

But yes, the police will do any sort of wiggling to find differences between you or I saying something and Rowling saying it. It will be the location or who is present or the "merits of the individual case" or some waffle.
 
Back