7 years in prison for calling a man, a man…

[Slimshandy]

After reading the discussion here, I understand why the question needed to be rephrased. That's all.

I think that’s because you’re unable to truthfully answer the question without appearing to be unsupportive of transgender rights.

If there are questions that are too uncomfortable to answer, that’s another issue…

[AZOldGal66]

"JK Rowling in ‘arrest me’ challenge over Scottish hate crime law" https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c51j64lk2l8o

[AZOldGal66]

"Prime minister backs JK Rowling in row over new hate crime laws" https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cmmqq4qv81qo

[jessilin0113]

So looking at JK Rowling's tweets, she's not just saying "in my personal opinion, trans women are not women" and leaving it at that. She's deliberately stirring the pot by posting about supposed trans women who committed crimes and is saying that their right to be called women is superseding the safety of "real women". She had this to say:

https://x.com/jk_rowling/status/1774749 ... 52873?s=20

[Slimshandy]

Do you disagree?

“In passing the Scottish Hate Crime Act, 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. The new legislation is wide open to abuse by activists who wish to silence those of us speaking out about the dangers of eliminating women's and girls’ single-S*x spaces, the nonsense made of crime data if violent and sexual assaults committed by men are recorded as female crimes, the grotesque unfairness of allowing males to compete in female sports, the injustice of women’s jobs, honours and opportunities being taken by trans-identified men, and the reality and immutability of biological S*x.

For several years now, Scottish women have been pressured by their government and members of the police force to deny the evidence of their eyes and ears, repudiate biological facts and embrace a neo-religious concept of gender that is unprovable and untestable. The re-definition of 'woman' to include every man who declares himself one has already had serious consequences for women's and girls’ rights and safety in Scotland, with the strongest impact felt, as ever, by the most vulnerable, including female prisoners and rape survivors.

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 S*x is deemed criminal.“

So looking at JK Rowling's tweets, she's not just saying "in my personal opinion, trans women are not women" and leaving it at that. She's deliberately stirring the pot by posting about supposed trans women who committed crimes and is saying that their right to be called women is superseding the safety of "real women". She had this to say:

https://x.com/jk_rowling/status/1774749 ... 52873?s=20

[jessilin0113]

Do you disagree?

“In passing the Scottish Hate Crime Act, 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. The new legislation is wide open to abuse by activists who wish to silence those of us speaking out about the dangers of eliminating women's and girls’ single-S*x spaces, the nonsense made of crime data if violent and sexual assaults committed by men are recorded as female crimes, the grotesque unfairness of allowing males to compete in female sports, the injustice of women’s jobs, honours and opportunities being taken by trans-identified men, and the reality and immutability of biological S*x.

For several years now, Scottish women have been pressured by their government and members of the police force to deny the evidence of their eyes and ears, repudiate biological facts and embrace a neo-religious concept of gender that is unprovable and untestable. The re-definition of 'woman' to include every man who declares himself one has already had serious consequences for women's and girls’ rights and safety in Scotland, with the strongest impact felt, as ever, by the most vulnerable, including female prisoners and rape survivors.

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 S*x is deemed criminal.“

So looking at JK Rowling's tweets, she's not just saying "in my personal opinion, trans women are not women" and leaving it at that. She's deliberately stirring the pot by posting about supposed trans women who committed crimes and is saying that their right to be called women is superseding the safety of "real women". She had this to say:

https://x.com/jk_rowling/status/1774749 ... 52873?s=20

Yes, because I think she's both over-simplifying it and being over-dramatic. I don't know that the things she says, like about the serious consequences, have been proven true. I would have to look more in to this and I don't want to right now.

[Della]

After reading the discussion here, I understand why the question needed to be rephrased. That's all.

I think that’s because you’re unable to truthfully answer the question without appearing to be unsupportive of transgender rights.

If there are questions that are too uncomfortable to answer, that’s another issue…

I think you're full of crap. Do you ever actually see yourself?

[Slimshandy]

After reading the discussion here, I understand why the question needed to be rephrased. That's all.

I think that’s because you’re unable to truthfully answer the question without appearing to be unsupportive of transgender rights.

If there are questions that are too uncomfortable to answer, that’s another issue…

I think you're full of crap. Do you ever actually see yourself?

I suppose this is when we spin away from the topic at hand to begin insulting each other again… sigh.

The question is :Do you think it would be fair that if a man wants to be called a woman, you are forced to call him a woman or spend 7 years in prison?


If that’s not a question you feel comfortable answering, so be it. There’s no need…

[WellPreserved]

I think that’s because you’re unable to truthfully answer the question without appearing to be unsupportive of transgender rights.

If there are questions that are too uncomfortable to answer, that’s another issue…

I think you're full of crap. Do you ever actually see yourself?

I suppose this is when we spin away from the topic at hand to begin insulting each other again… sigh.

The question is :Do you think it would be fair that if a man wants to be called a woman, you are forced to call him a woman or spend 7 years in prison?


If that’s not a question you feel comfortable answering, so be it. There’s no need…

Okay, back in. Your question is assuming that transgender women are just men who are pretending to be women. If one (like myself and 40% of women in the US) believes that transgender women ARE women, then how is your question answerable? This is why I said that the question should be re-worded to indicate "mis-gendering" because that is the issue as I stated earlier.

Misgendering someone intentionally or unintentionally should not be an automatic charge of a crime. Misgendering someone intentionally "to stir up hatred with threatening or abusive behavior" should be a crime (in Scotland) in the same way that racially charged or homophobic language "to stir up hatred with threatening or abusive behavior" should be and is a crime (in Scotland). I also make no distinction between mis-gendering a transgender woman or a transgender man.

I'm actually surprised that this is even a debate, lol.

[Slimshandy]

I think you're full of crap. Do you ever actually see yourself?

I suppose this is when we spin away from the topic at hand to begin insulting each other again… sigh.

The question is :Do you think it would be fair that if a man wants to be called a woman, you are forced to call him a woman or spend 7 years in prison?


If that’s not a question you feel comfortable answering, so be it. There’s no need…

Okay, back in. Your question is assuming that transgender women are just men who are pretending to be women. If one (like myself and 40% of women in the US) believes that transgender women ARE women, then how is your question answerable? This is why I said that the question should be re-worded to indicate "mis-gendering" because that is the issue as I stated earlier.

Misgendering someone intentionally or unintentionally should not be an automatic charge of a crime. Misgendering someone intentionally "to stir up hatred with threatening or abusive behavior" should be a crime (in Scotland) in the same way that racially charged or homophobic language "to stir up hatred with threatening or abusive behavior" should be and is a crime (in Scotland). I also make no distinction between mis-gendering a transgender woman or a transgender man.

I'm actually surprised that this is even a debate, lol.

Because these aren’t just questions that arise based on whether or not Brenda down the street should be called Brenda and treated nicely… that is of course true and Brenda should be treated respectfully…



But these are now questions that the safety of women rely on, such as the issue was pointed out:

Do you believe that a rapist who targets women should be able to say they are a woman upon arrest, and then be housed in a women’s prison?