Jk Rowling

[seventiesdemon]

JK Rowling isn’t american.

So you have the right to critique her, yet you use her nationality against fireman?

She is a human inhabitant of the planet Earth.

 

[seventiesdemon]

I think your assumptions about Rowling and the issue here are generally wrong. You made you case, people answered you. I tend to agree with those who take issue with you on this.

No worries.

 

[cherryboom66]

So you have the right to critique her, yet you use her nationality against fireman?

She is a human inhabitant of the planet Earth.

His whole monologue was about “freedom of speech” which is american.

 

[seventiesdemon]

His whole monologue was about “freedom of speech” which is american.

Freedom of speech was around thousands of years before Europeans invaded the the Americas.

Ever heard of the Greek and Roman Senates? Tribal discussions? No? Go and view the paintings on the US Rotunda ceilings at the Whitehouse...where are the paintings of the Indigenous Americans? Burn the Whitehouse down too cause all I see are white people as gods with white people as their servants.

 

[cherryboom66]

Freedom of speech was around thousands of years before Europeans invaded the the Americas.

Ever heard of the Greek and Roman Senates? Tribal discussions? No?

This is what we have in the UK. Under Article 10 of the Human Rights Act 1998, “everyone has the right to freedom of expression” in the UK. But the law states that this freedom “may be subject to formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society”.

So no, you are not free to say whatever you want.

 

[seventiesdemon]

This is what we have in the UK. Under Article 10 of the Human Rights Act 1998, “everyone has the right to freedom of expression” in the UK. But the law states that this freedom “may be subject to formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society”.

So no, you are not free to say whatever you want.

Under your Royal decree. This says much for my dislike of the royal hierarchy. I's not until recent times they have allowed marriage outside of royal boundaries.

We in Australia have ignored the UK in these areas. It won't be long before we are rid of their shackles once and for all.

One of our Australian,Tasmanian (state of Australia) women married into the Denmark royal family, she is making her mark known there as well. Princess Mary speaks out about gay and transgender rights at IDAHO forum | Daily Mail Online

Unlike the conservative twats which dwell in the UK.

 

[cherryboom66]

Under your Royal decree. This says much for my dislike of the royal hierarchy. I's not until recent times they have allowed marriage outside of royal boundaries.

We in Australia have ignored the UK in these areas. It won't be long before we are rid of their shackles once and for all.

One of our Australian,Tasmanian (state of Australia) women married into the Denmark royal family, she is making her mark known there as well. Princess Mary speaks out about gay and transgender rights at IDAHO forum | Daily Mail Online

Unlike the conservative twats which dwell in the UK.

She seems cool. But I seem to recall, it was all over the news here a few years ago, that Australian politicians were trying to ban LGBTQI teachings in schools.

 

[fireman1294]

This is what we have in the UK. Under Article 10 of the Human Rights Act 1998, “everyone has the right to freedom of expression” in the UK. But the law states that this freedom “may be subject to formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society”.

So no, you are not free to say whatever you want.

What the law says
Article 10 of the Human Rights Act: Freedom of expression
1. Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers. This Article shall not prevent States from requiring the licensing of broadcasting, television or cinema enterprises.

2. The exercise of these freedoms, since it carries with it duties and responsibilities, may be subject to such formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society, in the interests of national security, territorial disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, for the protection of the reputation or rights of others, for preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence, or for maintaining the authority and impartiality of the judiciary.


It doesn’t sound like her opinion is actually in violation of Article 10 at all. One could argue she skirts close to one of them, but I would surmise that that is intended for a direct call to do harm or intended violence. So if she was saying things like “all transgenders are evil and it’s our duty as god fearing people to attack and or kill them when we see them to protect our nation”. That’s a call to do harm and would be in violation of the health or morals clause. Also if she was actively smearing by name transgender people and saying bad lies about their moral character I would say she would be in violation of the reputation or rights clause.

from what I have read she has said no things like that. She’s just voicing a personal opinion.

 

[cherryboom66]

What the law says
Article 10 of the Human Rights Act: Freedom of expression
1. Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers. This Article shall not prevent States from requiring the licensing of broadcasting, television or cinema enterprises.

2. The exercise of these freedoms, since it carries with it duties and responsibilities, may be subject to such formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society, in the interests of national security, territorial disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, for the protection of the reputation or rights of others, for preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence, or for maintaining the authority and impartiality of the judiciary.


It doesn’t sound like her opinion is actually in violation of Article 10 at all. One could argue she skirts close to one of them, but I would surmise that that is intended for a direct call to do harm or intended violence. So if she was saying things like “all transgenders are evil and it’s our duty as god fearing people to attack and or kill them when we see them to protect our nation”. That’s a call to do harm and would be in violation of the health or morals clause. Also if she was actively smearing by name transgender people and saying bad lies about their moral character I would say she would be in violation of the reputation or rights clause.

from what I have read she has said no things like that. She’s just voicing a personal opinion.

This is where as intelligent adults, we need to be really critical and actually see the damage being done. She is not “voicing personal opinions”. In the majority of her shitty monologues she references “studies” that don’t exist and “sources” that don’t exact. She is saying that what she is saying is true, she is not voicing her personal opinion. We need to be really careful with statements like this.

 

[fireman1294]

@cherryboom66 you and I have had some great conversations in the past both on and off here. I may not like agree or believe in what someone is saying or believing, but as long as they are in no direct violation of the law I will stand up for their ability to say it. I swore an oath on a bible that has no expiration date on it. You may not understand that completely but it means something to me. I put my life on the line because of it and saw many friends die living by it.
Yes I’m American and I know different country and different laws. But I did spend a few hours reading parliament law to find that plain English version of it. If the state finds that she is in violation then charges should be filed. But so far I don’t think she has crossed the line yet.

 

[deeperthanyou]

I dont care what any billionares think actually. They are so far removed from general society I would say they have lived enough life as it is. Her books are dumb she made a ton of cash off them, cool. How does that make me care what she thinks or has to say.

 

[cherryboom66]

@cherryboom66 you and I have had some great conversations in the past both on and off here. I may not like agree or believe in what someone is saying or believing, but as long as they are in no direct violation of the law I will stand up for their ability to say it. I swore an oath on a bible that has no expiration date on it. You may not understand that completely but it means something to me. I put my life on the line because of it and saw many friends die living by it.
Yes I’m American and I know different country and different laws. But I did spend a few hours reading parliament law to find that plain English version of it. If the state finds that she is in violation then charges should be filed. But so far I don’t think she has crossed the line yet.

So because of your “freedoms”, JK Rowling, in your eyes, is fine telling the world that your friend, me, is actually a predatory man? It’s OK for her to say to her millions of fans that she is speaking from the side of science?

 

[seventiesdemon]

She seems cool. But I seem to recall, it was all over the news here a few years ago, that Australian politicians were trying to ban LGBTQI teachings in schools.

Yeah, that is their opinion. But in a land of so called democracy, beating heads in accomplishes nothing. Generational change, discussion and education is the answer.

We need to remember that world wide social discussion is not centuries old. It was not that long ago I remember using an Amiga as my technical advance into the WWW. I still remember the guy who invented the modern Television

I have moved along with the times, I am forever changing and I "pride" myself for this. The only thing I will not give up are my values of truth, fact and freedom of expression. I will never give in to radicalism, extortion or intimidation.

I have been confronted by gangs on the street because they wanted my shoes to gain access to a club. I gave in to them because I was intimidated.....then I thought after, no....they are my shoes, so I walked in, through the club bare feet.. demanded them back.....I may have been lucky, but I got my shoes back...before that, I had a gang who wished to steal my pushbike....I had a friend who ran away and left me and his bike, I stood my ground....and they respected me for this and let me be, along with my bike and my friends... I was only a kid.....many stories of where I have stood my ground...then, till now...not even going to go into other stuff...I just have always thought outside of the square.

There is something that lights a fire in my gut, always has, and I have always respected those of the same.

I don't take sides unless I see a threat which endangers freedom, yours or mine. I have never been nor ever will be a follower. I am an individual, in mind, body and heart.

 

[cherryboom66]

Yeah, that is their opinion. But in a land of so called democracy, beating heads in accomplishes nothing. Generational change, discussion and education is the answer.

We need to remember that world wide social discussion is not centuries old. It was not that long ago I remember using an Amiga as my technical advance into the WWW. I still remember the guy who invented the modern Television

I have moved along with the times, I am forever changing and I "pride" myself for this. The only thing I will not give up are my values of truth, fact and freedom of expression. I will never give in to radicalism, extortion or intimidation.

I have been confronted by gangs on the street because they wanted my shoes to gain access to a club. I gave in to them because I was intimidated.....then I thought after, no....they are my shoes, so I walked in, through the club bare feet.. demanded them back.....I may have been lucky, but I got my shoes back...before that, I had a gang who wished to steal my pushbike....I had a friend who ran away and left me and his bike, I stood my ground....and they respected me for this and let me be, along with my bike and my friends... I was only a kid.....many stories of where I have stood my ground...then till now.

There is something that lights a fire in my gut, always has, and I have always respected those of the same.

I don't take sides unless I see a threat which endangers freedom, yours or mine. I have never been nor ever will be a follower. I am an individual, in mind and body.

The language used by JK Rowling affects my freedoms as a trans woman. JK wants the world to revoke my right to call myself a woman.

 

[seventiesdemon]

The language used by JK Rowling affects my freedoms as a trans woman. JK wants the world to revoke my right to call myself a woman.

If she has, she is wrong. I read your words and you are very passionate in your beliefs. Can you point me to the place where she has mentioned these opinions you mention?

 

[cherryboom66]

If she has, she is wrong. I read your words and you are very passionate in your beliefs. Can you point me to the place where she has mentioned these opinions you mention?

This is why JK Rowling has been accused of transphobia after comments about menstruation on Twitter

This goes through a decent amount, and you will get to hear from actual trans women.

 

[Capitolhillguy]

One further point about the HP Universe. Unlike the author in her private/ public life, in her art is a world where house elves, half giants, werewolves and half muggles mattered. This resonates with me in a way her personal views don't. I never actually think of JKR when I am immersed in the Potter Universe. Never. I'm thinking of Jim Dale reading it.

 

[fireman1294]

So because of your “freedoms”, JK Rowling, in your eyes, is fine telling the world that your friend, me, is actually a predatory man? It’s OK for her to say to her millions of fans that she is speaking from the side of science?

is she mentioning you by name specifically?
Is she saying “transitioned or actively transitioning woman?” Or did she say “someone who just says they are but clearly not doing so.” I believe she is making reference to a case that happened in the states at a Wal Mart I believe but don’t quote me on that. It was a big box chain store though. Where an older man who checked every box as a man that is not transitioning or has started the process. Still in man’s clothes man’s traditional haircut the full man works literally followed an 8 year old girl into the woman’s bathroom. The father who was waiting outside saw the man follow his daughter and flipped his shit, when in and dragged the guy out and called the police on him as a sex offender. When the cops showed up he told the police “it’s ok I’m transgendered”. and tried to use it as a defense to avoid legal prosecution as a child sex offender. It’s people like that that give the actual transgender community a bad name, or a public smear. Why are you not mad at the people actually doing the harm? Instead you’re mad at a public figure for running her mouth. I honestly don’t believe she meant people like you who are doing this and committing to an entire life change to become the person they were meant to be. But there are legit predators out there that are saying they are trans just as a cover to be a predator.

I don’t believe at all that what she is saying is actually helping the real situation get fixed, just feeding flames in certain people or groups but those groups are the minority of the population with a small voice. Not what the majority actually believes. So it comes down to this I guess.
1. “Just because you have the right to doesn’t mean you should.”

2. “A person is smart, people are dumb”

If she has, she is wrong. I read your words and you are very passionate in your beliefs. Can you point me to the place where she has mentioned these opinions you mention?

yes where did she say these things, I’d also like to read the original words.

 

[seventiesdemon]

This is why JK Rowling has been accused of transphobia after comments about menstruation on Twitter

This goes through a decent amount, and you will get to hear from actual trans women.

Did you reply to her in person? Did you receive a reply? I really have no interest in sloughing through endless chatter or name calling.

If I have a beef with anyone, whether it be a local politician, councilor, Prime Minister or consulte official. I write or request a meeting with them in person, if not I write to them and receive a reply.

i wish to hear her answers to your concerns.

 

[cherryboom66]

is she mentioning you by name specifically?
Is she saying “transitioned or actively transitioning woman?” Or did she say “someone who just says they are but clearly not doing so.” I believe she is making reference to a case that happened in the states at a Wal Mart I believe but don’t quote me on that. It was a big box chain store though. Where an older man who checked every box as a man that is not transitioning or has started the process. Still in man’s clothes man’s traditional haircut the full man works literally followed an 8 year old girl into the woman’s bathroom. The father who was waiting outside saw the man follow his daughter and flipped his shit, when in and dragged the guy out and called the police on him as a sex offender. When the cops showed up he told the police “it’s ok I’m transgendered”. and tried to use it as a defense to avoid legal prosecution as a child sex offender. It’s people like that that give the actual transgender community a bad name, or a public smear. Why are you not mad at the people actually doing the harm? Instead you’re mad at a public figure for running her mouth. I honestly don’t believe she meant people like you who are doing this and committing to an entire life change to become the person they were meant to be. But there are legit predators out there that are saying they are trans just as a cover to be a predator.

I don’t believe at all that what she is saying is actually helping the real situation get fixed, just feeding flames in certain people or groups but those groups are the minority of the population with a small voice. Not what the majority actually believes. So it comes down to this I guess.
1. “Just because you have the right to doesn’t mean you should.”

2. “A person is smart, people are dumb”


yes where did she say these things, I’d also like to read the original words.

JK Rowling has 14.3 followers on twitter. If even 5% of her followers listen to her and believe in her, that’s 715000 extra people who are against trans women and our fight. She is the “people” doing me harm. All serial killers have been white, so don’t come at me with the rhetoric of “one trans predator giving trans people a bad name”.