Presumption isn't assurance though, is it?
Those who commit crimes are also presumed innocent until proven guilty.
And considering the shade that she puts on the trans community as a whole...
Transgender rights discussion
- Thread starter crappycraperson
- Start date
Those who commit crimes are also presumed innocent until proven guilty.
And considering the shade that she puts on the trans community as a whole...
It's Rowling's MO: Always paint herself as the victim. And when she really wants to try and shut someone down, she'll invoke the rape and death threats.
no one is saying that trans people can't do bad things just because they're trans, just that it's massively discrimatory to presume all trans people are potential predators just because some cis men 'may' pretend to be trans to access women's spaces. and very much emphasis on 'may' because no cis man needs to pretend to be trans to abuse women or to walk into a women's bathroom. in fact, it's frankly ridiculous to think they need to do that.
Yeah, it’s a stupid argument. Like I said, she’s tilting at a straw man. She’s not being a fascist though.
He didn't really say she was being a fascist, just that the following statement is right out of the fascist play-book:
„it is dangerous to assert that any category of people deserves a blanket presumption of innocence.“
Everyone gets a presumption of innocence, that's more or less how the justice system works.
He said “that is basically as fascist as it gets“
We both know what exactly what she meant when she said what she said. It clearly wasn’t a suggestion that trans people should lose the presumption of innocence everyone gets in accordance with the law
I don't know what she meant. It probably wasn't a sincere suggestion that trans people should lose the presumption of innocent in the justice system, but it certainly seems like basically an anti-trans dog-whistle to me.
It is an unfortunate choice for a pen name, given there was a Robert Galbraith Heath who was a psychiatrist and pushed gay conversion therapy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Galbraith_Heath#Gay_conversion_therapy
So many levels to the irony. Love it.
You do though. Or you could certainly have a good guess. In this never ending stupid argument, people on her side are obsessed with safe spaces for women. They think all biological males are potential sexual predators and need to be kept out of spaces where biological females are likely to be vulnerable. Changing rooms, prisons, rape crisis centres etc The point she’s making here is that if a biological male comes out as trans you can’t presume they’re no longer a potential threat to women, just because they identify as a woman.
It’s definitely unhelpful but it’s also definitely true. And saying it doesn’t make her a fascist. The bigger issue is whether biological males really are as big a threat as she implies they are (probably not) and whether identifying as a woman makes them less of a threat (probably) Either way the point stands that you can’t “presume innocence” (i.e. deem someone to no longer pose a threat) based upon a particular cohort they might belong to.
It’s kind of the converse of profiling, which most left leaning folk get rightfully annoyed about. Deciding anyone is more likely innocent or guilty (a threat or not) based around their identity is a slippery slope.
Last edited:
Good watch. She's certifiably awful.
Kemi Badenoch is second favourite to be the next tory leader / potential PM. her only contribution so far to the nations political discourse is that trans people are evil. (and that theres no such thing as racism)
honestly, all this culture war bullshit, is exactly that. most of the people in the public eye who wade in, dont give a shit about the issue at all, its just a convenient means to get noticed in this fecking soundbite / click world we live in.
meantime working classes being savaged by costs of living / austerity / public service gravy train milked by well connected spivs and shysters and they really are losing their minds about gender neutral bathrooms?? feck em. burn down all their libraries and their workings mens clubs (the ones that havent been converted into multi-ethnic community centres), books are wasted on the sun / mail reading red wall peasants.
honestly, all this culture war bullshit, is exactly that. most of the people in the public eye who wade in, dont give a shit about the issue at all, its just a convenient means to get noticed in this fecking soundbite / click world we live in.
meantime working classes being savaged by costs of living / austerity / public service gravy train milked by well connected spivs and shysters and they really are losing their minds about gender neutral bathrooms?? feck em. burn down all their libraries and their workings mens clubs (the ones that havent been converted into multi-ethnic community centres), books are wasted on the sun / mail reading red wall peasants.
Can't wait for her to join this tweet
a good post.
Just cannot think of a valid reason for such a request...
26? That's... what?
Ridiculous?
18 would be ridiculous. 26 is gobbledygook.
Really stretching the definition of dependent there.
26 is also the age when kids can no longer be covered on their parents health insurance, iirc. I’d say it has more to do with that.
I think the bet is that many would have killed themselves or settled into their born gender by then, so reducing the total by a lot.
That's why I suggested they're stretching the definition of dependent. It implies that people can't make these kinds of decisions, be trusted etc until they're 26.
But that's just a cover. If they truly believed that then the maturity argument could be applied to gun rights, too, and they'd shit all over themselves in the great state of Oklahoma to stop such a thing from happening because freedom means guns and hate only.
But this is all too serious and depressing to think that people care so much about folks just trying to be happy in their own skin. I'd rather just say "Whoa, looks like no Oklahomo, eh?" and move along.
True enough Doc.
It’s only when it suits them that “kids” can be up to 26.
It’s only when it suits them that “kids” can be up to 26.
I think I'm one of those that think it should be 18, but 26 is outrageous
26 is so arbitrary. I’d love to be a fly on the wall at the discussions when they nailed it down to that specific age. Fecking weirdos. Don’t suppose it was a significant age for Jesus, or something mental like that?
What do people think of the argument surrounding the new Hogwarts Legacy game?
My bet is that one of the cretins found out that the human brain reaches full maturity in the mid-twenties and used that as their main argument.
I guess they’re going for 26 because the frontal cortex isn’t fully formed until you’re 25. Or am I giving these people way too much credit?
Buy the game to support the development team. Then give your character a name like "Tr4nsRightsMatter" and "T3RF-sl@y3r-69".
I think it's a bit shit that a game made by developers, that have done a lot to ensure their game is diverse and welcoming, might lose out on sales because the original author is a total fecking prick.
I've just discovered that J.K Rowling is a female. All these years I assumed it was a bloke
Jowling Kowling is clearly a female name.
Isn't conservative love grand? Should surprise no one that he is an outspoken christian...
As I understand it, the objective/plot of the new game is to quell an uprising by the goblins, who are seeking more equal rights. That is certainly an interesting way to go, but clearly in line with J.K. Rowling's political views as already expressed in the Harry Potter series, such as they are.
Whether it's intentional or not, it sure is hard to not see the goblins as a stand-in for every anti-semitic trope ever conceived. Hooked noses, runs the banking world, greedy, scheming, untrustworthy, etc. It's kind of hilarious that it made it into these movies for kids. I mean, look at what they decided to put on the floor of the bank in the first movie. Link.
J.K. Rowling is anti-semitic? That’s a new one to me. I thought her only problematic views were around trans rights?
EDIT: She’s being called anti-semitic because of the decor on the floor of a bank in one of the movies?!
EDIT: She’s being called anti-semitic because of the decor on the floor of a bank in one of the movies?!
That's almost as wacky as most actual fecking anti-semitic conspiracy theories.
There's a star on the floor because they filmed it in Australia House in London and that's what the floor of Australia House looks like.
That's almost as wacky as most actual fecking anti-semitic conspiracy theories.
There's a star on the floor because they filmed it in Australia House in London and that's what the floor of Australia House looks like.
I just love the idea of her phoning up the location manager or production design team “Listen, I’ve been thinking about the sort of tiling I want on the floor of the bank…”
J.K. Rowling is anti-semitic? That’s a new one to me. I thought her only problematic views were around trans rights?
EDIT: She’s getting blamed for the decor on the floor of a bank in one of the movies?!
I don't think she consciously set out to make the goblins antisemitic, but I think much of the lore around goblins in general is based on antisemitic tropes. The floor thing is probably a coincidence, but the design of the goblins is quite interesting.
Anyway, this criticism is not new, but I think it was recently brought up by Jon Stewart in a podcast or something, which is why it has resurfaced.