• allywilson@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    120
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    11 months ago

    For a gender that less than 0.5% of the population identifies as (Wiki numbers, 355 people out of 100,000), we sure do argue about this a lot, don’t we?

    • WhaleScenery@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      73
      arrow-down
      14
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      Never underestimate the will of bigots to obsess over other people’s genitalia.

      Edit: I said the above to be facetious and poke fun at these wall-eyed transphobic lunatics. I realise that trans / NB issues encompass SO much more than that, and I was being deliberately reductive in order to make a point. I hope that comes through ❤️

      • Track_Shovel@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        21
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        I hope that comes through ❤️

        Clear as a bell. Anyone shitting on you is as tone-deaf as JK.

        • TSG_Asmodeus (he, him)@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          16
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          11 months ago

          You don’t have to learn them all, just use the ones the person asks you to. This is like saying “there’s like 100,000 names and I’m supposed to know them all? You’re just Jack or Jane to me.”

          • Silverseren@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            Also, almost no one uses any form of neopronouns. They just use the classic three of she/he/they. Or a combination of them.

          • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            10
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            11 months ago

            “Jessica? There’s no Jessica in the Bible dammit. You’re either Adam or Eve and I’m gonna say you look like an Eve.”

        • legion02@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          “there are over 100 fucking names now and I’m too stupid to learn anything other than you”. No one is asking you to be psychic but instead to give their pronouns the same respect that they give your name. If you don’t know them it’s whatever but if you do and don’t use them on purpose you’re being intentionally disrespectful. Like if I know your name is Bob and call you Barbra on purpose that’s disrespectful.

    • K3zi4@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      33
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      11 months ago

      It’s just one of the culture war angles propagated by the rich to keep everyone angry with each other while they reap up as much of the world’s wealth as possible before any of the forthcoming disasters- whether that is climate crisis migration, the next financial crisis, AI unemployment crisis, further war, food and water shortages worldwide, etc…

      The writing is on the wall, a majority of people can see it too if you ask them, but unfortunately people can’t help but get sucked in anyway. Probably because it’s a distraction from facing the uncertain future we all have.

      OR, this is just a tinfoil hat getting the better of me. It feels like a logical conclusion, so maybe that’s the fallacy I’ve fallen for.

      • JasSmith@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        No, you’re right. Between 2009 and 2011, both the left and the right had their popular class movements with Occupy Wall Street and the Tea Party. The risk of both sides coming together to attack the rich was too dangerous. Shortly after that we had Obama and other business and political leaders talking about “systemic racial discrimination.” Boy has that divided us. An incredibly effective tool to convince us idiots that race has ANYTHING to do with our differences. Poor people have far more in common with each other than they do with the rich. The trans issue has been injected to stoke the fires more, and everyone has been quick to jump on board.

        You know what? If we’re too stupid to see through this obvious charade, maybe this is what we deserve.

        • HandBreadedTools@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          11 months ago

          Holy fuck you are so dense. Bringing up the tea party as a way of class solidarity? You are either lying or ignorant.

          Please, learn about the shit you spew if you actually care, but I assume you don’t since here you are spewing nonsense.

          • DaDaDrood@feddit.nl
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            11 months ago

            Not OP, but I don’t think they mean that the Tea Party was part of class solidarity, but more that it was a movement that was unorchestrated by the powers that be and could, if left unanswered, lead to threatening the status quo, aka super wealthy.

          • JasSmith@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            11 months ago

            I don’t know what you mean by “class solidarity,” but it was born in the fires of the 2008/2009 bank bailouts in which millions of ordinary people were wiped out financially while the financial institutions were given trillions of dollars. There was a lot of anger at the perception of crony capitalism and elites. The movement itself was grassroots and clearly feared by the powerful. You might not like the goals of the movement, but their anger was palpable, and at one point, something like 10% of the country identified with the movement. There was no way the rich and powerful could let ordinary citizens form such a powerful voting bloc.

            • jaywalker@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              11 months ago

              The tea party movement wasn’t grassroots at that point as it was being funded almost entirely by billionaires and groups like Americans for Prosperity. What you’re saying here is almost the exact opposite of reality.

    • Blackmist@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      11 months ago

      Better that than throwing off the shackles of the oppressor and rising up against the oligarch class.

      Those brown lads area after your crumbs! That man wants to be called “they”! Ooh look, Israel/Gaza, pick a side! Look at this jobless woman with her fancy flat screen television! Does eating Wotsits cure cancer? Distract yourselves with yourselves.

    • Honytawk@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      Even if they were only 1 in a billion. They still deserve to exist and live their lives how they like if it doesn’t negatively affect others.

      • Someology@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        They do, and they should get on with that, and start ignoring people who don’t agree with them, their lifestyle, or use of language. You cannot enforce your own ideas about your identity on anyone else, because they are also entitled to have their own ideas. All a person can do is just live. Celebrity opinions are not law, and should not be paid such attention as if they matter.

  • doggle@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    59
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    11 months ago

    Has anyone in any country ever been incarcerated for misgendering a trans person? Is there even a significant number of people who seriously believe that would be an appropriate response?

    Nope.

    Just come out and tell us about your victimhood complex, Joanne.

    • WolfhoundRO@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      11 months ago

      Exactly! It’s like going to jail for having someone presenting themselves as Joanne and you always call them Joanna. How will it ever be so much of a concern to throw someone in jail and destroy their future over it, Joanna? HOW??

      • UsernameIsTooLon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        11 months ago

        It’s about the influential power. She’s presenting a potentially dangerous rhetoric. She really does have the power to create a new wave of hate if she really wanted to.

  • blue_zephyr@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    42
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    11 months ago

    The prosecution complex is real. No one’s suing you for using the wrong pronouns you bigot.

    In fact, I’m almost entirely sure that no one’s ever asked Rowling to use specific pronouns because no queer person could stand being around her for longer than a minute.

  • tony@lemmy.hoyle.me.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    52
    arrow-down
    14
    ·
    11 months ago

    Does she realize what a complete arsehole that makes her look? She’d rather go to jail than treat people like human beings?

      • vanquesse@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        11 months ago

        assuming you didn’t make a typo, this ain’t cute. The signal you’re sending is that respecting pronouns is a privilege you reserve for people you agree with.

        • Chais@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          11 months ago

          It’s more that I’m giving her a taste of her own medicine. She doesn’t extend this basic courtesy to people she disagrees with, so why should anyone give it to her?

          • Honytawk@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            11 months ago

            Because it isn’t just hurting she/her, it is also hurting the people who want to be called a different pronouns.

            So better to keep referring to her cis pronouns every time she/her is mentioned.

          • vanquesse@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            Because the signal you’re sending to trans people is that you don’t think respecting our pronouns is a human right.

            She is so vile and toxic in such obvious ways - why not attack her for her wrongs instead?

      • casmael@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        11 months ago

        Personally I think pronouns should be abolished altogether - think of the cumulative time you could save by trimming the language like that. Trim the fat. After all, why use many word when few word do trick?

    • iegod@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      11 months ago

      It’s hyperbole and she is referring to being forced to think a particular thing. She’s not wrong on the premise. But no one wants to analyze this because thinking and discord are hard.

      • Honytawk@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        She can still think whatever she wants, she just isn’t allowed to call people names they don’t want.

        It is like me calling you “asshole” the whole time, and then proudly announcing that I would rather go to jail than stop calling you asshole.

        • iegod@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          She can call people whatever she wants that’s the point. You don’t go to jail for calling me an asshole. Being forced to use speech that counters her actual thoughts is the part she’s willing to go to jail for. You would likely do the same for your own beliefs.

    • huginn@feddit.it
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      Cute that you think she’s go to anything resembling a normal prison and not a white collar cell where the worst she deals with it eating freeze dried food sometimes

  • Margot Robbie@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    40
    arrow-down
    11
    ·
    11 months ago

    Using the correct pronouns is an issue of respecting others, and seeing Rowling doubling down on her smug and bigoted views in public is a revelation, because during a re-read, you start seeing these views reflecting everywhere in her writing. It’s a deeply prejudiced and irrational world, and it stayed that way all the way to the ending with nothing in that world really changed.

    I think being an adult is realizing that I don’t love Harry Potter as much as I used to, because (I can’t believe I’m saying this) I’ve finally outgrown it. It’s time to move on.

    Being a grown-up is painful.

    • nickwitha_k (he/him)@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      11 months ago

      A big part of that is context, I think. When we were children, we didn’t have the knowledge or developed brains to recognize these things. And the lossy nature of our memory leads us to skew towards remembering things in more idealized manners, probably because it is easier to recall things as “concentrates” of reality. The parts that we, as adults, recognize as problematic don’t tend to be remembered as significant because, when making the initial memories as children, we lacked the context to flag them as such.

      I think being an adult is realizing that I don’t love Harry Potter as much as I used to, because (I can’t believe I’m saying this) I’ve finally outgrown it. It’s time to move on.

      On other hand, this realization frees you in a way and may potentially inspire you seek out or create another piece of art to love (and potentially share with others). While I disagree with a significant section of the population and believe that art is inseparably and indelibly linked to the artist, it is important still to be kind to our past selves and not judge them for what they didn’t know. That still doesn’t entirely soften the blow of “breaking up” with a piece of art that one has loved but, it can help with accepting it.

      Being a grown-up is painful.

      It’s also joyful, terrible, wonderful, enraging, sorrowful, and countless other feelings and possibilities. I think it’s beautiful, even if not always comfortable. And the uncomfortable bits provide contrast to the positive, letting them seem to shine a bit more brilliantly. Though, that could also be the near-pathological optimism that I adopted to cope with depression in my younger years.

      • Margot Robbie@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        11 months ago

        inspire you seek out or create another piece of art to love (and potentially share with others)

        I think we did a pretty good job on that recently. :)

        • nickwitha_k (he/him)@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          11 months ago

          If you’re referring to the recent film, I think that you did indeed and hope your colleagues and yourself are proud of it. Nice to have a film that’s a bit more light-hearted (without being too saccharine) and, especially considering the thread topic, that embraces a diverse set of people in the cast and supports universal agency.

    • Cethin@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      11 months ago

      The world is fine (if flawed and sometimes generic). The real issue is there isn’t a single good character in them. Hermione is alright, with her desire to free the elves and generally no accepting of the status quo. Even she seems to stop caring about this after they’re free and capable of doing something about it. There’s not a single progressive person in those worlds. There are only not totally evil (but accepting of banal evils) people. Being against Hitler doesn’t make you a good person, it only makes you not a literal Nazi.

      • Karyoplasma@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        11 months ago

        Neville is the only somewhat progressive character. It’s just a transformation from loser to hero, but at least he never tossed his core values.

        All adults in the HP universe are terrible people, the only adult with a lick of integrity is McGonagall.

        • Rouxibeau@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          11 months ago

          A broken clock is right sometimes. I don’t believe never being good it says anything about the author, the author just forgot to fuck him up…

  • spiderkle@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    35
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    11 months ago

    TLDR; all Britons can say what they want and express themselves freely, unless it breaks any laws or harms another person.

    Isn’t this a classic “freedom of speech” vs. “anti-discrimination-laws” case? Unless the laws in the UK change anytime soon, J.K. very well has the right to talk how she pleases in the confines of the law. She also can’t be forced to change her vocabulary and shouldn’t be afraid to be bullied if she doesn’t. Whatever you may think about her, this always has to goes both ways:

    Under Article 10 of the Human Rights Act 1998, “everyone has the right to freedom of expression” in the UK. The law goes on to say that this freedom “may be subject to formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society".

    In 2010 the UK also passed a law protecting it’s citizens from “discrimination, harassment and victimization.”

    If it could be proven that J.K. harmed somebody by her speech, she could be liable for damages. At that point she could also sue back, having the most likely bigger budget than most people.

    • GreatAlbatross@feddit.ukM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      11 months ago

      As some say “freedom to swing your arms around ends where someone else’s face begins”

      Although that’s maybe not such a good phrase after all, as swinging your arms around to intimidate is also not acceptable.

    • V H@lemmy.stad.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      Yes, she is free to be a giant asshole with a persecution complex. And we are free to call her one.

    • jasory@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      11 months ago

      What a worthless comment. “Your freedom of speech is protected so long as it hasn’t been outlawed”.

      Who knew.

      This is why people say that Europe doesn’t have freedom of speech, because unlike the US there is nothing stopping legislature from simply banning any speech.

      • Ashe@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        27
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        11 months ago

        You get called out for shitty behavior that can negatively impact people, and are upset that carries consequences. That’s not bullying fwiw

          • Ashe@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            12
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            11 months ago

            Trans people have always existed and weren’t even on people’s radar until we became the focus of a “culture war”. This is something I denied and battled internally for 15+ years before I decided to actually pursue it; I am markedly less passable as a result, but that’s what the “rational” transphobes want right? Wait until you’re a fully developed adult before making that choice? I did. My voice might be on the deep end of things, but I get gendered correctly in public by total strangers. So while I appreciate my life being called a trend, I can assure you it’s not.

            Now, while I worry about my personal safety by way of being hate crimed in public due to some shitty rhetoric; you can keep posting about getting “bullied” online. Hope this clears things up <3

      • iegod@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        Just use they/them. It’s universally understood and was in use long before you ever knew about LGBTQ at all. It’s really not hard. Whatever you think about gender or sex, this is a neutral acknowledgment that is a person. We can all at least agree on that.

      • LogarithmicCamel@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 months ago

        Seriously living in the worst timeline.

        It really doesn’t get any worse than people downvoting our posts or saying they don’t agree with us when we post things on the Internet for other people to read. So much bullying! I say we should go back to the good old times when people who felt insulted, whether the insult was real or imagined, would challenge you for a duel at sunset in front of the saloon.

      • fosforus@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        I mean I’m not ecstatic about those things but it’s pretty easy to just ignore them. You know, to keep your shit to yourself. Or are you in some situation that forces you to encounter them on a regular basis?

  • noodle@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    [x] Doubt

    Even if you disagree, using a pronoun is just polite. She’d have to go out of her way to do this.

    • RGB3x3@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      He’d have to go out of his way to do this.

      Start misgendering him and see how frustrated he gets.

    • Cethin@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      You can’t not use pronouns. It’s about using the correct ones. Why do some people think pronouns are new? “You” is a pronoun, for example. It has nothing to do with gender.

        • Cethin@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          Even if you disagree, using a pronoun is just polite.

          It may have just been a typo, but I’m seen far too many people who think pronouns are a modern invention that has to do with gender identity. Sorry if it was just a mistake.

          • noodle@feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            It’s not a typo, I just lazily wrote the comment like I’d speak.

  • Melllvar@startrek.website
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    37
    arrow-down
    21
    ·
    11 months ago

    Wait… is that really on the table? If so, then I grudgingly have to take her side insofar as objecting to prior restraint or compelled speech. Being an asshole is a fundamental human right.

    • darq@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      67
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      No. It isn’t on the table. This is another in the long line of scenarios that only exist in TERF imaginations.

    • finthechat@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      45
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      It was not on the table.

      Some rando posted on her Shitter account “vote for Labour, get two years” and Rowling responded with the quote in the headline.

      If you read the article, they clarify that the Labour party wants to crack down on LGBTQ hate crimes, and nowhere is it said that they would make it illegal to use improper pronouns for others.

    • Doug [he/him]@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      14
      ·
      11 months ago

      As fundamental as not having to put up with assholes.

      You wanna do it? Go do it over there where no one else has to put up with your shit

      • Melllvar@startrek.website
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        11 months ago

        There is no right to not have to put up with assholes.

        You wanna do it? Go do it over there where no one else has to put up with your shit

        Exercising your rights, I see.

        • bitsplease@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          11 months ago

          There is no right to not have to put up with assholes.

          Sure there is. It’s called freedom of association

          • Melllvar@startrek.website
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            7
            ·
            edit-2
            11 months ago

            That’s neither here nor there. There is no right to punish or censor someone just because in your opinion they’re an asshole.

            • bitsplease@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              8
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              11 months ago

              Depends on what you mean by punish or censor.

              If you’re being an asshole on social media, I absolutely have the right to “punish” you by downvoting your post and calling you an idiot. If I’m the owner or moderator of the platform you’re being an asshole on, then I absolutely have the right to censor you by banning you - or just blocking you if I’m an individual user.

              I do agree that the government doesn’t have a right to intervene however, unless you take it far enough that it constitutes targeted harassment - but in my experience, when most people complain about being “censored” for being asshole, they really mean that privately owned platforms are deciding to not host their BS

              There is no right to not have to put up with assholes.

              EDIT: Because @charonn0@startrek.website keeps making comments then immediately deleting them, I’ll just answer here for when he finally finds a version of his response he’s satisfied with - since they’ve all been basically the same.

              If you say “Of course I meant purely the legal aspect, that’s what I was saying the whole time”, then I’d point you to the comment of yours I actually responded to, which was

              There is no right to not have to put up with assholes.

              This is the remark that I’ve been talking about, and you don’t need to government to intervene in order to not have to put up with assholes. If you said “There is no right to have people you think are assholes put in jail”, then obviously I’d agree with you, but that’s not what you said. What you said is that we all have to just put up with assholes because we don’t have the right to stop them from being assholes, which is factually untrue for all the reasons that I’ve already stated

  • Etterra@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    11 months ago

    Enjoy jail then I guess. It’s a pretty stupid hill to die on, especially when you’re filthy rich and the conservatives already hate you over the whole witchcraft nonsense. I cannot fathom conservative doublethink.

  • rainynight65@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    11 months ago

    That makes her the second gigantic prominent shithead in as many days expressing that they’re willing to go to prison for their beliefs. And also the second whom I wouldn’t believe for even a millisecond that they’re telling the truth.

    • HipPriest@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      11 months ago

      Was my exact reaction when I read this this morning before moving on.

      She’s just jealous Glinner’s got a book out and she thinks she needs to raise her TERF game.