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.

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

      • seriousconsideration@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        9 months ago

        Bad faith framing of the issue. OPSEC in critical national security operations is a little different than respecting people’s gender identity. Not even in the same ballpark, it aint even the same sport.

          • seriousconsideration@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            9 months ago

            Or, maybe I got it right when I assumed that you were comparing Assange and Manning leaking information critical to military operations to Trans people not being the target of hate speech?

            • gapbetweenus@feddit.de
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              9 months ago

              Or maybe you got it wrong and that’s not the point I was making?

              The reasoning used in Assange and Manning case, is that information they made publicly available is endangering peoples lives. That is not unsimilar to the argumentation that hateful speech is endangering people targeted by it.