• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should JK Rowling's Comments Be Considered a Crime?

Should what JKRowling said be a crime?

  • Total voters
    91
Absentglare said:
This is demonstrably false, there is male, female, and intersex.
Click to expand...

True hermaphrodites are about 0.02% of human births and are a birth defect outlier. They are medical issues, very real and very in need of being correctly; and that means in all facets of proper including legally, socially and medically dealt with but it’s not a “sex” in the biological sense. It’s a birth defect in the scientific sense.

As I stated regarding gender, not sex; male, female, and all points in between are social constructs. If you are referring to that I pointed that out and we aren’t on different pages.

Me: The scientific is one thing and there are two sexes. The sociological, gender, is something else. Room for much variance.
 
Josie said:
Can you not use your own words to explain your own opinion?

This is Peppermint. She uses the pronoun "she" even though she's biologically male:

OIF.eILAJIyil8zQqtGVE6lutg


If I would've said "he" instead of "she," would that rise to the level of verbal harassment, in your opinion?
Click to expand...
Is it the first time you met? Did you do it on purpose? Is it repeated or aggressive? Are you coworkers?

Your hypothesis contrary to fact is bullshit. If you try and humiliate, say, an older woman you work with who has visible facial hair by saying, “nice mustache, bro,” don’t you suppose that might violate workplace harassment?
 
Josie said:
That's also a bridge too far.
Click to expand...
Maybe not. They are trying to abuse the legal system for political gain. For that, there must be some legal ramifications.
 
NatMorton said:
I do. I also understand that an opinion can be proven wrong, which is a breakthrough you’ve yet to make.
Click to expand...

So, you have demonstrated that you don’t know what an opinion is once again.
 
Absentglare said:
No, but that doesn’t mean that speech is protected as legal because it insults someone. For example, sexual harassment in the workplace is against the law, humiliating a male colleague by referring to them as female, for example, can qualify.
Click to expand...

Sexual harassment in the workplace is illegal under workplace discrimination laws. So intentionally insulting someone's gender or gender identity would already qualify under that, but only in a workplace. I've not heard of any other laws that would apply to non-workplace insults being criminalized.
 
ModernDiogenes said:
True hermaphrodites are about 0.02% of human births and are a birth defect outlier. They are medical issues, very real and very in need of being correctly; and that means in all facets of proper including legally, socially and medically dealt with but it’s not a “sex” in the biological sense. It’s a birth defect in the scientific sense.

As I stated regarding gender, not sex; male, female, and all points in between are social constructs. If you are referring to that I pointed that out and we aren’t on different pages.

Me: The scientific is one thing and there are two sexes. The sociological, gender, is something else. Room for much variance.
Click to expand...
No, you are wrong about the science. There is male, female, and intersex. Further, there are females with male characteristics, and there are males with female characteristics. They are established within expected variations.
 
A crime? No. I think she should expect some vitriol her way though. Court of public opinion etc etc
 
Absentglare said:
No, you are wrong about the science. There is male, female, and intersex. Further, there are females with male characteristics, and there are males with female characteristics. They are established within expected variations.
Click to expand...

Characteristics have biological components but scientifically (human biology) they aren’t the sex. Even an inter sexed person XX or XY chromosomes. The exclusion, and it is an exclusion, is the XXY and as pointed out it’s an outlier. The exception that proves the rule. It’s a birth defect, not a separate sex.

Again, gender is different, and that’s what you’re describing: gender. A social construct with room for the variances your describing, and as I’ve stated - should be acknowledged.
 
ModernDiogenes said:
Characteristics have biological components but scientifically (human biology) they aren’t the sex. Even an inter sexed person XX or XY chromosomes. The exclusion, and it is an exclusion, is the XXY and as pointed out it’s an outlier. The exception that proves the rule. It’s a birth defect, not a separate sex.

Again, gender is different, and that’s what you’re describing: gender. A social construct with room for the variances your describing, and as I’ve stated - should be acknowledged.
Click to expand...
Chimeras can have both XX and XY chromosomes.
 
Rogue Valley said:
This is a UK problem.

But as always, @MrNiceGuy jumps on anything about the trans community.
Click to expand...
UK problems are just as open for discussion as other problems.

I jump on events that are in the news. This was blasted all over the interwebz. There are a dozen articles about it on the first page if you search JK rowling criminal charge or words to that effect.
 
MrNiceGuy said:
Generally, no.

The question was "should" it be criminal?
Click to expand...
Which seems like a bait question. What JK did was not illegal, did not meet the criminal threshold for the law. Most people agree with that position, even if we think the law itself may serve a purpose, especially for the country that put it in place.
 
roguenuke said:
Which seems like a bait question. What JK did was not illegal, did not meet the criminal threshold for the law. Most people agree with that position, even if we think the law itself may serve a purpose, especially for the country that put it in place.
Click to expand...
Why is it a bad or bait question, just because the outcome is that most people agree that the answer is no?

The reason the question is important is that there is a faction that clearly thinks that it SHOULD be criminal, such as, for example, the person who filed the criminal charge. There are also those who obliquely suggest the same, such that you can read this thread and see folks suggesting that what Rowling did was an act of violence. Most acts of violence, unless justified by self-defense, defense of others, involvement in war, or some other excuse or justification, are criminal acts. The issue is also being discussed in mainstream news publications.

It is heartening to see that most people do not think it should be criminal, but there does seem to be a bit more buzz about the concept today then, say, 20-30 years ago, when it would have been literally laughed off, if not met with confused stares because the concept of "misgendering" someone wouldn't have even registered as an issue....
 
roguenuke said:
Which seems like a bait question. What JK did was not illegal, did not meet the criminal threshold for the law. Most people agree with that position, even if we think the law itself may serve a purpose, especially for the country that put it in place.
Click to expand...

It's not a bait question simply because most people agree with one position.
 
NatMorton said:
You’ve never had an opinion later proven to be wrong?
Click to expand...
Clearly an opinion can be proven wrong, although whether and how that can happen depends on the type of opinion. Value judgments can rarely, if ever, be proven wrong. So, if one's opinion is that JK Rowling's statement is bad or good, that can't really be proven wrong. But, if the opinion is "my opinion is that the Earth is flat..." then, well, that opinion can be proven wrong.
 
MrNiceGuy said:
Why is it a bad question, just because the outcome is that most people agree that the answer is no?

The reason the question is important is that there is a faction that clearly thinks that it SHOULD be criminal, such as, for example, the person who filed the criminal charge. There are also those who obliquely suggest the same, such that you can read this thread and see folks suggesting that what Rowling did was an act of violence. Most acts of violence, unless justified by self-defense, defense of others, involvement in war, or some other excuse or justification, are criminal acts. The issue is also being discussed in mainstream news publications.

It is heartening to see that most people do not think it should be criminal, but there does seem to be a bit more buzz about the concept today then, say, 20-30 years ago, when it would have been literally laughed off, if not met with confused stares because the concept of "misgendering" someone wouldn't have even registered as an issue....
Click to expand...
Because the article you posted stated it wasn't illegal, didn't meet the threshold. So that indicates already that the vast majority of people believe that specific circumstance does not reach a level of criminality, that the law requires something that is harassment, defamatory, etc.

People moving towards being less of assholes is a good thing, in my opinion. We need to stop cheering people for being dicks, treating them as "good" for basically being giant bullies.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom