On Sunday, Harry Potter author J.K. Rowling revealed that she would not delete posts where she called trans-identified male India Willoughby a man as Scotland's "hate crime" bill goes into effect.
In response to an X user suggesting she delete her posts by the April 1 enactment date, Rowling said, "If you genuinely imagine I’d delete posts calling a man a man, so as not to be prosecuted under this ludicrous law, stand by for the mother of all April Fools’ jokes."
In a previous post, Rowling highlighted an article from The Times discussing the new law. She quoted the author who pointed out "...the Scottish government has contrived to create a bill which affords greater status and protection to men who cross-dress than it does to actual women."
Rowling and UK Journalist India Willoughby have been publicly feuding for a couple of months. While Rowling is a staunch advocate of women's rights, she is often the target of trans-rights activists for unapologetically speaking her mind.
Earlier this month, Rowling discussed how the feelings of trans-identified males are "more important than truth." In one post referring to Willoughby she said, "India didn’t become a woman. India is cosplaying a misogynistic male fantasy of what a woman is," while discussing trans-identified males using the women's changing room.
She then posted a screenshot from January, where Willoughby fantasized about kidnapping the author and said "This is the individual whose precious feelings are more important than truth, according to some of his fellow men."
"If you think women calling this person a man is more offensive than him publicly fantasizing about kidnapping women, I can't help you," she added.
Willoughby took umbrage with Rowling using the term "man" to describe the adult human male and even filed a police report against her.
In response, Rowling revealed that her lawyers had advised her that she not only had a winning defamation case against Willoughby, "but that India's obsessive targeting of me over the past few years may meet the legal threshold for harassment."
In the thread, the author pointed out, "The Forstater ruling established that gender-critical views can be protected in law as a philosophical belief." She added, "No law compels anyone to pretend to believe that India is a woman."
Rowling noted that she would just have to explain to police that in her view, "India is a classic example of the male narcissist who lives in a state of perpetual rage that he can't compel women to take him at his own valuation."
Police determined that Rowling's using the term "man" to describe a male did not "meet the criminal threshold." Willoughby then vowed to appeal the decision.
In response to an X user suggesting she delete her posts by the April 1 enactment date, Rowling said, "If you genuinely imagine I’d delete posts calling a man a man, so as not to be prosecuted under this ludicrous law, stand by for the mother of all April Fools’ jokes."
In a previous post, Rowling highlighted an article from The Times discussing the new law. She quoted the author who pointed out "...the Scottish government has contrived to create a bill which affords greater status and protection to men who cross-dress than it does to actual women."
Rowling and UK Journalist India Willoughby have been publicly feuding for a couple of months. While Rowling is a staunch advocate of women's rights, she is often the target of trans-rights activists for unapologetically speaking her mind.
Earlier this month, Rowling discussed how the feelings of trans-identified males are "more important than truth." In one post referring to Willoughby she said, "India didn’t become a woman. India is cosplaying a misogynistic male fantasy of what a woman is," while discussing trans-identified males using the women's changing room.
She then posted a screenshot from January, where Willoughby fantasized about kidnapping the author and said "This is the individual whose precious feelings are more important than truth, according to some of his fellow men."
"If you think women calling this person a man is more offensive than him publicly fantasizing about kidnapping women, I can't help you," she added.
Willoughby took umbrage with Rowling using the term "man" to describe the adult human male and even filed a police report against her.
In response, Rowling revealed that her lawyers had advised her that she not only had a winning defamation case against Willoughby, "but that India's obsessive targeting of me over the past few years may meet the legal threshold for harassment."
In the thread, the author pointed out, "The Forstater ruling established that gender-critical views can be protected in law as a philosophical belief." She added, "No law compels anyone to pretend to believe that India is a woman."
Rowling noted that she would just have to explain to police that in her view, "India is a classic example of the male narcissist who lives in a state of perpetual rage that he can't compel women to take him at his own valuation."
Police determined that Rowling's using the term "man" to describe a male did not "meet the criminal threshold." Willoughby then vowed to appeal the decision.
