JK Rowling

Rank 22 of 47
|
Score 31
10/27/2025, 12:52:41 PM
X
In reply to:
Prof. Gary Francione
@garylfrancione
·
104d
@jk_rowling "Biologically she's correct but..." There is no "but."
J.K. Rowling
@jk_rowling
·
104d
It is not ‘hate’ to speak the truth.
It is not ‘hate’ to defend the rights of women and girls.
It is not ‘hate’ to be deeply worried about an unevidenced medical experiment on minors.
Rationality goes out of the window when you pretend men can be women.
Concerned Citizen
@BGatesIsaPyscho
·
116d
“She (JK Rowling) believes if you’re born a Man then you can’t ever become a Woman”

“Biologically she’s correct, but, when you introduce this level of hate into a Debate then rationality goes out the Window”

Listen to Labour MP Carolyn Harris make an absolute fool of herself.

The statement engages in public discourse by addressing contentious issues related to gender identity and free speech. The tone is confrontational, suggesting a parallel between historical suppression of ideas and current debates on gender. The intent appears to be to criticize perceived restrictions on expressing certain views.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement may cause harm by dismissing opposing views and potentially contributing to a polarized environment. [-1]
  2. Principle 2:
    I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
    It does not respect the dignity of those with differing opinions, potentially engaging in dismissive rhetoric. [-1]
  3. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The statement does not promote understanding or empathy, as it frames the issue in a divisive manner. [-1]
  4. Principle 4:
    I will engage in constructive criticism and dialogue with those in disagreement and will not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments.
    The statement does not engage in constructive dialogue, instead using a historical analogy to undermine opposing views. [-1]