JK Rowling

Rank 22 of 47
|
Score 31
12/1/2025, 2:39:49 PM
X
In reply to:
The Pissed Off Lawyer
@legaltweetz
·
67d
@jk_rowling Once you see the fetish in it, you cannot unsee it.
J.K. Rowling
@jk_rowling
·
67d
@legaltweetz It's one of the very few debates where there's hardly any middle ground, other than general agreement that nobody should be persecuted for wanting to dress or look a certain way (within obvious limits. Thinking of that Canadian teacher with the enormous fake breasts. I am not
The Pissed Off Lawyer
@legaltweetz
·
67d
@jk_rowling I’ve crossed the rubicon against all of it. It’s the only way forward
J.K. Rowling
@jk_rowling
·
67d
'He has a point, but he's too blunt.'

From the start, a key tactic of the gender identitarians has been linguistic prescription, and it's proved shockingly successful. Trans activists' shibboleths and euphemisms have been allowed to penetrate the upper echelons of our culture
Ian O'Doherty
@OdohertyI64991
·
68d
Interesting interview with @Glinner on @GBNEWS a few minutes ago about the trans debate. It's interesting how the tide is turning in his favour.
I've seen old friends who shunned him admit he has a point but that he was too blunt. Even that would was unthinkable a few years ago

The statement by @legaltweetz, 'AGP remains the elephant in the room we're all supposed to pretend is a hat stand,' is part of a broader conversation about gender identity and the trans debate. The tone is critical and suggests that there is an issue being ignored or downplayed in public discourse. The intent appears to be to highlight a perceived problem within the discussion of gender identity, specifically referencing 'AGP' (autogynephilia), a controversial and often criticized concept. The content is provocative and implies that there is a lack of honest discussion about this topic.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement does not directly cause harm, but it touches on a sensitive topic that could be perceived as harmful to some individuals involved in the gender identity debate. [-1]
  2. Principle 2:
    I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
    The statement does not engage in direct harassment or hate speech, but it could be seen as disrespectful to those who identify with or support the trans community. [-1]
  3. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The statement does not promote understanding, empathy, or compassion, as it uses a metaphor that could be seen as dismissive of the concerns of the trans community. [-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 criticism or dialogue, as it uses a metaphor that could be interpreted as dismissive rather than engaging in a reasoned argument. [-1]
  5. Principle 7:
    I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.
    The statement engages in free speech but does so in a way that may not be considered responsible or with integrity, given the potential for misunderstanding and offense. [-1]