The Harry Potter author described several transgender women as men in a series of social media posts.

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.

  • otp@sh.itjust.works
    78·
    9 months ago

    Bill Gates started a charity.

    Steve Jobs killed himself because he thought he knew better than his doctors. Well, that’s wacked out too, but at least it’s not being a Nazi…

    • FuglyDuck@lemmy.worldEnglish
      408·
      9 months ago

      Bill gates didn’t start the charity as a midlife crisis.

      It’s a tax dodge and a lot of other ways of protecting his money while also doing a little reputation washing/ morality banking

      • otp@sh.itjust.works
        14·
        9 months ago

        Wasn’t he 45 when he started the charity? That sounds like a perfect candidate to be a midlife crisis, haha

        • FuglyDuck@lemmy.worldEnglish
          236·
          9 months ago

          Just because it was midlife doesn’t mean it’s a crisis.

          He started the charity as a shelter for his obscene wealth. That is all.

          • otp@sh.itjust.works
            162·
            9 months ago

            I’m not obscenely wealthy, so I don’t have the experience…but it seems plausible that a billionaire midlife crisis could be “Where am I going to put this ridiculous amount of money that I’ve earned through less-than-ethical means?”

              • TranscendentalEmpire@lemm.ee
                12·
                9 months ago

                I mean, the main motivator for the endowment was always Malinda Gates. I’m sure it functions as a tax shelter, but I doubt that was really the main motivator. He’s already given over several times what his tax burden would have been, and if we compare it to other NGOs whose sole purpose is truly preserving or raising money, they really aren’t comparable.

                I’m in agreement that no one should have hundreds of millions of dollars, let alone billions. We can discuss the validity of NGO as a concept, but as far as NGO go, the gates foundation has done more actual aid work for 3rd world countries than most governments.

                • FuglyDuck@lemmy.worldEnglish
                  34·
                  9 months ago

                  We can discuss the validity of NGO as a concept, but as far as NGO go, the gates foundation has done more actual aid work for 3rd world countries than most governments.

                  most governments don’t have nearly the same revenue. This is like saying corporations have done more to help homeless people than homeless shelters (to whom the corpos donate money.)

                  The reality is that a lot of the way things are, are caused by people like- and including- bill gates.

                  While there are many NGOs that exist to do good things- and are very good at aid- the gates foundation is not one of those.

                  I think you’ve bought into the reputation washing the foundation has done for the Gates, and severely underestimate just ho sociopathic they are…. And just how profitable the foundation is for them personally.

                  • TranscendentalEmpire@lemm.ee
                    1·
                    9 months ago

                    most* governments don’t have nearly the same revenue. This is like saying corporations have done more to help homeless people than homeless shelters (to whom the corpos donate money.)

                    In this hypothetical, the shelters are still necessary for the investment to do any actual good, therefore the input of the investment could never exceed the input of the shelter.

                    One of the things that makes the gates foundation an actual working NGO is that they employ their own aid workers, and set up the logistics systems that support their mission.

                    The reality is that a lot of the way things are, are caused by people like- and including- bill gates.

                    I agree, my claim isn’t that bill gates deserves his wealth, or that his NGO validates his earnings, or even the economic system that allowed it. My claim is simply that the gates foundation is about as good of an NGO we could ever expect to have within our current economic system.

                    think you’ve bought into the reputation washing the foundation has done for the Gates, and severely underestimate just ho sociopathic they are…. And just how profitable the foundation is for them personally.

                    I think that the vast majority of those impacted by the “sociopathy” you speak of are/were other wealthy silicon valley types, and the rest of the 1rst world in general. Was he a monopolistic technocrat who personally slowed the march of technology for personal gain? Yes, but to be honest so did other corporations like apple. The thing apple hasn’t done is save +30 million lives from preventable diseases.

                    As far as how profitable the foundation is… I don’t really think you understand how tax write offs work. They aren’t an infinite supply of free tax credits that you can deduct from your personal income. There is a point where the amount you give exceeds your personal tax burden.

                    If it were truly about making money, he would just do the same thing musk is, keeping his investments in unrealized gains, and then using those assets as collateral for tax free loans.

                    Also, Id hardly claim the gates foundation has been a success at reputation washing. I mean just in the last couple years he’s been accused of everything from drinking baby’s blood for adrenochrome, injecting people with the 5g, and even creating COVID. I think he’s a difficult person to have a nuanced opinion over. People tend to not criticize them for the things he’s actually done, and tend to focus instead on some hidden insidiousness.

      • gmtom@lemmy.world
        72·
        9 months ago

        It’s a tax dodge

        Have you ever worked with the Gates foundation? Because calling it a “tax dodge” like that is completely baseless, they’re a really reallyngood charity, like honestly one of the best in the world, and also that’s very ignorant of how taxes work.

        • Empricorn@feddit.nlEnglish
          25·
          9 months ago

          They do good work and help people? That’s great! They do the best work out of all charities worldwide? That’s even better!

          Still a tax dodge. You really want to help the world, donate. The money being out of their control is kind of the point…

          • gmtom@lemmy.world
            22·
            9 months ago

            How is the money being out of their control the point?

            The point is to save lives and help people, which the Gates foundation does incredibly well.

            And it’s not a tax dodge, he’s literally just not selling his Microsoft shares for cash, getting taxed, and then giving the money to the foundation and instead just giving the foundation the shares directly.

        • FuglyDuck@lemmy.worldEnglish
          14·
          9 months ago

          and also that’s very ignorant of how taxes work.

          You could just google it and alleviate your own ignorance of all the scummy ways both the foundation and the trust are used to avoid taxes (and other expenses.) here’s a forbe’s article with the stuff they’re actually allowed to talk about. The “good work” you’re so keen to point out… is part of the grift.

          Specifically so schmucks like you pounce whenever some schmuck like me says “they’re not that nice.” That’s the part about “reputation washing”. he gives some money - literal pocket change for somebody that makes nearly 11 million per day.

          you don’t get that fucking rich by being “nice” or “decent” or even human, really. this is about Bezos, but it puts their wealth into perspective. Decent humans, with that kind of wealth could solve global housing. Or they could solve the food shortage. he hasn’t even come close to that. No. The foundation isn’t a force for good, even if it occasionally does good shit.

          for example, the Rich Douche exploited the pandemic to make money, by investing in vaccine companies. And refusing to release the IP on the Vaccine. Because that would hurt his the foundation’s profits.

          • gmtom@lemmy.world
            41·
            9 months ago

            My dude, I have worked with the foundation to help create diagnostic tools for deseases that would otherwise gone unnoticed in developing countries.

            The work we have done has saved thousands and thousands of peoples lives. So you can take your.

            The “good work” you’re so keen to point out… is part of the grift.

            And shove it right up your arse. If saving peoples lives is a “grift” to you because bill Gates didn’t sell his shares in Microsost before he gave them to his trust, because obviously the shares will keep increasing in price, then honestly I don’t fucking care.

            And yes I know Bill Gates did shitty things and screwed a lot of people over in his early carrier to become so rich and I’m not excusing that. But the Gates foundation isn’t part of that and has done way too much good for humanity as a whole for some ignorant chucklefuck with no first hand experience of what they do to dismiss it as a “grift”.

    • vividspecter@lemm.ee
      111·
      9 months ago

      Steve Jobs killed himself because he thought he knew better than his doctors. Well, that’s wacked out too, but at least it’s not being a Nazi…

      Steve Jobs was always a piece of shit, and he had that diet well before he got cancer. But yeah the fact he continued to double down in the face of death shows how much of a narcissist he was.