Guest post: A woman has said “No,” and gone unpunished
Originally a comment by Your Name’s not Bruce? on Major doubts.
I’m starting to think that Willyboy is really stupid enough to think that because something exists as a matter of law it is, ipso facto, illegal to deny it. [Francis Boyle]
I’m not so sure; I don’t think he would have seen this coming, and not because of stupidity or for having been blinded by his narcissism. Given how much the police had become the enforcers of trans ideology, Willoughby would have been justified in expecting the police to continue harassing and arresting those who resist and speak out against trans demands, or more accurately, those who defend women’s rights, particularly women themselves. We’ve certainly seen plenty of stories of police abuse in the name of trans “rights” from policing tweets and ribbons, limericks and stickers that said nothing different than what Rowling did.
Perhaps the tide is turning, and Willoughby chose the moment after the high water mark of trans influence to lodge his complaint. Or maybe, as I speculated above, Rowling was just too strong to target. But since the police have made it clear (in this instance at least) that calling a man a man, and referring to him as “he” and “him” is not a crime, all police persecution of anyone else doing the same thing should stop. It’s not a court decision but it is a precedent. It also shows that, in the eyes of this police department, in this instance, whatever documentation Willoughby has declaring him to be female, it does not turn him into one; he remains a man. This shouldn’t be news, but it is. Given the police’s eagerness to pursue gender heretics who refused to bow to Stonewall Law, this is huge.
I wonder if the department in question thought through the fact that they were unilaterally opening up this big new can of worms that’s going to effect policing itself. Feminists and other critics of gender ideology in the UK can now point to this police decision to protect themselves against police targeting and harassment. Considering how widespread the surrender of police services to the demands of trans activism is (along with the police’s own apparent internally motivated enthusiasm for GC witch hunts), it will be interesting and informative to see how this de facto change in policy plays out across the country.
I’m guessing this standard will not be applied evenly or consistently; some departments seem to be more “trans zealous” than others. Will they follow Northumbria’s lead? While the police’s taking up the position of trans “enforcers” seems to have been centrally devised and organized, the beginning of its abandonment of this Holy mission, as it has happened, surprisingly, in the Willoughby/Rowling case, might be a good deal more ad hoc and piecemeal, until government guidance steps in decisively. Will trans activists recognize the police response to this incident for the potential sea change it very well might be, if it were to be applied across the board? A woman has said “No,” and has gone unpunished; the police have declared that she did not break the law. Calling a man a man is now no longer a hate crime, not even a “non-crime hate incident.” How will they let this stand?
Now if the police took the next step and actually started citing trans activists for launching frivolous complaints of “misgendering” that waste police time and resources, that would be great. Mustn’t be greedy though; we should be happy with one miracle at a time.
All true, of course, and eloquently put but, thing is, Willoughby knows, or should know, the tide is turning – he whines enough about it. And yet somehow he chose this extraordinarily bad moment to come at the queen. Which leads me to conclude that he’s a Trump-like grifter who was simply lucky to find his moment and now the moment is slipping away he’s flailing wildly. Granted his cause is Willoughby first and foremost with the actual trans agenda a distant second. But that just means he was never a serious opponent. Like Hitler in the final months of WWII he’s not worth the metaphorical assassination attempt. To mix an already tortuous metaphor I hope he stays around to kick a few more spectacular own-goals and I’ll be there handing out free rope. (If anyone’s going to end up with a citation for wasting police resources it’s our Willyboy.)
Give it a week (or two) and there will be snivelling apologies, a young copper offered up as a sacrifice, and a promise to never again treat role-playing as anything other than reality.
Rev, I very much doubt that, because in order to make an apology they’ll not only have to admit that they were wrong to not investigate the allegations, they’ll actually have to investigate it. Investigating it will show that under certain circumstances they classify calling a man a man a hate incident at best, a hate crime at worst, and as Rowling did say exactly that about Willoughby the police would have to question Rowling under caution. I can’t imagine that she would comply with a request from them to voluntarily attend an interview and so they would have to arrest her. Were she not JK Rowling, that wouldn’t be a problem; they’ve done it many times to non-famous people and caused what amounts to minor ripples in some corners of social media and maybe earned a paragraph or two tucked away on page 15 of a local rag. But this time it is JK Rowling; can you imagine the headlines in the news – on television, on-line, in print – around the world?
“Jk Rowling Arrested For Saying Men Are Not Women”!
Not even the Metropolitan Police are that stupid.
Except that’s not how captured media would report it; they would say “JK Rowling Arrested For Transphobic Hate,” or some other wording that would conceal the details. If we were really lucky, we’d get an actual quote of what she really said a few paragraphs in, but that would still be a long shot. They might just paraphrase and go on about “misgendering,” rather than print anything about Willoughby being a man, and her saying just that. Lots of stories about “transphobia” managed to avoid stating the problematic, “transphobic” things of which those so tarred were accused. Mustn’t upset the activists by repeating the Forbidden Truth. Plenty of media accepted the “JKR is transphobic” characterization without ever bothering to explain what it was she said that was so hateful. Her enemies’ word and the accusation itself were taken as sufficient evidence of her bigotry without any further digging. Why would they stop doing that now?
Good point.