• TacticsConsort@yiffit.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    104
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    4 months ago

    Ok, so this IS the Daily Mail, they’re notoriously shit reporters. That said:

    Please please please please please please please

    • Gerudo@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      4 months ago

      I don’t think there is anything false with what they said, it’s just stating the punishment for the crime. Now, whether those punishments actually happen is the question.

  • some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    80
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    In a perfect world, this would happen. In reality, nope. But let’s enjoy the fantasy, for a few minutes, of wealthy shitheads having consequences.

    The fantasy could be a reality if we collectively agreed that we demanded it.

    • SkyNTP@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      4 months ago

      The French did something about it, a few hundred years ago. Just saying.

      • underscore_@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        4 months ago

        We live in capitalism. Its power seems inescapable. So did the divine right of kings. Any human power can be resisted and changed by human beings. Resistance and change often begin in art, and very often in our art, the art of words.

        Ursula K. Le Guin

    • Signtist@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      4 months ago

      Yeah, people are acting like this is up to chance - rich people throw money at their problems, and so long as someone is willing to spend their time catching it instead of doing their job, it works. It’s going to work. The 5 year sentence is for poor people they want to get rid of, not for rich people they want to profit from.

    • norimee@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      28
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      4 months ago

      I’m not sure, I don’t care about fines, but I think Imane Khelif would deserve some compensation for what they put her through.

      So, a jail sentence and generous damages payed to the victim would be an ideal outcome from my point of view.

    • Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      4 months ago

      Agree, but you know that’s about as likely to happen as Trump serving time. The legal system likes money as much as everyone else.

  • thesohoriots@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    36
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    I wish Joanne had gone the Enya route and finished Harry Potter and the Writing Quality of Diminishing Returns, disappeared with her wealth into the highlands, did some occasional projects, and just never spoke again. Maybe some occasional rumors would pop up about her having a panda ranch that she kept for demolition derbys or something weird. She can go suck a railroad spike.

    • BertramDitore@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      4 months ago

      Seriously. She has been such a massive disappointment. The fact that she feels like she has to be actively hateful, makes it all the worse. Just shut the help up and enjoy your gobs and gobs of money.

      • allywilson@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        4 months ago

        I’m sure I’ll regret asking this, but what is it she has actually done? Every time I’ve asked people seem to spout off how she’s pure evil, said evil things, and then backed it up with nothing. The only thing I think I’ve ever seen from her is that she wants to protect woman.

        • BertramDitore@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          No, that’s a totally fair question!

          This article summarizes some of the transphobic shit she has said. Here’s another one. She likes to say that her beliefs are feminist and meant to protect women, but really what she does is denigrate trans women and meanly argues that they can never be “real” women. It’s bigoted, hateful, and not what most people would expect from a “lefty” author.

        • AnarchistArtificer@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          You’ve already got answers with plenty to read, so I’ll share an anecdote about why I feel so strongly.

          She wrote an essay titled TERF wars in 2020 which has a few concrete bits I have beef with. TERF stands for “trans exclusionary radical feminism” and even besides the “trans exclusionary” part, I, a cis woman, have personally been harmed by radical feminists and their rhetoric. My intention here isn’t to elevate my own suffering above that of trans people, who have certainly been harmed more by TERFs, but to highlight how hypocritical TERFs are, because ostensibly I’m one of the people they’re trying to protect.

          Doubly so because I’m also autistic, and one of the things Rowling says in her TERF wars essay was effectively “poor autistic women, being brainwashed into becoming trans men”. It’s really ick to be undermining autistic people’s agency in this way, and it feels invalidating to my gender too, even as a cis person. I’m exactly the kind of person who Rowling talks about in her essay: an autistic woman who has a heckton of internalised misogyny to work through (made worse by the fact I work in science, so sometimes I do wish I were a man, before simulated gender dysphoria makes me realise that no, I actually just wish for a more equal world). I also have a bunch of LGBTQ friends, including trans friends, but rather than being peer pressured into being trans, if anything, I’m more secure in my own gender, which happens to be my assigned gender at birth.

          This is because conversion therapy, in any direction, doesn’t work. I don’t recall if Rowling has said anything on this, but TERFs (the group she has specifically aligned herself with) are often pro conversion therapy.

          Looking to TERFs more generally, a core part of their beliefs is that they define a woman as someone who belongs to the “female sex class” and that gender is a system of social norms that serve to oppress women. I deeply disagree with this because of how such sex essentialism serves to reinforce patriarchal violence. I have faced harassment from TERFs when going into bathrooms, including groping (they were leafletting and perceived me as trans and believed that my big boobs must be fake — a padded bra). I live in the UK, and I have directly seen how Rowling’s TERFism has emboldened transphobes. They don’t care who their “trans-spotting” hurts, which makes it abundantly clear that they don’t care about protecting even cis-women, they just want to hurt trans people (especially trans women).

          Trans women are the main target of their ire because of this same sex essentialism. They paint cis men out to be inherently violent or dangerous, as if having a penis makes one inherently predisposed to upholding the patriarchy. It is true that within the patriarchal system we live under, men are the privileged class, but I have countless male friends who recognise the harm done by the patriarchy to both themselves and the women in their lives. In my own experience of resisting patriarchal oppression, it’s much easier to do that when you’re working with men who recognise the privilege they have and work on the same team to undermine that oppressive system. I’m talking about something as simple as being at a meeting where I keep getting talked over by men, and one of the men, who is aware of how this keeps happening to women, speaks over the interrupters to say “hang on, Ann wasn’t finished speaking. What was it you were saying?”. They can do that much more effectively than I can, not least of all because they’re less likely to face career harms for speaking up. Treating men as if they are fundamentally the enemy just reinforces systems that oppress women, as well as making the men who are aware of gendered oppression hate themselves as if they are guilty for the sins of all men. That’s not productive.

          What’s real tragic is that in Rowling’s TERF wars essay, it’s clear that some of what drives her TERFism is her direct lived experience of patriarchal violence: in particular, her experience with an abusive male partner, and her inability to find justice following that experience. I truly feel for her, and sympathise with how that experience might facilitate the hostility that she now holds towards all she perceives as men. I don’t doubt that she would feel unsafe at the prospect of a trans woman using a public bathroom, but I am literally scared of using public bathrooms because of transphobic harassment that I’ve faced.

          TERFs ask “what is a woman?”. Not me apparently. I don’t menstruate (due to illness), so it hurts when Rowling tweets things that take the biological essentialism line that this makes me “not a real woman”. And the tweets are where it all started. She said some stuff that wasn’t especially bad, but some of her fans found them hurtful, so they said so. I’ve seen so many people try to constructively reply to Rowling, especially in the early days, but even handling her with kiddie gloves wasn’t enough to stop her from blowing up defensively, deepening her bigoted rhetoric each time. That’s part of why reaction against her is so strong, I think — many of her fans felt actively betrayed, me included. Part of Rowling’s doubling down has been that she has surrounded herself with increasingly extreme people (like Posie Parker/Kellie Jay Keen, whose supporters include literal Nazis ) and continued to make it clear that she doesn’t care about protecting women, only hurting trans people.

          • BertramDitore@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            4 months ago

            Wow, thank you for sharing all of this. Your experience does a way better job explaining her hatefulness than our silly article links. I wish this kind of comment got more visibility, because it really is a betrayal when an author who wrote fiction that was formative for entire generations of young adults around the world, turns out to hate her own readers, with a passion that is difficult to explain or understand.

            I very much appreciate your thoughts on all this.

        • Katrisia@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          She’s a gender critical feminist. But in a scale from 1 to 10 where 1 is a gender critical feminist that questions the validity of the concept of gender without ever wishing harm to people (actually trying to see what’s helpful to all) and 10 is the raging transphobic lady that belittles and wishes harm to trans people, J. K. Rowling seemed to have moved from 2 to 6-7 (and she probably keeps moving).

          This is a very controversial topic as many people think that all gender critical theorists or sympathizers are in the 10. I don’t think so, but those who are transphobic are definitely louder.

  • mavu@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    33
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    I would love that as much as anyone, but does anyone here seriously believe this will happen?

    • FrowingFostek@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      4 months ago

      Literally, they don’t produce anything. They would probably accumulate more wealth while in prison. In my ideal society the judge would hit them for a percentage of their net worth.

      • FordBeeblebrox@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        20
        ·
        4 months ago

        Same with “SWATing”, giving every asshole access to the internet has caused real physical harm to many people and should be punished severely.

      • Kidplayer_666@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        4 months ago

        Be careful. Suddenly JD Vance couch memes are illegal, cause it’s making fun of someone for something with no basis in reality.

        • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          4 months ago

          Believe it or not, posting a meme about JD Vance on Lemmy, where he doesn’t even go most likely, is not cyberbullying.

          It is also generally not considered cyberbullying to do such a thing to a public personality like a politician.

    • Queen HawlSera@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      Sometimes I think the Right has a point about how sensitive we are… But, only sometimes…

    • Nuke_the_whales@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      4 months ago

      Nobody does till it happens to their kids or a family member and you see what it does to someone, especially children and young people

    • Drivebyhaiku@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      4 months ago

      Well the way laws tend to work they scale to consequence.

      Like think about speeding in a school zone. You get caught by a cop doing it it’s a fine. Nobody is going to jail.

      But say you speed and hit someone and cause injury. You probably face big fines or a few days in jail or community service.

      But then imagine you are speeding in a school zone and you hit and kill a kid. That’s not ruled a no fault accidental death as it would be if you weren’t speeding. Because you broke the smaller law you get the upgrade to manslaughter because you were found criminally at fault.

      Cyberbullying applies the same logic. As long as there were no criminal harms and measurable damages it’s a little fine to remind you that that’s not cool. But the more recordable damages the cyberbullying causes the more you are on the hook. If you are a person with millions of followers chances are you have a lot of potential destructive power and it is wiser to keep your facts straight and your nose clean when it comes to calls to action to harrass someone who has comparatively very little ability to defend themselves.

  • p5yk0t1km1r4ge@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    Nobody is going to jail. Sorry to burst your bubble. Just find comfort in knowing they will likely cost themselves millions, needlessly.

    • AVincentInSpace@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      4 months ago

      There was a very nice bit in the TV show Emma:

      “She should be able to come and go as she pleases, not as the fucking Daily Mail pleases! Pardon my language.”

      “It’s alright. I’ve heard the words ‘daily mail’ before.”

  • pingveno@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    4 months ago

    How does the jurisdiction even work there? A UK citizen and a SA/Canada/US citizen get prosecuted for cyberbullying of an Algerian citizen? Don’t get me wrong, they deserve it, but this feels like a “careful what you wish for” type of thing.

    • SmilingSolaris@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      19
      ·
      4 months ago

      It’s almost like these borders we have are stupid and arbitrary and instead we should have a global system of justice to handle these cross border crimes.

      But hey. Nationalism.

      • mctoasterson@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        20
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        4 months ago

        You’re advocating people be tried for speech crimes by an international body that they didn’t vote for and can’t fire through an electoral process. Seems like a great idea that totally won’t backfire.

      • feddylemmy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        4 months ago

        All around the world, crime is defined very differently. What would a global system of justice look like?

        • SmilingSolaris@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          Would you say the system as it exists now is your Utopia? Then why does mine have to have no flaws? Your question is loaded, it’s looking to poke specific holes into the broad idea that humanity should cooperate further. It’s pedantic.

          • feddylemmy@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            4 months ago

            I never said yours has to have no flaws. I literally just asked you what you thought lmao

            • SmilingSolaris@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              4 months ago

              Your asking for specifics from a laymen. That’s argumentive bait. My “vision for global justice” is irrelevant to the broad idea that we should have one as I am not talking specifics.

      • angstylittlecatboy@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        Even arguably the two most similar cultures in the world, the United States and Canada, have enough disagreements on how government should work that there wouldn’t be massive support on either side for them to merge.

        Not to mention 1A has worked against Rowling in the past (she threatens libel lawsuits that are valid in the UK, but US doesn’t extradite for stuff that would be considered free speech there.)

        • SmilingSolaris@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          4 months ago

          Ya know what, your totally right. All of human history up to this point was just building to the natural borders and separations we have right at this moment and never should we aspire to come together beyond them. Everyone is exactly in their place as God intended. Wishing for more human cooperation is not only stupid but somehow immoral, despite the fact that centralizing larger populations has been the progress of humans for all of human history, it should stop right at this moment because the people living through it just can’t imagine their flag being different. They like the flag too much.

      • hate2bme@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        I thought the conspiracy videos I watched about a new world order were lying when they said there are people out there that actually want this.

      • pingveno@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        4 months ago

        Ever heard of the lèse-majesté laws in Thailand? Now imagine a dictator able to use that to silence critics globally that are “cyberbullying” them. We already see it with countries filing bogus Interpol requests to harass dissident diaspora members. And sure you could have an independent body, but then that is subject to politics and capture.

        • FantasmaNaCasca@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          4 months ago

          “It’s like these borders we have are stupid and arbitary”

          You get that borders and people governing a piece of land is stupid…but you still don’t GET IT.

        • SmilingSolaris@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          4 months ago

          Yes, let’s imagine the worst possible implementation of this broad idea. Done. Let’s not do it that way then. Problem averted, thank you for submitting your complaint to the planning committee of the new world order justice system aka me apparently.

          • pingveno@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            4 months ago

            Yes, let’s imagine how humans will try to exploit a system like this. Concentrate power like that and people will absolutely try to abuse it. Someone has to set and enforce the rules, and that means one single global point of failure.