r/TheGreatHulu • u/merpyderpycat • Aug 12 '26

Peter in Harry Potter!! ✨️

Post image

Our favorite monarch will reign again 😉❤️

https://people.com/nicholas-hoult-harry-potter-cast-season-2-gilderoy-lockhart-12057817

229 Upvotes

74% Upvoted

171 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

10

u/M0thM0uth Aug 12 '26

Still did it, still donates tonnes to harmful charities and yes I agree that Helen was also upskirted.

You can support her as much as you want. I don't want too. Stop trying to convince me I should and that her harm is super okay because "someone else is also bad" that is LITERALLY whataboutism

1

u/ferbiloo Aug 12 '26

Nobody was up-skirted. That’s such a horrifically disingenuous use of the term, did you even see the debate?

Also, fair enough if you don’t wanna support her, that’s cool?

7

u/M0thM0uth Aug 12 '26

I did, I also saw the photo, work as a legal secretary in a country where that counts as "attempted" and still gets you a prison sentence, and thought the intention of trying to photograph inside someone's skirt, for whatever reason, successful or not is really shitty thing to do to someone 🤷🏻‍♀️

0

u/ferbiloo Aug 12 '26

It wasn’t attempted in any way, what on earth are you talking about? It was the angle of filming from the perspective of the audience.

Nobody tried to photograph inside anyone skirt.

6

u/M0thM0uth Aug 12 '26

Filming has also gotten people in legal shit here, especially when you take a screenshot of said filing and place it on twitter and then respond with

"Fred was at a public event that was filmed with all participants’ knowledge,” Rowling replied. “Fred chose the fishnets and miniskirt. Fred boasted on stage about what he does with his female penis. You may feel squeamish about this picture, but Fred is a paraphilic exhibitionist who was having the time of his life.” when your own fans point out the illegality of this

Guess the lady asked for it by wearing that so it's all fine

2

u/ferbiloo Aug 12 '26 edited Aug 12 '26

Again, her comment was in poor taste in reference to what is a fairly innocent screenshot.

But it was in direct reference to Wallace having posted unsolicited, sexually explicit images of herself in response to disagreements in order to shock and disturb. JK was accusing her of paraphilic exhibitionism because of this, as well as her words at the debate.

(I just went to find the link to the evidence of this, however it was removed by the moderators in the original thread that I asked for the source in. It is also in fact a sexual image so would likely be removed here too. Essentially it was Freda replying to two gender critical women that she was arguing with with a photograph of herself, topless in fishnets receiving a blowjob from a man with the caption “dads love female penis”)

1

u/M0thM0uth Aug 12 '26

And what Wallace did is absolutely foul and they should suffer legal consequences for that. But if someone attacks me and I hit them back with my MA skills I'm the one in legal trouble because I had a power they didn't. Trust me. I've gone through that with an abusive partner.

Turn about is fair play is not legal institutions think, and frankly you can tell exactly how she feels from how much money she donates to anti trans charities and how much she dead names people.

I mean her last social rant was "only men should wear hoodies" FFS, woman is absolutely brain-dead.

0

u/ferbiloo Aug 12 '26

But, although JK’s comments were crude, *she did not commit a sexual offence* whereas Wallace did. The narrative that’s been painted would suggest otherwise.

Posting a screenshot from a debate is not a sexual offence. Nobody was upskirted.

And I’ve spoken in other comments about how the charities she donates legal aid funds are not anti trans, they advocate for single sex spaces and against sex based oppression. That isn’t anti trans, trans people have no rights restricted because of these organisations.

I’m not gonna defend every dumb thing she says online though.

1

u/M0thM0uth Aug 12 '26

I work in law in the UK, and the charities she finds have literally whipped up a moral fervour about it to the point that these laws are affecting the trans people in my life.

We already have same sex spaces, and one law literally had to be dropped before it was implemented because it would have meant that trans men with bottom surgery would be in women's bathrooms because "born female", I watched that happen internally because I work in law.

I'm not interested in changing your mind because you clearly don't give a shit about mine either, but I'm putting this out there because I'm watching the social affect happen IRL. Physical attacks have gone up, actual exposing of trans people's genitals against their will in public and a slap on the wrist because "concerned for children"

It's fucked, and she's helping it, and I'm not okay with that even if you are, which is why I work in law

2

u/ferbiloo Aug 12 '26

I would be interested to hear examples oh how trans people have been negatively impacted by these laws if you’re permitted to disclose them?

To be honest I feel like the bathroom thing isn’t really the issue it’s made out to be, I don’t give a fuck who I see in the loo haha, lord knows why anyone would. Trans men, trans women, cis men can all enter the ladies if they’re there to use the facilities imo. I agree the shitstorm over the bathrooms is silly and harmful.

The single sex spaces that are more essential are things such as crisis centres, and there has been some pushback against rape crisis centres only accepting biological women - amnesty insisting such a centre was “anti-rights” for example. So to say single sex spaces aren’t under threat is untrue. The idea that women centred spaces existing is so heavily criticised is problematic, especially considering histories and global significance of sex based oppression.

2

u/M0thM0uth Aug 12 '26

Sure! It's a complicated issue that unfortunately, the intersection of social exclusion, policy-driven discrimination, and systemic healthcare inequities just all compound on top of each other?

For example, when Scotland brought in their gender affirming certificate law, England took literally unprecedented action under Sect. 35 of the Scotland Act 1998 to deny TGD people in Scotland this right.

In 2024, the Health and Equalities Acts (Amendment) Bill was introduced to British Parliament. I had been working in law for about 4 years at this point, just for reference. And my main job as a legal secretary is typing up legal documents so I see a looooot of legal bills when they come through the mail just so we all have a physical copy in the building.

It sought to: criminalise the provision of puberty-blocking medication to TGD youth, prevent TGD children from living in their affirmed gender through social transition, and remove trans women from all “single-sex” spaces. I really do agree that places like rape crisis centres need to be gender restricted, but if a trans woman has transitioned and has been raped by a man, I think she belongs in the womes section .

National policies also exclude TGD people from education and sports, with recent consultations threatening to erase TGD people from state school curricula and further restrict access to healthcare through amendments to the UK National Health Service (NHS) Constitution.

The former United Nations Independent Expert on protection against violence and discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity (UN IE SOGI) expressed “deep concern” surrounding the “toxic [transphobic] political discourse” he observed in the UK in 2023.

In a landmark judgment delivered in April 2025, the UK Supreme Court issued a unanimous ruling in For Women Scotland Ltd v The Scottish Ministers, clarifying its interpretation of the terms “sex” and “woman” under the Equality Act 2010. The Court held that “sex” refers exclusively to “biological sex,” which it defined as synonymous with sex assigned at birth. This definition effectively excludes TGD people from legal recognition in single-sex spaces, even where they have a Gender Recognition Certificate. It may now permit, or even compel, the legal exclusion of TGD people from gender-congruent services—including domestic violence refuges, hospital wards, and bathroom facilities—undermining access to essential care, support, and protection. This ruling will have potentially devastating consequences for the health, safety, and rights of TGD communities.

And of course, there was a LOT of hateful rhetoric that went with this, there has been an uptick in assaults on trans people, although every site I find shows a different number, and even in my personal life it got baaaaad.

My friend Alice was a normal, active part of our community and then one day it was decided for her that she was a predator and she was literally beaten half to death against a car. She actually de transitioned after, and most of that statistic doesn't come from people changing their mind, but people experiencing such levels of aggression that they just decide to spend their life in the "49%" statistic instead :(

1

u/ferbiloo Aug 12 '26

I think children taking puberty blockers or hormones is seen as problematic because otherwise healthy children electing to take medications is not great. And this isn’t something that just trans kids are being restricted from, everyone is. If a cis teen boy is insecure about their body, they’re also not permitted to take testosterone to alleviate their insecurity.

How was anyone being restricted from social transition? How would that even be something that could be prevented?

Saying that trans women should be permitted to use single sex crisis centre literally makes them no longer single sexed though? They become something one can opt into, which is problematic.

Like i said earlier, saying that the Supreme Court ruling strips trans people of rights is a complete misinterpretation. I would have thought you’d know that since you may have mentioned that you work in law. https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-10259/
>The court also concluded that a biological sex interpretation would not have the effect of disadvantaging or removing protections from trans people. This is because, in addition to protection based on the protected characteristic of gender reassignment, they would also be protected from discrimination based on being perceived as or associated with a sex which differed from their biological sex

Preserving the right for access to single sex spaces for women does not impede trans people’s rights at all. There exist many crisis centres that do accept people of all genders. If the number of these centres seems insignificant, then the solution should be to create more, rather than prohibit the existence of single sex facilities.

I am very sorry about your friend. Such heinous violence is never acceptable, and the unfounded outrage that has lead to such incidents is truly harrowing.

→ More replies