Potter star shockingly compares ‘bigot’ Rowling to Andrew Tate over trans views despite STILL cashing in on books’ fame
A HARRY Potter star has called JK Rowling a “bigot” and compared her to Andrew Tate over her trans views despite cashing in on her fame.
The author, 59, celebrated the Supreme Court’s ruling that trans women are not legally women with a cigar and cocktail on a luxury yacht.
Top politicians and feminist campaigners hailed the landmark decision as a “victory for common sense”.
And Rowling posted an image of herself along with the caption “I love it when a plan comes together” in a nod to the A-Team.
But Sean Biggerstaff, known for his role as Oliver Wood in three of the films and making money from her through the franchise, condemned the ruling and Rowling on social media.
In Rowling’s post, she hit back at those who suggested she was smoking a “blunt”, which is associated with cannabis use.
She said: “To those celebrating the fact that I’m smoking a blunt: it’s a cigar.
“Even if it decided to identify as a blunt for the purposes of this celebration, it would remain objectively, provably and demonstratively a cigar.”
Shameless Biggerstaff replied to the post by penning: “Bigotry rots the wit.”
He also showed his support for one person who compared Rowling to Andrew Tate.
Biggerstaff re-posted a tweet which read: “lol, huffing on a cigar now? Is she Andrew Tate?”
He later slammed her for sharing a picture of Susan Smith and Marion Calder, co-directors of For Women Scotland, celebrating their court victory.
Rowling wrote: “In case it wasn’t clear: don’t f*** with Scottish women.”
Biggerstaff responded: “The majority of Scottish women, who don’t agree with these d***heads, aren’t being bankrolled by an obsessed billionaire.”
Yet Biggerstaff still remains involved in the Harry Potter franchise and was recently seen at a meet-and-greet event in February.
Rowling has been a long standing advocate for women’s group For Women Scotland, which she is also believed to have backed with funding.
However, Rowling has also come under fire for comments made in the past towards trans people, with the author bravely standing firm in the face of online pressure.
Key points about the Supreme Court ruling
- THE UK’s highest court unanimously ruled the terms “woman” and “sex” as set down in UK law 2refer to a biological woman and biological sex”.
- Judges ruled having a Gender Recognition Certificate stating a trans woman is female does not mean that person should be treated as a woman under the UK 2010 Equality Act.
- This means trans women with a GRC can be excluded from single-sex spaces if “proportionate”.
- The ruling will apply to spaces such as changing rooms, homeless hostels or domestic violence refuges.
- NHS guidance on who can be placed on same-sex wards is also now likely to be changed. The current document, set out in 2019, states: “Trans people should be accommodated according to their presentation: the way they dress, and the name and pronouns they currently use.”
- One option is for transgender people to be placed in rooms on their own. Trans people still retain legal protections and cannot be discriminated against, but they cannot acquire protections reserved for women.
In 2020, the esteemed author slammed the growing trend of replacing “biological sex” with “gender identity”.
Her stance, that declared “sex is real”, led to death threats, but also moulded her into a figurehead for the “gender-critical” movement.
Activists accused her of transphobia in 2020 when replying to an article with the headline: “Opinion: Creating a more equal post Covid-19 world for people who menstruate.”
She tweeted: “‘People who menstruate’. I’m sure there used to be a word for those people.
“Someone help me out. Wumben? Wimpund? Woomud?”
Her remarks led to criticism from Potter actors Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Watson, Rupert Grint, who ignored the fact her books had made them famous to launch a string of attacks.
It was Rowling’s beloved group For Women Scotland which also launched a long-running legal battle with the Scottish government over how a “woman” was defined in Scottish law.
The Scottish government had argued people with gender recognition certificates (GRCs) should be protected from sex-based discrimination, meaning a transwoman would be considered a woman.
However, campaign group For Women Scotland claimed this only applied to people born as a female.
Now, the Supreme Court‘s landmark judgement ruled that it was unanimously determined “sex is binary” and that female-only spaces must be protected on the basis of biology.
Hailing the landmark decision last week, Tory Leader Kemi Badenoch said: “Saying ‘trans women are women’ was never true in fact, and now isn’t true in law either.
“This is a victory for all of the women who faced personal abuse or lost their jobs for stating the obvious.
“Women are women and men are men: you cannot change your biological sex.”
Taking aim at Sir Keir Starmer, who previously suggested that women CAN have male genitalia, Ms Badenoch added: “The era of Keir Starmer telling us women can have penises has come to an end.”