Could J.K. Rowling potentially be banned from using women’s toilets? Thanks to a new ruling there’s an argument to be made

The recent decision from The Supreme Court of the U.K. banning non-biological women from using women-only spaces has had some unforeseen consequences. You see, there are a few loopholes which only serve to confuse things even further and make it so that even biological women, like J.K. Rowling, could be kicked out of women’s toilets.

When the news was first announced regarding The Supreme Court’s decision, Rowling shared a snap of herself sitting on a yacht, holding a glass of champagne and smoking a big cigar. The image led to some people comparing her to the infamous misogynist, Andrew Tate. Anyways, the Harry Potter author was pretty chuffed that a marginalized group were being further persecuted.

However, that picture may soon come back to haunt her as one TikToker, Emlyn Pearce (@emlynpearce) shared a legal loophole that could get her banned from women’s only spaces.

The legal loophole explained

One question that came to many when the new law definition was announced was what does this mean for trans men? Women who transitioned to men would legally have to use the women’s toilets now right? After all, they are biologically women. In theory, that opens the door for cis-gendered men to simply claim they are male-ing but biologically female in order to invade these female-only spaces.

To get around this the law specified that in some cases, male ing women and female ing men would not be permitted to use the toilets of their biological gender either. That’s right, this new law is so ridiculous that, if your trans, you could be denied access to any and all public toilets.

However, as Emlyn points out. That now, theoretically, opens another door in which anyone can be questioned if they as the wrong gender for the toilets they’ve entered. For example, Rowling, if she appeared masculine enough, could be banned from the women’s toilets.

The picture doesn’t help

The pic she shared earlier this month doesn’t exactly help her case. Emlyn suggests that the fact she’s smoking a cigar and doing traditionally “masculine” actions, the argument could be made that she is too masculine to use the women’s bathroom. Others ed in in the comment section, with one adding that Rowling has written under the male pseudonym of “Robert Galbraith” in the past. Could that further prove that she is not feminine enough?

This all sounds a bit ridiculous but it just goes to show how confusing this change to the law has gone and made things. No doubt cis-gendered women who appear a little too masculine will suffer because of this. So the argument that Rowling is just standing up for women doesn’t really hold water. It’s always been about her own vendetta against the trans community.