Since JK Rowling has blocked any reply to this litany of half-truths and transphobic dogwhistles, I thought I'd catalogue them properly here: https://twitter.com/jk_rowling/status/1270749170215903232

1a. In the case of Maya Forstater.

Firstly, she did not "lose her job" (she was a contract worker, her contract was not renewed). The distinction is important both legally and linguistically - since "losing a job" casts Forstater as the victim, implying she was fired.

1b. Forstater also did not "ask the judge to rule on whether a philosophical belief that sex is determined by biology is protected by law".

She asked the judge to rule that (among other things) misgendering was protected speech. This was the judge's response.

1c. And here's the full judgement, for those wanting to know more.

I'll also note that not once in JK's blog post does she reference an external source to support her views. She alludes to them, but never links.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5e15e7f8e5274a06b555b8b0/Maya_Forstater__vs_CGD_Europe__Centre_for_Global_Development_and_Masood_Ahmed_-_Judgment.pdf

1d. The distinction between the truth and JK's mischaracterisation is important - because *no one* is arguing that sex is not determined by biology.

This is a common transphobic attack to cast trans (and NB/intersex) rights in an absolutist light to make them seem absurd.