Harry Potter author JK Rowling hits back at SA Chief Justice over gender rules

The Harry Potter author says there’s a key detail missing from an SA court’s new rules that allow “preferred” gender pronouns, slapping back at one of the nation’s top judges.

Harry Potter author JK Rowling has hit back at SA Chief Justice Chris Kourakis over SA’s new court gender term rules, saying “no such exemption” exists to prevent them causing victims distress.

The author has criticised the new rules, which allow “the preferred gender pronoun”.

JK Rowling’s comments on X regarding South Australia’s endorsing of the use of preferred gender pronouns in the courtroom.

Chief Justice Kourakis said in a statement issued on Monday the author had got it wrong.

“Unfortunately, Ms Rowling has misunderstood the protocol,” he said.

“It does no more than allow lawyers and others to inform the court of the correct pronunciation of their name and their preferred gender pronoun so that proceedings are conducted respectfully.

“However, the presiding judicial officer retains control over all forms of address used in court … a victim of crime would never be asked to address an accused person in a way which caused the victim distress.

“I would prefer that social media commentators took the time to properly inform themselves before pressing the send button.

“But my only concern is to assure the South Australian public that Ms Rowling’s anxiety is completely unfounded.”

The Honourable Chris Kourakis has issued a statement referring to my 'anxiety' about the use of female pronouns for men standing trial for violence against women and rape. He states that 'a victim of crime would never be asked to address an accused person in a way which caused… pic.twitter.com/43tdCboOc6

— J.K. Rowling (@jk_rowling) November 6, 2023

But Rowling is maintaining her stance.

“(The Chief Justice) states that ‘a victim of crime would never be asked to address an accused person in a way which caused the victim distress’,” she tweeted in response.

“That assurance is welcome, although I note that he’s addressed the matter only after it was raised publicly … no such exemption is mentioned in the Practice Note, which takes the ideological position that the ‘use of preferred gender pronouns is a matter of respect’.

“The natural inference is that a woman would be considered guilty of disrespect if she, alone in the courtroom, described her male attacker as a man, while all court officials were addressing and describing him as a woman.

“This is not a hypothetical situation. The judge will be aware, if he‘s informed himself – as he implies I have not – that I’ve already cited an example where a 60-year-old woman was violently assaulted by a 26-year-old trans-identified male.

“She was chided by the judge for displaying ’bad grace’ by not using her attacker’s preferred pronouns.”

JK Rowling sparked a social media storm, hitting out at new gender rules allowing “the preferred gender pronoun” in SA courts.

Her comments sparked a chorus of condemnation, but also support, with one academic warning allowing defendants in South Australian courts to choose a gender pronoun could have unintended consequences and create a slippery slope leading to men being jailed in women’s prisons.

Centre for Independent Studies research fellow Peter Kurti, director of the Sydney-based centre’s Culture, Prosperity and Civil Society Program, said while he believed the all-courts directive this month by Chief Justice Kourakis was well-intended, the author raised some legitimate concerns.

“She is warning us about where transgender ideology can take us … we have to consider all sorts of consequences, to try and foresee the unforeseen,” he said.

“Do men who identify as women end up in women’s prison? Do men who identify as women use women’s changing rooms? What about the threat that is posed to a young girl in a women’s changing room if a man who identifies as a woman goes in?

“These are really important social issues and I think that JK Rowling has performed an important service by reminding us it is a very serious matter … yes, we want to be sensitive and compassionate to people but we have to think very carefully about where this is leading us.”

Consulting victimologist Michael O’Connell welcomes the new rules. Picture: Supplied

However, Law Society of SA James Marsh slammed the best-selling writer’s commentary, which caused a social media storm and included claims it would allow women victims of male violence to be “re-traumatised”, if asked to refer to an alleged offender as “she”.

“There is nothing in the protocol that could be understood to oblige a female complainant of rape to refer to an alleged male rapist by ‘she’,” Mr Marsh said.

“The protocol aims to ensure that everyone involved in a court matter is treated with basic respect … it does not signify a departure from existing expectations.

“The Law Society does not expect the practice note to cause any confusion.”

Consulting victimologist Michael O’Connell also hit back at the author’s criticism.

“Transgender and gender non-conforming people are victimised in ways that other victims of discrimination endure … rather than an assault of women’s rights as JK Rowling suggests, initiatives such as that taken by the Chief Justice, might lead to greater attention to the abuse of women – that is all women, including transgender women.”

SA Victims’ Rights Commissioner Sarah Quick said: “I appreciate this protocol is designed to ensure respectful treatment of all participants, and was especially pleased to hear the Chief Justice reiterate that a victim’s wellbeing will always be the primary consideration.”