That’s part of Rowling’s usual shenanigans — making sure trans people know unequivocally that she will continue to encourage everyone to constantly push back against their existence and peace. But things took a weirder turn after someone replied to her post with “Vote Labour, get a two-year stretch!”

The snarky remark seemed to be a reference to Labour politician Anneliese Dodds saying earlier this month that a government run by the Labour Party would enact harsher punishments for anti-LGBTQ+ hate crimes.

The pivot prompted Rowling to reply that she would “happily do two years [in prison] if the alternative is compelled speech and forced denial and the reality and importance of sex.”

“Bring on the court case, I say,” she added. “It’ll be more fun than I’ve ever had on a red carpet.”

At first glance, perhaps this could warrant a generous interpretation of Rowling standing up for free speech and against government censorship, but let’s be perfectly clear about how she escalated the situation and conflated unrelated things.

The promise for tougher sentences under a Labour-run government was about LGBTQ+ hate crimes. It wasn’t about shifting the definition of crime itself, or about merely having archaic opinions about trans people. Rowling—who has not been charged with a crime in all her anti-trans commentary so far—would have to already be doing something cruel and criminal, such as assaulting or harassing an LGBTQ+ person, in order to “bring on the court case.”

It’s worth noting that hate crimes against trans people in particular in the UK rose 11% between 2022 and 2023. While Rowling may be eager to join that tragically growing number and go to jail, where she can continue insisting that she’s the victim of a witch hunt, it’s imperative to remember that, despite her framing here, her options wouldn’t be silence or prison. She could simply not launch a targeted attack on a trans person.

Guess we’ll see if that’s too high a bar for her to clear.