her books were always about her “real beliefs” just hidden behind her writing. family guy joked about her writing-anti-trans years before she went full terf.
OK, this is a tough one and what I’m about to say might get me some dislikes. Let me just say something that might soften the blow: Fuck Rowling, her transphobia, and the bigots that defend her wretched views. Even if she decided, in an alternative timeline, decided her loudmouth shut, she would still be the scum of the earth for her views on trans people. I repeat, Fuck Rowling.
Now, with that out the way, let’s address the crux of the issue. I know that many of you in the LGBTQ+ community grew up with the franchise and enjoyed it long before Rowling exposed her true colors. If you’re LGBTQ+ and you decide to reconcile, in some way, with the franchise without directly supporting Rowling, you’re well within your rights to do so. The nostalgia you feel for something that brought you joy in your youth is yours to keep. No one, not even the creator themselves, can take that from you. As for the products themselves? You can: buy the books secondhand, pirate the movies, pirate the EPUBs if you have an e reader and buy fan-made merch from LGBTQ±friendly sellers.
If decided to not reconcile with the franchise, you’re also well within your rights to do so. Rowling has to made aware of the damage her views have on people. Demonstrate the hypocrisy of writing about a group of outsiders finding a place of acceptance and discovering their true selves and espousing bigoted rhetoric towards a discriminated group wanting acceptance for their true selves. There’s plenty of other fictional universes you can draw your attention towards (more on that in a moment) that are far less problematic and worthier of your time.
If you’re an ally (like myself), it’s best that we don’t engage with the franchise all together out of support. For me, this isn’t a problem since I didn’t engage with the franchise all that much in my youth (I was more of a LOTR fan). If you do decide to reconcile, much of what I have already said still applies.
In short, the question of reconciliation is a personal matter. So long as Rowling isn’t benefiting, you should be happy with your decision and the stand you take. As for alternatives? Well…
The already mentioned Lord of The Rings
Dune series
Discworld
Elric of Melniboné
Wheel of Time
The best way to enjoy something that may benefit a problematic person is to simply acquire it in a way that doesn’t benefit them. Perhaps whilst on board a ship with a nice barrel of grog.
Potheads are tiring.
I have never even had an inner monologue about wanting to support of continue consume the work of someone who made something I like after they’ve got outed for bad shit. It’s just and instant “damn, sucks to loose that thing but that’s all there is too it.”
I seriously don’t understand people who do that and the whole “separate the art from the artist” shit.
We have more than enough of literally everything, you aren’t giving up something that nothing else can replace. There’s more stuff to like and discover from nice people than anyone can fit in their lifetime.cuz art can be beautiful in it’s own right.
And it’s not fair to loose it just because the OP is shit.
Like futurism, my favourite artstyle? i just love how they show this world in motion and so Industrial (yes I study mech eng how did you guess), I support the painters? fuck no, fuck them, but their art is pretty regardless.
I don’t know, but as I grew older and the world became more harsh, out of cynicism I stopped investing in so much pop culture and especially personalities who have or could possibly make an about-face.
So many people in this thread defend J.K. Rowling, or at least the Harry Potter works, under the guise that Rowling’s anti-trans positions are just an opinion. She does so much more than just talk. She uses her personal fortune made directly from Harry Potter to fund legal attacks on the rights of transgender people in the UK.
Imagine if Elon Musk showed up one day to fund a civil case against you for playing rec league soccer or to get you fired from your job. This is what the beginning of genocide looks like. It may take years to get to the camps and the ovens, but we will get there. Hell, the camps are already built here in the US, and they will house more than the transgender.
https://www.advocate.com/news/jk-rowling-anti-trans-organization
I think we should normalize acknowledging reality. JK Rowling is a POS, Neil Gaiman is a POS, many others are POS or problematic for different reasons. A lot of products are owned by problematic companies. Some have better alternatives.
Bashing people for it is just going to make people tune you out though. Just be aware. I’m really not interested in the Harry Potter show. But the movies are a staple. If I see Tom Cruise is in a movie I get a lot less interested in it. I still like Edge of Tomorrow though.
I wanted to see Edge of Tomorrow so bad because it looked like a cool scifi movie but my wife HATES Tom Cruise as if he’d wronged her personally. Told her he dies like 100 times. I got to see it in the theater with her.
It wouldn’t have been the worst thing in the world to see it alone though. With all due respect to your wife.
Oh, I would have gone alone and enjoyed it. But it was nice to share her catharsis.
Bashing people
What usually happens is people conflate critique of the media they consume with an attack on them as people.
This comic is very explicitly bashing fans not the media.
That is a problem. I think there are different ways to engage with media, and consuming purely for validation is a very fucked one.
Just don’t pay for it and be done with it.
Enjoy Harry Potter, just don’t give money to scumbag author.
Read some genuinely good fiction? What do you like about them? I guarantee theres better books for that.
As someone who did grow up with the series but doesn’t interact with it anymore, I’m gonna tell you that not everyone needs things to be good.
It doesn’t have to be good for you to enjoy it. Fanfiction alone wouldn’t exist if it had to be good.
I don’t understand this the same way I don’t understand burning books you already own. It’s performative but it doesn’t show any actual thought.
Lack of thought is part of the problem.
3D print your own merch
Or, maybe, look at those books with critical eyes for the first time in your life, and realise how shit it is, and how much it is littered with awful terrible takes. And read another book maybe.
how can people enjoy shit made by absolute hags?
like, if you have standards, and you should, that ought to make said products gross, because it really fucking does.
there’s so much more to this world than this one shitty, played out franchise, just move on in life people ffs
Disliking a chefs dish based on their political stance or personal opinion no matter how wrong isnt going to solve anything about it, just a giant waste of energy
lol, keep telling yourself whatever lies you need to stay happy.
but if you had a shred of decency in you, you’d know better already.
Sure, but it’s reasonable to stop going to the restaurant because of the chef’s political stance or personal opinion.
I dont see a prpblem with it as long as you dont pay them. Some of gaiman’s stuff was genuinely good.
The problem is making it your identity. Consuming uncritically. Worshipping. Not reading any other kinds of shit.
enjoy your terfy garbage
No i dont read absolute trash. I think as a kid i stopped reading after they made a pro slavery charicature.
Richard Wagner was a bigtime nazi who wrote some of the best classical music ever.
And apparently Gene Roddenberry wasn’t an entirely perfect human being either.
ride of the Valkyries is shite and if you think it’s great, that’s prob your inner der fuhrer trying to drive the bus.
Attacking people for liking Harry Potter is the epitome of pointless performative action. It does nothing to help with the root problem.
The root of the problem being people giving millions of moneys to bigots, which then use those money to hurt people.
There are other books written, by people who don’t hurt anyone.Just wait until you find out where some of your taxes are going then lmao
Seriously. Many people here don’t seem to grasp the whole “no ethical consumption under capitalism” thing.
Are you sure? Maybe they are child abusers, or spousal abusers or tax frauds or so many other possible bad things. Can you really be sure that your approved author/actor/athlete/celeb isn’t a bad person? Do you really know any of them to be positive? Or is it ok to like them so long as you don’t know that they are bad people but it only becomes wrong if they are publicly outed as bad? I don’t and won’t do anything to financially support JKR now but I’m not going to burn any of my books by her.
I’m not attacking. But I will remind people of the money that the author will continue to get as her business grows and makes movie/tv/game deals. I won’t attack someone for buying a Tesla, either, but will remind them that buying said Tesla funds a Nazi’s wallet.
I sometimes get ChiFilA food. It’s convenient, my family likes the food, and somewhat affordable. I also know what horrible people that own that company believe. I don’t go nearly as much now, and attempt to dissuade my family from going there. Now Hobbly Lobby? Strict ban hammer on that shithole. So much fucking monsterous, vile shit from that place.
You shouldnt stay away from hobby lobby. Their LP may range from inept to nonexistent, but if you consider the regular discounts their prices cant be beat.
You can, you know, read another book
For Harry Potter fans in particular, may I suggest The Guy We Don’t Mention in the Same Sentence. You know. Terry Pratchett.
While I agree it’s logical to boycott her, portraying HP fans as trans abusers is a bit much. If buying the HP books is equivalent to punching a chained down trans person in the face then absolutely none of us, including the artist here, haven’t done worse.
I’d bet anything they have bought products on Amazon, which makes them responsible for Bezos. Does that artist have an X account for advertisement? That gas they buy makes them responsible for violence the middle east. Are they one of the remarkable few who ethically source clothes without child labor? Bet not.
I boycott all kinds of stuff, but demonizing people for not joining you is nonsensical in this consumerist hellscape where complete harm avoidance isn’t possible.
Even with your example you’re missing a big point though. It’s pretty tough to get around without gas and just as difficult to find clothes that don’t involve child labour. But this is one single fantasy franchise in a huge sea of other options and people will still happily give their money to the single person that actively harms a specific minority.
Again, people should boycott her, convince people to do it all day. However, this demonization is out of line. I’m just saying if this is your threshold for what makes someone an irredeemable monster, then you should make sure your own house is in order before you start lighting the pyre.
oh look, an average liberal telling trans people the genocide they’re currently facing is not that serious.
Uh, no what they’re saying is that buying a particular book is actually no t exactly equivalent to genocide. Supporting somebody with shitty views sure, but these days there’s a lot of those
When that money goes directly towards funding that genocide- yes, it is equivalent.
Not even close.
The really weird thing is how many LGBTQ folks latched onto HP in its early releases as what was recognized to be a kind-of pro-queer YA novel.
You had a young boy who was literally in the closet, disowned and disrespected by family, who is spirited away to a magical school where his differences are valued and cultivated. He’s got a bunch of friends who could easily sub in for queer icons. There are gender-bending magical spells, the bad guys are explicitly fascist, most books end with some kind of “The power of friendship and love will triumph!” rejoinder. FFS, Dumbledore is canonically gay.
It is far more a testament to the psychologically corrosive power of plutocracy that JK Rowling went off the rails. I don’t think it’s unfair for people to like the books and hate the author. Just remember not to pay for anything and you’re fine.
It’s most probable that Rowling is actually trans, but refuses to accept it. Denying it along with degrading empathy due to her financial success just creates a void she feeds with hostility. This leads to guilt, more hostility due to “shame”, etc. Her books portray her actual feelings, but she fell off the wagon because she believes it is shameful to accept a different gender. She has even said that she wished she was a boy. Regardless, funding any kinda hate group is fucked. Believe what you want, but don’t try and stop people from having their own joy if it’s not harmful.
It’s most probable that Rowling is actually trans, but refuses to accept it.
I’ve heard this speculated extensively. It would certainly be ironic.
But I’m more prone to believe she’s one more British Fascist, poisoned by money and a growing circle of reactionary hysterics.
She has even said that she wished she was a boy
A lot of that stems from British entrenched misogyny. Wanting the privileges of masculinity, as much as the actual biology.
I think she’s actually talked about how she’d have been trans if she had been born in a more trans-friendly age.
Like you also theorise, maybe that’s what making her so mad, other trans people getting to have lives outside the closet when she was too afraid to.
Oh wait you had that in there
She has even said that she wished she was a boy.
My bad read it too fast
When i was in kindergarten, i made my teacher call me harry potter for like a month. I was obsessed with those books. As a 6 year old.
Anyways, im a girl now and jkr and people who support her can go die in a puddle of piss
Even if a book I read as a teenager was the best book of all time and the author was the greatest person to ever live who was literally Jesus I would still read other books because being a literate adult requires one to read a wide variety of new material over time lol
I feel like this is aimed at the new tv series. It’s more about not watching the new content and not rereading.
I’ve seen people demonizing watching then discussing it with friends, since it’s spreading it, even if you don’t buy it. I get it since jk is basically trans enemy number 1, but it does feel a bit intense. That being said, If I watch it, I’m pirating it and not really discussing it with anyone since I have no friend, so I don’t have to worry about it.
Oh yeah that tracks I guess, I don’t really watch tv series and saw they were holding a book in the meme but there is a poster about the series.
You never read a book more than once?
On rare occasions, no YA books unless I’m reading them to a kid. I’m not going to reread the The Chronicles of Narnia either. I haven’t read Harry Potter because it came out when I was in college but I don’t believe from what I know that there is enough substance to Harry Potter to make me want reread them if I had.
I read about a book every week and am in multiple book clubs and have a huge list of books to read so going back and reading fluff from when I was a kid is not going to make the cut because I am an adult. The point I made is about actual literacy though, if you are just rereading the same books and not engaging with the wide variety of works and authors through time you aren’t really exercising your literacy muscles. I loved the Hitchhikers Guide series too, but I already read it and probably won’t read it again. There are more books to read than I have life to live.
I personally feel that it’s perfectly fine to boycott problematic figures. Speech has real effects and should be treated like it.
But once you accept the equivalence of speech/reading and violence you can start choosing to regulate speech/reading as violence, or free up violence as speech. I don’t think either is a great idea. Do you think that any of you have never said something hurtful to others? Should you be jailed for it?
I await all the civil and non-hurtful replies from peaceful and sympathetic people I am likely to garner for this stance.
I await all the civil and non-hurtful replies from peaceful and sympathetic people I am likely to garner for this stance.
You are a
greatperson Iagreewith you and hope youliveThanks, stranger. I hope you live and are happy even if we someday come to disagree on some things. You are more important to me than almost any disagreement.
<3
I know its a hyperbolic example (though entirely possible in the context you describe)
What would be your thoughts on speech that had the effectual equivalent of murder?
There’s no traps here im just interested in the thought process behind the context you provided.
Side note: if verbal violence is possible then it would probably track that there are degrees of violence, much like the physical equivalent.
If that’s true the argument that you shouldn’t regulate subjectively heavy violence because “who here hasn’t physically hurt someone?” Isn’t a reasonable as it sounds at first glance.
For the record, Rowling is a shitbag, the potter books are mediocre and the actors were the best thing about the movies.
None of that bias is in the foundation of my questions though.
Speech equivalent to murder? Well calls to violence, or criminal conspiracy are crimes. But that’s kind of a cop-out because they lead to eventual killing via non-speech means.
Actual murder via speech would be… stuff like shouting fire in a crowded movie theater. (This is also already a crime.)
I used effectual equivalent for a reason.
I did say it was somewhat hyperbolous but there are real life examples that are possible.
Something like extended bullying directly leading to suicide, lies with the intention of causing harm or death.
Calls to violence that lead to deaths that otherwise wouldn’t likely happen is a good example of one that can be technically correct but difficult to prove.
Intentionally telling someone a door leads to safety when it actually leads to a spike pit is effectually the same as stabbing them yourself.
Are those examples good enough for an answer?
Im looking for how the idea holds up at the logical extreme so I can understand the bounds of the theoretical context.
There doesn’t have to be a good answer either, some ideas only work in a limited boundary and break down at the extremes.
I know this is a bit of an extreme example. Leaving an abusive spouse leads to suicides. You can’t blanket assign responsibility in all cases. It needs to be reasonable.
In cases of targeted harassment, sure. I think cases like that have gone to trial.
But if seeing someone walk into a book signing by a woman with regressive views on trans related stuff tips someone over the edge to suicide I don’t feel that’s reasonably assignable blame. Seeing J.K.Rowling succeed is such a minor thing compared to the child raping cannibal cults we have running things. It just does not even register.
Calls to violence are outright crimes where I live, whether any violence occurs or not. I think you might get a lighter sentence if nothing happens, not sure. Just like you don’t get off with no charges if you shoot at someone and miss.
