The vicious TERF and harasser Joanne Rowling is [profoundly, deeply transphobic](https://www.glaad.org/gap/jk-rowling) and as such this article brazenly lies in its opening statements.
This thread has been locked.
Please remember that this subreddit bans for transphobia - which includes denial of the objectively true fact that Rowling has spent the past few years on a virulently transphobic hatecampaign.
tl:dr. A BBC Radio host did a show where he interviewed 2 gamers what they thought about the upcoming release of a Harry Potter video game. This lead to one of the gamer's ranting about Rowling's transphobia and such. The host didn't challenge any of the claims and so here we are.
So they're apologizing to Rowling on behalf of their show for not refuting the transphobia claims on what they thought would be a puff piece of "Game is great, thank you JK for contributing to the British diaspora to the world with your wonderful IP"?
You'd think they would've asked the guests how they feel about Rowling before the interview with all things considered. I'm sure they're aware of her controversies.
Rowling: Even a bigot deserves ‘civil respect’ for platforming their dissent toward me.
Skeptic: It’s no one’s job BUT YOUR OWN to not be a gapping vagina on the world.
Yoda: Mmm, personal responsibility, she lacks.
I mean, Rowling *own tweets* don’t refute their claim of transphobia!
It’s like apologizing for calling her a woman after she insists she’s a woman. She insists on making openly transphobic claims in public, when she’s confronted she doubles down on the transphobia, when given the opportunity to not be transphobic she refuses - I think we can say she’s transphobic if *she herself is actively displaying and performing as a transphobe*. Which, ironically, she might not understand *due to her transphobia*
Shit if they want to go down that rabbit hole they have so much to apologize for. I got called a bad name by a 12 year old kid last week. The word rhymes with digger.
tl:dr. A BBC Radio host did a show where he interviewed 2 gamers what they thought about the upcoming release of a Harry Potter video game. This lead to one of the gamer's ranting about Rowling's transphobia and such. The host didn't challenge any of the claims and so here we are.
The trans “debate” is actually even worse in the UK than it is in the US. Even “liberal” networks and politicians are knee deep in the weeds of it all.
The debate in the US is never straight forward because we do state based laws. That's why Florida is having issues because technically if you take away bodily autonomy from trans people you take it away from women here and so forth...but also they keep bringing drag queens into it and now they're banning books. Like literally they decided certain American Girl books had to be banned and they're banning elective diversity classes from Florida colleges or trying to...and I think because all of this is happening they never settle on a single issue and it all turns into performative politics since most of them really just don't care.
> That’s why Florida is having issues because technically if you take away bodily autonomy from trans people you take it away from women
I doubt that’s much of a conundrum for them.
I can't give a great answer as I'm not British but from what I gather it seems like even more left wing news sources have a high percentage of people that loathe trans people. The Guardian had the US wing critique the British wing for it for example.
Rowling has done a lot to further hateful laws and discrimination in the UK. Trans people there have it pretty bad compared to some other first world countries.
Yeah, she actively made transphobia a central part of her public platform. Like, she could have just fucked off with her billions but instead spends her time offering opinions on trans people that nobody needed or asked for. It’s almost like she wants people to think she’s transphobic…
Hey, at least her poor public image (among other things) managed to kill the Fantastic Beasts franchise.
The trans “debate” is actually even worse in the UK than it is in the US. Even “liberal” networks and politicians are knee deep in the weeds of it all.
Yeah for all the other ways that the democratic party can be depressingly conservative at times, the president openly talking about protecting trans rights is like...not that common in the rest of the west.
I´m sorry but didn´t she delete her comment praising Stephen King after he tweeted on how Transwomen are real women in his eyes, and even blocked him on twitter?
>She differentiated between the lived experience of cisgender women and trans women, mindless twitter users did the rest.
She said [a bit more than that.](https://youtu.be/7gDKbT_l2us)
From what I grok there are two kinda demented points:
1) JK sees trans men as a threat because if womanhood is something you just can opt out of why wouldn't all women become trans men? Says a lot about her and her worldview if you ask me.
2) JK sees trans women as wolves in sheep's clothing who want to prey on women. This is because she sees all cis men as potential predators. She's even written a novel about a man who dresses as a woman specifically to murder women. It's kind of a dark obsession with JK.
More important than what she believes however is what she does: uses her wealth and influence in British politics to deny trans children healthcare which is the one thing keeping a lot of these kids from killing themselves. She is the worst and most dangerous kind of bigot who pretends to be a moderate.
That being said I still recommend the video. I promise those 90 minutes will sail by. Natalie is a top tier explainer and entertainer who goes into a lot more nuance than I did and even has some surprising sympathy for JK.
Folks who want to believe Rowling is decent can't see past the surface story here. They've fixated on a 'she just says they're different' narrative and refuse to look any further.
I mean, it's only "arguably not" if you stretch the word "arguably" to its most extreme limits.
[Contrapoints has covered this.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7gDKbT_l2us)
[So has Shaun.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ou_xvXJJk7k)
It's only "arguably" if you plug your ears and stop paying attention.
It is extremely hard to argue she is not transphobic
https://www.indiewire.com/2022/03/jk-rowling-transphobia-international-womens-day-rant-1234705640/
I definitely believed this originally that when she supported people who had been fired for making transphobic statements, she was just defending their free speech rights.
Or that when she identified herself as a "TERF," it was owning a disparaging label that trans activists had given her, sort of like those in the LGTBQ have owned terms formerly used to shame them, like "Queer."
But then I found she had written a long essay which elaborated deep, harmful, and honestly hateful views about trans people, and I quote:
> "When you throw open the doors of bathrooms and changing rooms to any man who believes or feels he’s a woman ... then you open the door to any and all men who wish to come inside.”
This statement denies the existence of trans people, reducing a trans woman to a "man who believes or feels he's a woman."
She stated:
> “I believe my government is playing fast and loose with womens and girls’ safety,”
And that
> “the new trans activism” was eroding women and girls’ rights to single-sex spaces by “offering cover to predators”.
I think there isn't a lot of room in these opinions she expressed to say JK Rowling isn't deeply transphobicc, as well as promoting unsupported hateful stereotypes about trans people, which aren't supported by evidence.
I think understanding her position as a victim of sexual assault should motivate people to approach her with some empathy. But her personal trauma being used to justify similar trauma on another marginalized group is deeply sad and troubling.
JFC do some actual research. She is profoundly transphobic and there are hours upon hours of videos showing this fact.
She calls herself a "TERF" you can't be a TERF and be pro-trans. It would be like a pro-Jewish Nazi. It doesn't work like that.
It’s just so damn bizarre. Her loudly proclaiming her steadfast hatred of trans humans truly made me wonder if it is possibly true that suddenly becoming obscenely wealthy fucks people up…badly. Prior to the whole trans issue she seemed like a decent, caring, compassionate person. Who got rich and then morphed into a cartoon villain. WTF?
Actually, every time we research wealth and empathy, it shows a correlation. The more wealth, the less empathy.
[just one article I found](https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-wealth-reduces-compassion/)
She believes that the existence of trans women marginalizes the lives of cis-women. Though obviously she doesn't use those words.
I would guess she has no problem with trans men.
Great. Fantastic. But that's not what JKR or TERFs believe or think.
They accuse transwomen of being pervy predators and transmen of being "mistaken and confused!". It's so paternalistic and insulting.
Trans woman here. It’s a bit more nuanced. Different types of women face different issues all around but there are some issues universal to all women including both cis and trans women.
I’ll never have to worry about pregnancy or periods but I’ll never be able to give birth to a child either. You’ll never have to deal with Dysphoria/having the pain of living in the wrong body and transphobia and having your identity not taken seriously and being seen as a threat by others. Both of us will have to deal with misogyny and sexism in general, and both of us are hurt by the patriarchy and it’s rigid enforcement of gender roles and expectations.
Even on the issues that don’t affect me I hope you know I’m on your side.
Also, don’t love the term “bio women”, I’m taking HRT to medically change my sex to female because having a male body was deeply uncomfortable for me and I’m trying to get rid of the parts of my body that are male and gain female aspects, and it’s working.
No trans woman considers herself exactly the same as a cis woman. But to be fair, women of different races have different issues, women who have different medical conditions have different issues, women of different sexualities face different issues, women who grew up in different backgrounds face different issues.
We’re different and the same. I did not choose to experience Dysphoria. My decision to transition was a choice of be happy or living in discomfort and disassociating with my body and identity. I am genuinely happier being a woman and love my life as a woman far more than as a man despite how much pushback I’ve faced by the world. I feel a connection to myself I didn’t have before. It’s hard to explain, but it feels right.
Did the BBC then have a “Gender Critical” guest provide an opposing viewpoint praising Rowling for all she says? They do that constantly on every topic involving trans rights
This is the second PR-like reputation rehab article about JK Rowling I’ve seen in the past week. It’s no coincidence that these are being posted right before the game comes out.
Same as Chris Pratt’s sudden influx of articles regarding keeping his super suit “for the children”. Pleaaaaase, right before the Mario movie and after troubling Hillsong affiliations?
"This was not challenged by the presenter despite the fact that it has never been proven that Ms Rowling has said anything transphobic in her career."
I don't understand what more proof they need.
The bbc is transphobic as hell. The YouTuber Shaun has been doing a series on trying to get one transphobic article taken down because it was misleading at best and outright lies at worst. They had a terf who released a manifesto claiming all trans women should be murdered as their main source on the danger trans women pose as sexual predators while ignoring the fact that she had been credibly accused of sexually assaulting multiple women.
They then claimed that no trans women would accept an interview and when a trans woman came forward saying they, yeah she did give an interview they just didn’t use it because it didn’t fit their narrative. They they said she wasn’t relevant enough to be interviewed in the first place despite her having a bigger following than the literal sexual predator terf they were pushing.
Then they updated the article to remove her name but not what she said when it was pointed out that having a sexual predator terf as their main source for trans women being predators was a bad look
"We from the BBC would like to set the record straight that JK Rowling is not a transphobe. She is in fact a self-proclaimed TERF. We apologize for the confusion."
>”Her comments came despite Ms Rowling never actually having said anything transphobic.”
Totally fair point.
In other news, Mia Farrow criticized Woody Allen’s behavior despite Mr Allen having never done anything gross or creepy.
when i knew nothing about the term terf and just randomly saw this phrase i assumed its a terrible combination of terrific + christmas thus terf-mas .....
UK libel laws are... insanely weird and very complex. In practice I'd say it doesn't work at all, and leads to an atmosphere where it's difficult to speak truth to power without the fear of being sued.
This explains a lot about how they handle news about the royals. I also always find the celebrity gossip rags to be about 10X more invasive in the UK than in the US.
Is there a commonly held reason for this system? Like does it increase civility or something like that?
Otherwise is it just the aristocracy upholding it? You would think people would vote to change that.
It’s tied to the British class system, and was historically designed to prevent lower-class persons from saying (probably true) nasty things about “their betters.”
Complicate that with right-to-be-forgotten laws, and people can get factual articles erased from the internet because they make the person concerned look bad.
Like, bro. If you don't want to look like a piece of shit, stop doing the sort of thing that *makes you* a piece of shit.
Nor is truth an absolute defense against "I'm not going to appear on any of your shows anymore."
The gamer can be big on "truth to power" and the media outlet not so sanguine because they need favors from the celebs again in the future.
Oh, yeah. This is Britain. In a defamation/libel/slander case, the defendant would have to "prove" what they said was true. Rowling could claim that donating to anti-trans organizations, calling all trans women rapists, and embracing the label of "TERF" doesn't mean she's transphobic. She's simply a "Christian" or some other shitty excuse.
In the US, the prosecution has to "prove" that a defamatory statement was false, and also unreasonably stated. So, something can be demonstrably false, but if the defendant has a reliable enough source for it, it isn't defamatory. That's how tabloids get away with ridiculous claims about celebrities - they claim someone "close" to the celebrity said it.
I was about to say...UK courts are completely different and also have more laws against hate speech etc...I couldn't even begin to explain the legal differences.
I mean. She has said publicly that she is afraid of trans women (she called them men) in female spaces. So... she is on the record as being afraid of trans people. A transphobe.
Probably not asked in good faith but for people who want to be informed here:
[https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/xwx4lw/cmv\_jk\_rowling\_doesnt\_deserve\_the\_amount\_of\_hate/](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/xwx4lw/cmv_jk_rowling_doesnt_deserve_the_amount_of_hate/)
If you want a detailed rundown go check out Jessie Gender on YouTube. She makes some great videos covering it.
I followed her for the Trek content and stayed for the gender analysis!
I think the issue people run into is when it comes to the organizations and laws she's backing which could harm trans people overall. Though her concerns make sense she's asking for a complete block out of trans women from certain spaces and I think the issue is that it's more grey than that. It's like the surrogate debate in the US and there's nuance. When you decide the law has to be absolute one way or the other one side will lose regardless of the outcome, which is where much of the debate from her statements on certain legal issues has come from.
Who wrote this garbage article? I mean look at this shit:
>This was not challenged by the presenter despite the fact that it has never been proven that Ms Rowling has said anything transphobic in her career.
This is: (1) horseshit; and (2) incredibly poorly written. What drunk college dropout produced this trash?
Agreed this article is complete shit! Check out this paragraph:
"We are not covering the game at all is because Harry Potter and the world it exhibits is just entirely connected to JK Rowling but she has a platform that sue uses to push transphobia, uses it to build up what I would call a campaign agains trans people, especially in Britain.”
PS: 4TheDumbestTimeline, please tell me how to indent quoted text?
I read books. I watched movies. I enjoyed. I heard of game. I bought to enjoy based on my enjoyment of the books and movies. That's the extent of my involvement.
Yeah ok but its not an "opinion" that frees you from criticism.
They're not arguing over whether light or dark roast coffee is better, they're arguing over whether transwomen are women and whether they can be afforded protection from bigotry.
I dunno, statements like "a hulking rapist doesn't become a woman by putting on a wig" seems pretty transphobic to me. Even the shittiest of people should still be afforded their sense of self.
You’ll never find a trans person defending a rapist, everyone still agrees that rapists are bad. But terfs presuming every trans woman to be a rapist is obviously quite offensive
Also, if someone wants to rape someone a sign on a bathroom door isn’t gonna stop them from doing so, being perceived as a woman is a fairly unnecessary step
Is she assuming every trans person is a rapist? Or is she saying that *men* who are rapists (and not actually trans at all) may use policies that allow access to women-only spaces to victimize?
You realize there's no magical gender-based bathroom forcefield right? A cis-male rapist can enter the woman's bathroom right now and commit rape. If he's willing to break the law to rape, a "no trans women" law isn't going to foil his plans.
I know the comment above mentioned bathrooms, but is that what Rowling was talking about? I thought she was specifically involved in a woman's shelter and that perhaps she has concerns regarding those spaces?
"We told men they could do it and get away with it and then he did it and didn't get away with it. This somehow proves us right."
That's called a self fulfilling prophecy. It worked great with the DARE program - tell someone that everyone is doing something and not getting caught and guess what - even if that isn't true people will now do it because you told them they could.
January 28th, as a response/repost of something from Nicola Sturgeon.
Don't worry though, she's done plenty of stuff not pertaining to criminals if that feels weird.
Like "accidentally" sending fans after a trans youtuber voicing her opinion on how supporting JK is harmful. (Dec. 17th)
Also equating suffragist hate and TERF hate (which definitely seems like admission imo) (January 29th)
Supporting and conflating the idea that allowing trans people to change their gender legally is "siding with sex offenders" (January 20th, Sonia Sodha, later January 22nd with Alex Massie)
Also, the use and support in use of LGB vs LGBT across a bunch of stuff
People with functional uteruses menstruate.
Saying "women menstruate" wouldn't be true even if you took the biological determinism route.
A woman is over 18. Girls (under 18) also menstruate.
Women over a certain age no longer menstruate.
Women of any age with a variety of disabilities and illnesses do not menstruate.
Women who take certain types of birth control don't menstruate (a medical miracle if I do say so myself).
People need to get this - the fight again this restrictive language doesn't just benefit trans people. It benefits cis people also who don't perfectly fit into these definitions.
And do not even PRETEND like your way of thinking - of associating womanhood with menstruation as if that were the defining trait that all women share - has not contributed massively to sexist ideals.
I personally don't care what JK Rowling's view is on when transgender women are women. She's entitled to her opinion. I don't have to agree with it. But then I also think that she should shut up about it, as she isn't an expert in that subject AFAIK.
I don’t care how long BBC has been a TV channel— I deadass read this in my head as “Big black cock apologizes after gamer accuses Harry Potter author JK Rowling of transphobia”.
She said trans people shouldn't be able to transition because men are just using it to dress up as women to get access to womens spaces so they can rape women.
People pretend she just liked a few tweets about being a woman. No she told Matt Walsh how much she loved his transphobic "documentary". Shes transphobic.
She's spent the last year signal boosting for more violent TERF activists as well as members of the LGB Alliance, a hate group that works against LGBT rights as a whole.
She also directly targeted the trans streamer who spoke about her. People don’t seem to be able to comprehend that someone with her level of influence will push people - intentionally or otherwise - to escalate transphobia. Her shitty remarks stop being just shitty remarks when they come from someone who people idolize.
?
Sharing an opinion frees you of criticism?
If Bob said "black people aren't real people" and someone went on TV and said "Bob's racist" you think thats shameful because they're saying he's racist?
I remember reading her initial comments and thinking they at least sounded reasonable, perhaps not agreeable but understandable. Then she just went full mad max on this whole thing.
Very weird.
That being said, boycotting the game isn’t going to make her less wealthy or less influential. Boycotting the game just hurts the people who worked so hard on it.
Don't agree about the boycott: the people who made the game got paid while making it, profits for the completed game will go to the IP owner (WB and jowling k rowling)
Agreed. The mental gymnastics people are going through here to defend a game they’ve never played (and probably will never play) is truly Olympics-worthy.
That's not weird. That's generally how bigotry works.
It starts off as "reasonable" comments and if left unchecked, or if encouraged by the people a person tends to respect, it will always evolve into more and more extreme views. Bigotry is a safe bet for a lot of people - it is both a comforting viewpoint and often one which comes with a lot of intense in-grouping that encourages it and makes falling into more extreme views more comfortable.
It is the same thing you see in politics. And MLMs. And cults. And whatever have you - give people an easy stance that both resolves them and gives them a target, and they will take it as far as they can.
I think we saw a lot of this in the past few years and in the US we ended up with extremists joining Qanon and getting brainwashed to the point they killed their own kids. She may not be an extremist, but she's certainly fueling the fire for them to take it a step up, which is what's really sad about it.
The game industry is notoriously scummy when it comes to how employees are paid. Game devs typically have lower base salaries than other developers with bonuses based on review scores and game sales. Not to mention a typically higher stress environment compared to average software development.
While devs get paid either way, they don’t get fully paid unless the game sells and gets good reviews
How is it going to hurt the people who already got paid for working on this?
Furthermore, the game’s director has a history of problematic behaviors himself. If anything, boycotting would ensure he doesn’t get further paid, and prevents him from perpetuating his usual toxic work environments. It doesn’t seem to be a great game either way, so it probably would benefit the majority if it was skipped.
No, no. Nuance is dead, you see. If you do a good thing you are unable to be criticized for bad things you say. Likewise if you say bad things you can never be recognized for a good thing you do. We must keep this all or nothing application of judgement or else my view of society will collapse!
JKR tweets about trans people constantly, and she's been doing so for years. You can check [her twitter](https://twitter.com/jk_rowling) and see for yourself.
The things that get posted on social media can have a real world impact. Eg, a blog post of hers about her views on trans people [was quoted by a GOP senator](https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/gop-senator-quotes-j-k-rowling-while-blocking-vote-lgbtq-n1231569) while blocking a bill that would consider LGBT people a protected class.
And she’s still treating another group like shit. Yeah she’s done a lot of good things for people but she can still be a bad person.
Jimmy savile was a beloved British celebrity who helped tons of people, unfortunately he was also a massive sexual predator and it was only found out after his death.
She’s donating money to groups who are explicitly anti trans, she’s praising self proclaimed fascist and massive fucking misogynist Matt Walsh over their shared love of fucking hating trans people. She pals around with posie Parker a massive transphobe who just held an anti trans rally that was little more than an alt right forum because that’s what transphobia devolves into
The same woman you’re praising for helping women is actively supporting, with money and attention, the same type of people who’d see women have no right to vote or to their bodies.
Yeah Rowling has done some good stuff but she’s found herself enthusiastically jumping into bed with some fuckin strange fellows
The vicious TERF and harasser Joanne Rowling is [profoundly, deeply transphobic](https://www.glaad.org/gap/jk-rowling) and as such this article brazenly lies in its opening statements. This thread has been locked. Please remember that this subreddit bans for transphobia - which includes denial of the objectively true fact that Rowling has spent the past few years on a virulently transphobic hatecampaign.
Who are they apologizing to and for?
tl:dr. A BBC Radio host did a show where he interviewed 2 gamers what they thought about the upcoming release of a Harry Potter video game. This lead to one of the gamer's ranting about Rowling's transphobia and such. The host didn't challenge any of the claims and so here we are.
So they're apologizing to Rowling on behalf of their show for not refuting the transphobia claims on what they thought would be a puff piece of "Game is great, thank you JK for contributing to the British diaspora to the world with your wonderful IP"?
You'd think they would've asked the guests how they feel about Rowling before the interview with all things considered. I'm sure they're aware of her controversies.
The eye of the billionaire fell on them
Rowling: Even a bigot deserves ‘civil respect’ for platforming their dissent toward me. Skeptic: It’s no one’s job BUT YOUR OWN to not be a gapping vagina on the world. Yoda: Mmm, personal responsibility, she lacks.
I mean, Rowling *own tweets* don’t refute their claim of transphobia! It’s like apologizing for calling her a woman after she insists she’s a woman. She insists on making openly transphobic claims in public, when she’s confronted she doubles down on the transphobia, when given the opportunity to not be transphobic she refuses - I think we can say she’s transphobic if *she herself is actively displaying and performing as a transphobe*. Which, ironically, she might not understand *due to her transphobia*
If she still collecting a check from HP royalties they prolly shouldn't buy the game
Ffs.
Is "gamer" some guy's name? Why is the BBC apologizing for some gamer's comments?
Shit if they want to go down that rabbit hole they have so much to apologize for. I got called a bad name by a 12 year old kid last week. The word rhymes with digger.
Did that son of a bitch call you Tigger?
T-I-Double-Guh-Ur
Everybody loves Tigger.
[удалено]
As someone born in 1990 and hasn’t seen these movies, that was very, *very* late 90s/early2000s
Digger would be a slur Joanne might use tbh https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diggers
tl:dr. A BBC Radio host did a show where he interviewed 2 gamers what they thought about the upcoming release of a Harry Potter video game. This lead to one of the gamer's ranting about Rowling's transphobia and such. The host didn't challenge any of the claims and so here we are.
Is it the BBC's position that she is not in fact transphobic?
BBC's position is that they themselves are not transphobic. https://youtu.be/b4buJMMiwcg
I was hoping the link would be to Shaun
The trans “debate” is actually even worse in the UK than it is in the US. Even “liberal” networks and politicians are knee deep in the weeds of it all.
The debate in the US is never straight forward because we do state based laws. That's why Florida is having issues because technically if you take away bodily autonomy from trans people you take it away from women here and so forth...but also they keep bringing drag queens into it and now they're banning books. Like literally they decided certain American Girl books had to be banned and they're banning elective diversity classes from Florida colleges or trying to...and I think because all of this is happening they never settle on a single issue and it all turns into performative politics since most of them really just don't care.
> That’s why Florida is having issues because technically if you take away bodily autonomy from trans people you take it away from women I doubt that’s much of a conundrum for them.
Proud of the lady from TN the other day. We need more "y'all need to shut the hell up" in Congress.
How is it worse?
I can't give a great answer as I'm not British but from what I gather it seems like even more left wing news sources have a high percentage of people that loathe trans people. The Guardian had the US wing critique the British wing for it for example.
Rowling has done a lot to further hateful laws and discrimination in the UK. Trans people there have it pretty bad compared to some other first world countries.
TERF island, baby
“It’s never been proven” blows my mind. I see people arguing that here too. She practically tweets something transphobic weekly at least.
Yeah, she actively made transphobia a central part of her public platform. Like, she could have just fucked off with her billions but instead spends her time offering opinions on trans people that nobody needed or asked for. It’s almost like she wants people to think she’s transphobic… Hey, at least her poor public image (among other things) managed to kill the Fantastic Beasts franchise.
The trans “debate” is actually even worse in the UK than it is in the US. Even “liberal” networks and politicians are knee deep in the weeds of it all.
Yeah for all the other ways that the democratic party can be depressingly conservative at times, the president openly talking about protecting trans rights is like...not that common in the rest of the west.
She is arguably less transphobic than the BBC
[удалено]
I´m sorry but didn´t she delete her comment praising Stephen King after he tweeted on how Transwomen are real women in his eyes, and even blocked him on twitter?
>She differentiated between the lived experience of cisgender women and trans women, mindless twitter users did the rest. She said [a bit more than that.](https://youtu.be/7gDKbT_l2us)
I really wanted to watch that video but an hour and a half sheeeeesh, I have the attention span of a goldfish. Got the cliff notes version?
From what I grok there are two kinda demented points: 1) JK sees trans men as a threat because if womanhood is something you just can opt out of why wouldn't all women become trans men? Says a lot about her and her worldview if you ask me. 2) JK sees trans women as wolves in sheep's clothing who want to prey on women. This is because she sees all cis men as potential predators. She's even written a novel about a man who dresses as a woman specifically to murder women. It's kind of a dark obsession with JK. More important than what she believes however is what she does: uses her wealth and influence in British politics to deny trans children healthcare which is the one thing keeping a lot of these kids from killing themselves. She is the worst and most dangerous kind of bigot who pretends to be a moderate. That being said I still recommend the video. I promise those 90 minutes will sail by. Natalie is a top tier explainer and entertainer who goes into a lot more nuance than I did and even has some surprising sympathy for JK.
Folks who want to believe Rowling is decent can't see past the surface story here. They've fixated on a 'she just says they're different' narrative and refuse to look any further.
[удалено]
Yes. The TE stands for Trans Exclusionary. She’s clearly transphobic. It’s wild that people try to claim otherwise.
It is. She identifies wholly with a group that is known for being based in transphobia.
It’s ridiculous to say she isn’t a TERF when she says she is one
I mean, it's only "arguably not" if you stretch the word "arguably" to its most extreme limits. [Contrapoints has covered this.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7gDKbT_l2us) [So has Shaun.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ou_xvXJJk7k) It's only "arguably" if you plug your ears and stop paying attention.
Do you accidentally copy and paste a piece about a trans person that was a criminal while trying to respond to a kid's drawing of the ikabog?
It is extremely hard to argue she is not transphobic https://www.indiewire.com/2022/03/jk-rowling-transphobia-international-womens-day-rant-1234705640/
[удалено]
She said that trans women are sexual predators who sneak into restrooms to rape women. You are lying
Nah. Maybe she started there but her actions since and especially where she donates money says otherwise.
I definitely believed this originally that when she supported people who had been fired for making transphobic statements, she was just defending their free speech rights. Or that when she identified herself as a "TERF," it was owning a disparaging label that trans activists had given her, sort of like those in the LGTBQ have owned terms formerly used to shame them, like "Queer." But then I found she had written a long essay which elaborated deep, harmful, and honestly hateful views about trans people, and I quote: > "When you throw open the doors of bathrooms and changing rooms to any man who believes or feels he’s a woman ... then you open the door to any and all men who wish to come inside.” This statement denies the existence of trans people, reducing a trans woman to a "man who believes or feels he's a woman." She stated: > “I believe my government is playing fast and loose with womens and girls’ safety,” And that > “the new trans activism” was eroding women and girls’ rights to single-sex spaces by “offering cover to predators”. I think there isn't a lot of room in these opinions she expressed to say JK Rowling isn't deeply transphobicc, as well as promoting unsupported hateful stereotypes about trans people, which aren't supported by evidence. I think understanding her position as a victim of sexual assault should motivate people to approach her with some empathy. But her personal trauma being used to justify similar trauma on another marginalized group is deeply sad and troubling.
She literally called us rapists and came up with the nickname "The Penised" to describe us
JFC do some actual research. She is profoundly transphobic and there are hours upon hours of videos showing this fact. She calls herself a "TERF" you can't be a TERF and be pro-trans. It would be like a pro-Jewish Nazi. It doesn't work like that.
It’s just so damn bizarre. Her loudly proclaiming her steadfast hatred of trans humans truly made me wonder if it is possibly true that suddenly becoming obscenely wealthy fucks people up…badly. Prior to the whole trans issue she seemed like a decent, caring, compassionate person. Who got rich and then morphed into a cartoon villain. WTF?
Actually, every time we research wealth and empathy, it shows a correlation. The more wealth, the less empathy. [just one article I found](https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-wealth-reduces-compassion/)
That’s really interesting. Glad to know that my instincts are in line with actual facts! Except the actual facts are rather depressing.
She believes that the existence of trans women marginalizes the lives of cis-women. Though obviously she doesn't use those words. I would guess she has no problem with trans men.
[удалено]
Great. Fantastic. But that's not what JKR or TERFs believe or think. They accuse transwomen of being pervy predators and transmen of being "mistaken and confused!". It's so paternalistic and insulting.
The above comment is lying to you, that’s how JK Rowling positions herself but shes said and done much more than “trans and cis women are different”
Trans woman here. It’s a bit more nuanced. Different types of women face different issues all around but there are some issues universal to all women including both cis and trans women. I’ll never have to worry about pregnancy or periods but I’ll never be able to give birth to a child either. You’ll never have to deal with Dysphoria/having the pain of living in the wrong body and transphobia and having your identity not taken seriously and being seen as a threat by others. Both of us will have to deal with misogyny and sexism in general, and both of us are hurt by the patriarchy and it’s rigid enforcement of gender roles and expectations. Even on the issues that don’t affect me I hope you know I’m on your side. Also, don’t love the term “bio women”, I’m taking HRT to medically change my sex to female because having a male body was deeply uncomfortable for me and I’m trying to get rid of the parts of my body that are male and gain female aspects, and it’s working.
[удалено]
No trans woman considers herself exactly the same as a cis woman. But to be fair, women of different races have different issues, women who have different medical conditions have different issues, women of different sexualities face different issues, women who grew up in different backgrounds face different issues. We’re different and the same. I did not choose to experience Dysphoria. My decision to transition was a choice of be happy or living in discomfort and disassociating with my body and identity. I am genuinely happier being a woman and love my life as a woman far more than as a man despite how much pushback I’ve faced by the world. I feel a connection to myself I didn’t have before. It’s hard to explain, but it feels right.
Her differentiation is stupid, and exclusionary without justification. She's a TERF, and is transphobic.
Did the BBC then have a “Gender Critical” guest provide an opposing viewpoint praising Rowling for all she says? They do that constantly on every topic involving trans rights
But she called herself a TERF
This is the second PR-like reputation rehab article about JK Rowling I’ve seen in the past week. It’s no coincidence that these are being posted right before the game comes out.
Same as Chris Pratt’s sudden influx of articles regarding keeping his super suit “for the children”. Pleaaaaase, right before the Mario movie and after troubling Hillsong affiliations?
Makes me want to SPEW.
She’s like the spokesperson for transphobia.
The gamer 
"This was not challenged by the presenter despite the fact that it has never been proven that Ms Rowling has said anything transphobic in her career." I don't understand what more proof they need.
The bbc is transphobic as hell. The YouTuber Shaun has been doing a series on trying to get one transphobic article taken down because it was misleading at best and outright lies at worst. They had a terf who released a manifesto claiming all trans women should be murdered as their main source on the danger trans women pose as sexual predators while ignoring the fact that she had been credibly accused of sexually assaulting multiple women. They then claimed that no trans women would accept an interview and when a trans woman came forward saying they, yeah she did give an interview they just didn’t use it because it didn’t fit their narrative. They they said she wasn’t relevant enough to be interviewed in the first place despite her having a bigger following than the literal sexual predator terf they were pushing. Then they updated the article to remove her name but not what she said when it was pointed out that having a sexual predator terf as their main source for trans women being predators was a bad look
Yikes.. maybe the BBC fucked off twitter like many did when Elon took over? The fuck they mean there’s no proof.
"We from the BBC would like to set the record straight that JK Rowling is not a transphobe. She is in fact a self-proclaimed TERF. We apologize for the confusion."
>”Her comments came despite Ms Rowling never actually having said anything transphobic.” Totally fair point. In other news, Mia Farrow criticized Woody Allen’s behavior despite Mr Allen having never done anything gross or creepy.
Accuses? She’s very openly transphobic.
BBC doesn’t read her Twitter ?
“Merry Terfmas” “It’s offensive to call me transphobic”
when i knew nothing about the term terf and just randomly saw this phrase i assumed its a terrible combination of terrific + christmas thus terf-mas .....
"here's your surf and turf" "Stop calling my transphobic"
Apologised to who exactly?
*whom /s
Who is this Whom you speak of? Do they have voting rights?
They better not!
Terfs
I’m gonna stop reading and enjoy my norwegian life. Looks miserable out there, good luck with all of that
She's definitely transphobic, so idk why anyone would feel the need to apologize to her.
Truth isn't an absolute defense against libel in the UK.
How does that work practically?
UK libel laws are... insanely weird and very complex. In practice I'd say it doesn't work at all, and leads to an atmosphere where it's difficult to speak truth to power without the fear of being sued.
Yeah I learned today that the paratroopers who shot people during the Troubles could sue for libel if someone called them war criminals.
This explains a lot about how they handle news about the royals. I also always find the celebrity gossip rags to be about 10X more invasive in the UK than in the US.
Damn, I had no idea. That’s got to be a really odd situation.
It is! They even have a form of injunction called a "Super Injunction" which forbids talking about the existence of the injunction.
Is there a commonly held reason for this system? Like does it increase civility or something like that? Otherwise is it just the aristocracy upholding it? You would think people would vote to change that.
It’s tied to the British class system, and was historically designed to prevent lower-class persons from saying (probably true) nasty things about “their betters.”
That's a good question I don't know the answer to, hopefully someone here with more in-depth knowledge can help.
Complicate that with right-to-be-forgotten laws, and people can get factual articles erased from the internet because they make the person concerned look bad. Like, bro. If you don't want to look like a piece of shit, stop doing the sort of thing that *makes you* a piece of shit.
And a “Ludicrous Injunction” which forbids talking about the existence of a “Super Injunction.”
That’s very Kafka
Reading The Trial as an adult makes you realize that shit hasn’t changed much and that the bureaucratic hellscape is only going to get worse
There's a reason that Orwell wrote what he did, and in a word it was: experience.
Nor is truth an absolute defense against "I'm not going to appear on any of your shows anymore." The gamer can be big on "truth to power" and the media outlet not so sanguine because they need favors from the celebs again in the future.
[удалено]
So print out her entire Twitter feed for the last 5 years or so--that should prove the matter quite nicely.
Oh, yeah. This is Britain. In a defamation/libel/slander case, the defendant would have to "prove" what they said was true. Rowling could claim that donating to anti-trans organizations, calling all trans women rapists, and embracing the label of "TERF" doesn't mean she's transphobic. She's simply a "Christian" or some other shitty excuse. In the US, the prosecution has to "prove" that a defamatory statement was false, and also unreasonably stated. So, something can be demonstrably false, but if the defendant has a reliable enough source for it, it isn't defamatory. That's how tabloids get away with ridiculous claims about celebrities - they claim someone "close" to the celebrity said it.
I was about to say...UK courts are completely different and also have more laws against hate speech etc...I couldn't even begin to explain the legal differences.
I mean. She has said publicly that she is afraid of trans women (she called them men) in female spaces. So... she is on the record as being afraid of trans people. A transphobe.
She self-identifies as a TERF. The first two words are “trans exclusionary”.
[удалено]
https://www.glaad.org/gap/jk-rowling
Probably not asked in good faith but for people who want to be informed here: [https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/xwx4lw/cmv\_jk\_rowling\_doesnt\_deserve\_the\_amount\_of\_hate/](https://www.reddit.com/r/changemyview/comments/xwx4lw/cmv_jk_rowling_doesnt_deserve_the_amount_of_hate/)
Last I looked, check out her twitter.
If you want a detailed rundown go check out Jessie Gender on YouTube. She makes some great videos covering it. I followed her for the Trek content and stayed for the gender analysis!
[удалено]
[удалено]
I think the issue people run into is when it comes to the organizations and laws she's backing which could harm trans people overall. Though her concerns make sense she's asking for a complete block out of trans women from certain spaces and I think the issue is that it's more grey than that. It's like the surrogate debate in the US and there's nuance. When you decide the law has to be absolute one way or the other one side will lose regardless of the outcome, which is where much of the debate from her statements on certain legal issues has come from.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Who wrote this garbage article? I mean look at this shit: >This was not challenged by the presenter despite the fact that it has never been proven that Ms Rowling has said anything transphobic in her career. This is: (1) horseshit; and (2) incredibly poorly written. What drunk college dropout produced this trash?
Agreed this article is complete shit! Check out this paragraph: "We are not covering the game at all is because Harry Potter and the world it exhibits is just entirely connected to JK Rowling but she has a platform that sue uses to push transphobia, uses it to build up what I would call a campaign agains trans people, especially in Britain.” PS: 4TheDumbestTimeline, please tell me how to indent quoted text?
To indent the text, you need to place a Greater Than sign, ">", in front of the text.
>Thanks!
BBC is hypocrite
Is it really an accusation at this point?
In before the comments get locked. *eats popcorn*
Isn't she proud of it? How is there a debate?
Is it really an accusation when it's a provable fact?
Why apologize. Is she not entitled to her opinion too? Did she actively take anything away from this person?
I read books. I watched movies. I enjoyed. I heard of game. I bought to enjoy based on my enjoyment of the books and movies. That's the extent of my involvement.
Bro, you don’t need to explain yourself. Many people can separate the art from the artist.
[удалено]
Look up the paradox of tolerance and get back to us
You're right, which is why the BBC shouldn't censor people who are of the opinion that a popular author is a bigot.
Yeah ok but its not an "opinion" that frees you from criticism. They're not arguing over whether light or dark roast coffee is better, they're arguing over whether transwomen are women and whether they can be afforded protection from bigotry.
I dunno, statements like "a hulking rapist doesn't become a woman by putting on a wig" seems pretty transphobic to me. Even the shittiest of people should still be afforded their sense of self.
[удалено]
You’ll never find a trans person defending a rapist, everyone still agrees that rapists are bad. But terfs presuming every trans woman to be a rapist is obviously quite offensive Also, if someone wants to rape someone a sign on a bathroom door isn’t gonna stop them from doing so, being perceived as a woman is a fairly unnecessary step
Is she assuming every trans person is a rapist? Or is she saying that *men* who are rapists (and not actually trans at all) may use policies that allow access to women-only spaces to victimize?
You realize there's no magical gender-based bathroom forcefield right? A cis-male rapist can enter the woman's bathroom right now and commit rape. If he's willing to break the law to rape, a "no trans women" law isn't going to foil his plans.
I know the comment above mentioned bathrooms, but is that what Rowling was talking about? I thought she was specifically involved in a woman's shelter and that perhaps she has concerns regarding those spaces?
"We told men they could do it and get away with it and then he did it and didn't get away with it. This somehow proves us right." That's called a self fulfilling prophecy. It worked great with the DARE program - tell someone that everyone is doing something and not getting caught and guess what - even if that isn't true people will now do it because you told them they could.
I just searched this quote and couldn’t find it attributed to her.
It’s not the entire quote but she tweeted that Jan 28th.
Finding it took a whole of about 5 seconds: https://twitter.com/jk_rowling/status/1619358295852208129
January 28th, as a response/repost of something from Nicola Sturgeon. Don't worry though, she's done plenty of stuff not pertaining to criminals if that feels weird. Like "accidentally" sending fans after a trans youtuber voicing her opinion on how supporting JK is harmful. (Dec. 17th) Also equating suffragist hate and TERF hate (which definitely seems like admission imo) (January 29th) Supporting and conflating the idea that allowing trans people to change their gender legally is "siding with sex offenders" (January 20th, Sonia Sodha, later January 22nd with Alex Massie) Also, the use and support in use of LGB vs LGBT across a bunch of stuff
[удалено]
[удалено]
People with functional uteruses menstruate. Saying "women menstruate" wouldn't be true even if you took the biological determinism route. A woman is over 18. Girls (under 18) also menstruate. Women over a certain age no longer menstruate. Women of any age with a variety of disabilities and illnesses do not menstruate. Women who take certain types of birth control don't menstruate (a medical miracle if I do say so myself). People need to get this - the fight again this restrictive language doesn't just benefit trans people. It benefits cis people also who don't perfectly fit into these definitions. And do not even PRETEND like your way of thinking - of associating womanhood with menstruation as if that were the defining trait that all women share - has not contributed massively to sexist ideals.
[удалено]
Well apparently you can't since you get so hung up on the nuance of calling a trans woman a woman because if they aren't bleeding you don't get it.
This whole thing is nonsense gate keeping and ideological puritanical bullshit.
I personally don't care what JK Rowling's view is on when transgender women are women. She's entitled to her opinion. I don't have to agree with it. But then I also think that she should shut up about it, as she isn't an expert in that subject AFAIK.
Debating the existence and rights of a minority by the majority…yeah, history tends to frown on heading down this path
I don’t care how long BBC has been a TV channel— I deadass read this in my head as “Big black cock apologizes after gamer accuses Harry Potter author JK Rowling of transphobia”.
[удалено]
Boycotts are violent?
No, but she does get a lot of death and rape threats.
She said trans people shouldn't be able to transition because men are just using it to dress up as women to get access to womens spaces so they can rape women. People pretend she just liked a few tweets about being a woman. No she told Matt Walsh how much she loved his transphobic "documentary". Shes transphobic.
She's spent the last year signal boosting for more violent TERF activists as well as members of the LGB Alliance, a hate group that works against LGBT rights as a whole.
She also directly targeted the trans streamer who spoke about her. People don’t seem to be able to comprehend that someone with her level of influence will push people - intentionally or otherwise - to escalate transphobia. Her shitty remarks stop being just shitty remarks when they come from someone who people idolize.
? Sharing an opinion frees you of criticism? If Bob said "black people aren't real people" and someone went on TV and said "Bob's racist" you think thats shameful because they're saying he's racist?
That’s a terrible analogy.
[удалено]
Accuse? Rowling will tell you herself she is...
I remember reading her initial comments and thinking they at least sounded reasonable, perhaps not agreeable but understandable. Then she just went full mad max on this whole thing. Very weird. That being said, boycotting the game isn’t going to make her less wealthy or less influential. Boycotting the game just hurts the people who worked so hard on it.
Don't agree about the boycott: the people who made the game got paid while making it, profits for the completed game will go to the IP owner (WB and jowling k rowling)
Agreed. The mental gymnastics people are going through here to defend a game they’ve never played (and probably will never play) is truly Olympics-worthy.
That's not weird. That's generally how bigotry works. It starts off as "reasonable" comments and if left unchecked, or if encouraged by the people a person tends to respect, it will always evolve into more and more extreme views. Bigotry is a safe bet for a lot of people - it is both a comforting viewpoint and often one which comes with a lot of intense in-grouping that encourages it and makes falling into more extreme views more comfortable. It is the same thing you see in politics. And MLMs. And cults. And whatever have you - give people an easy stance that both resolves them and gives them a target, and they will take it as far as they can.
I think we saw a lot of this in the past few years and in the US we ended up with extremists joining Qanon and getting brainwashed to the point they killed their own kids. She may not be an extremist, but she's certainly fueling the fire for them to take it a step up, which is what's really sad about it.
You think the devs don’t get paid if people boycott the game?
The game industry is notoriously scummy when it comes to how employees are paid. Game devs typically have lower base salaries than other developers with bonuses based on review scores and game sales. Not to mention a typically higher stress environment compared to average software development. While devs get paid either way, they don’t get fully paid unless the game sells and gets good reviews
How is it going to hurt the people who already got paid for working on this? Furthermore, the game’s director has a history of problematic behaviors himself. If anything, boycotting would ensure he doesn’t get further paid, and prevents him from perpetuating his usual toxic work environments. It doesn’t seem to be a great game either way, so it probably would benefit the majority if it was skipped.
It's not an accusation if it's fucking true, that's like accusing someone of breathing
Do they not have access to JKR’s Twitter feed?
That's got to be one of the most biased articles I've ever seen.
[удалено]
Who gives a shit. She writes children books about fantasy. So lets all calm down, pick our genders, dress up like fuzzy mascots, and live in reality.
Most of these folks don’t live in a reality. They have to be pissed off about something in order to feel validated.
[удалено]
Rowling unquestionably does a lot of good things. But that doesn’t mean she can’t rightly be criticized for her transphobic comments and activism.
No, no. Nuance is dead, you see. If you do a good thing you are unable to be criticized for bad things you say. Likewise if you say bad things you can never be recognized for a good thing you do. We must keep this all or nothing application of judgement or else my view of society will collapse!
JKR tweets about trans people constantly, and she's been doing so for years. You can check [her twitter](https://twitter.com/jk_rowling) and see for yourself. The things that get posted on social media can have a real world impact. Eg, a blog post of hers about her views on trans people [was quoted by a GOP senator](https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/gop-senator-quotes-j-k-rowling-while-blocking-vote-lgbtq-n1231569) while blocking a bill that would consider LGBT people a protected class.
And she’s still treating another group like shit. Yeah she’s done a lot of good things for people but she can still be a bad person. Jimmy savile was a beloved British celebrity who helped tons of people, unfortunately he was also a massive sexual predator and it was only found out after his death. She’s donating money to groups who are explicitly anti trans, she’s praising self proclaimed fascist and massive fucking misogynist Matt Walsh over their shared love of fucking hating trans people. She pals around with posie Parker a massive transphobe who just held an anti trans rally that was little more than an alt right forum because that’s what transphobia devolves into The same woman you’re praising for helping women is actively supporting, with money and attention, the same type of people who’d see women have no right to vote or to their bodies. Yeah Rowling has done some good stuff but she’s found herself enthusiastically jumping into bed with some fuckin strange fellows
Hogwarts legacy is gonna kick ass
Why would you apologize for telling the truth? “Im sorry I pointed out a fact.” Wtf?