J.K. Rowling Explains Her Stance On Trans Issues

[Bronco 29,311]

5 hours ago, Horny Chicken said:

Probably a gross estimate but I think this is where we’re at right now:

Probably about right. 

Like I'm in the pink, but its a very casual boycot. I'd largely grown out of Harry Potter and never engaged with the spin off movies that started to come out as she went crazy. So the only HP I've actively boycotted is the game - which is something I would get if it werent for her views. 

The only other active boycott is that I have a friend who loves the original HP books, and sometimes I get him HP knock off **** for Xmas. But I explicitly set out to get stuff that has zero HP licensing attached to ensure she doesn't see a penny of it.

So, I definitely think there's not some big Anti-Aparthied scale boycott going on like she wants to claim at times

[Princess Diana 24,506]

Society has moved past the need for JK Rowling and Harry Potter. Hogwarts Legacy was just an anomaly. I genuinely think the new Harry Potter HBO won’t be as successful as people are anticipating, it’s gonna do mediocre numbers at best 

[gagzus 27,607]

5 hours ago, Main Pop Girl said:

Hogwarts Legacy is slightly different because the devs weren't associated with Rowling and made it very clear that trans people are welcome to enjoy their game, even going so far as to make a main character trans

A more accurate comparison would be to look at the Fantastic Beasts movies which flopped harder and harder until ultimately being cancelled altogether

We'll see how the new HBO series does but either way her name is dirt and no one ****s with this woman

To be fair, Rowling still makes money off the game because she owns the IP. Which means sure there’s pro-trans people working on the game, and trans people in the game, but she still makes millions off the game sales. And then uses that to find anti-trans stuff here in the UK. 

So it’s entirely inconsequential. If they made an entire wizarding open world RPG without any reference to Harry Potter—or donated funds equal to what she uses and sends them to trans charities and causes—I’d believe it. But the truth is they’re just empty words. 

ANYONE and ANY amount of money given to a Harry Potter related purchase from a wand toy to a view of the new show or buying the video game; is actively keeping Rowling rich, publicly visible and able to influence transphobia and fund trans hate. So anyone who is not making the effort for a full boycott is complicit. And that’s just a fact.

[littlepotter 76,743]

So she's just rehashing all the same things she's been saying, what was the point of this essay? 

It's really so heartbreaking to me what she has done to the trans rights mvt but also to her legacy. I had a 1% hope that she would one day see the light and change her mind and a delusional part of me thinks it's not impossible and that she'd atone by donating to the people she has hurt with her rhetoric but at this point it seems less likely than magic being real. 

[gagzus 27,607]

3 minutes ago, littlepotter said:

So she's just rehashing all the same things she's been saying, what was the point of this essay? 

It's really so heartbreaking to me what she has done to the trans rights mvt but also to her legacy. I had a 1% hope that she would one day see the light and change her mind and a delusional part of me thinks it's not impossible and that she'd atone by donating to the people she has hurt with her rhetoric but at this point it seems less likely than magic being real. 

She’s done far too much damage in the UK and moved the needle to the point now we have the nationwide ban on trans people using bathrooms and changing spaces outside of their gender identity. Even if she suddenly changed her mind it would take a LOT for her to atone. But she’s a Gen Xer so are we surprised. Impartiality and independent thought is not a big thing amongst people older than 45-50 in the UK. 

[timdrake 3,148]

7 hours ago, Horny Chicken said:

 

The pink represents true boycotters as the majority of Anti-Rowling/ Pro-trans activists were never consumers in the first place. 

This is why I think a boycott of Harry Potter-related material is never going to serve any significant purpose other than virtue signal (which is fine! it’s not a crime to want to be a visible ally if that’s what you want to do)

She basically has infinity money for the rest of her life, so it seems like using a thimble to toss water out of a sinking boat when she doesn’t get a couple dollars from former fans anymore (and as that graph showed, most people loudly against her views were never HP fans in the first place.)

Also she’s getting $20 Million per season from HBO, and I haven’t seen any large scale coordinated cancellation of their services, so my thinking is that going after the money isn’t how to successfully challenge her.

It’s more of a political playing field when it comes to her. She funds legal cases, throws support behind issues that come up for vote…Those who disagree with her should focus their energy more on raising awareness when trans-related matters are being voted on, litigated in court. I feel that is where more significant change will be possible. 

[Horny Chicken 11,317]

I love that my Venn diagram is being referenced.

I feel so scientific. 

[SleepingSun 1,872]

21 hours ago, SleepingSun said:

Creyk, may we know your opinion regarding Rowlings' statements? Since you asked us first, some here might be curious if you'd be willing to share your own view on the matter. Thanks a million 

@Creyk

 

[Creyk 18,958]

11 minutes ago, SleepingSun said:

@Creyk

 

Hi SleepingSun! 

I do not agree with her views, but I do like to read GGD's takes on this topic. So many of the comments here were insightful and thoughtful.

I always try to make my OP's neutral, because otherwise the thread often becomes a commentary about the opinion in the OP, as opposed to the topic at hand.

[phantasmas 12,505]

that black mold in her home really did a number on her, huh