Jump to content

JK Rowling causes an increase in anti-trans sentiments


Almost Home

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, Elusive Chanteuse said:

!! I also agree with this. One person tweeting doesn't have this much impact if society has progessed forward with acceptance.

Of course it does. You have your thoughts, you see the world seeing your opinion as an oppressive backwards one, so you keep quiet. Then a person in a position of power and influence says exactly what you're thinking so your opinion gets validated and you say "you know what? she's right!"

Same ish with white supremacy for example. You start saying white are the superior race and all of the sudden concentration camps are build. You say mexicans are rapists and you win an election because secretly you voted for it cause you agree with it.

 

So yeah, JK Rowling didn't change anybody's minds, just validated those opinions and people feel free to say it out loud.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 96
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Almost Home

    14

  • Javan

    4

  • chester

    4

  • Banksy

    3

Top Posters In This Topic

Bethenny Frankel

She is disgusting and I hope she rots in hell. Harry Potter is forever ruined.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, newwil7l said:

Hate to break it to people here but this will have literally no effect on the Harry Potter empire.

It actually can as they will be forced to do less projects relating to it if the public continues to demand her removal from the franchise regardless of the fact she created it. 
 

Cancel culture “may not exist” but brands can become too toxic for studios to reconsider how much they are willing to invest in them. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Almost Home said:

It wasn't just a Tweet. It's a book character, essays defending her stance with anti-trans TERF rhetoric, multiple Tweets, likes and Twitter threads supporting anti-trans Twitter pages and other TERFs as well as undermining the trans fight for equal rights and transitioning in the UK over a period of time and not just one instance.

You do know that sh*t was made up right? There was no Trans character in that book at all. A prime example of someone making stuff up and doing the most while sheep-mentalitiy goes with it and repeats it. 

 

And while I do think she needs to educate herself more on the matter, she doesn't seem nowhere near as impactful to make a difference on the views of people on trans-people. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Elusive Chanteuse said:

!! I also agree with this. One person tweeting doesn't have this much impact if society has progessed forward with acceptance.

....you really typed all this as if Donald Trump didn’t happen

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, chester said:

You do know that sh*t was made up right? There was no Trans character in that book at all. A prime example of someone making stuff up and doing the most while sheep-mentalitiy goes with it and repeats it. 

 

And while I do think she needs to educate herself more on the matter, she doesn't seem nowhere near as impactful to make a difference on the views of people on trans-people. 

Did you read the book yourself either? There may be “no trans character” in that book but there’s a very problematic anti-trans stereotype she runs with. 
 

You think Dennis Creed, a cross dressing serial killer, who lures his victims as a cross dresser may not have a bad influence on the trans agenda? Or is it not worrisome for such an established novelist to run with such a cliche? It’s an old transphobic trope that dates back decades. She should and can know better. 
 

Would you also think writing him as a gay character and using the age-old trope of gay men being serial killers would not be at very least problematic but also very damaging given the fact the minority in question is already stereotyped and stigmatised? :skull: 

 

And this character/book is on top of all the other inherently anti-trans TERF non-sense she is continuously spewing. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Almost Home said:

Did you read the book yourself either? There may be “no trans character” in that book but there’s a very problematic anti-trans stereotype she runs with. 
 

You think Dennis Creed, a cross dressing serial killer, who lures his victims as a cross dresser may not have a bad influence on the trans agenda? Or is it not worrisome for such an established novelist to run with such a cliche? It’s an old transphobic trope that dates back decades. She should and can know better. 
 

Would you also think writing him as a gay character and using the age-old trope of gay men being serial killers would not be at very least problematic but also very damaging given the fact the minority in question is already stereotyped and stigmatised? :skull: 

 

And this character/book is on top of all the other inherently anti-trans TERF non-sense she is continuously spewing. 

Yes, in fact, I read it. He dressed up as a women to lure drugged women into his van because it was his opinion that they would let them be helped by a woman and would be wary of men trying to help them. Also, please explain since when cross-dressing is the same as being trans? 

 

If we go by that rule many more books/films/tv shows are problematic since there is more media out there with gay people being serial killers. Not to mention there have been famous gay serial kilelrs in the past....

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, chester said:

Yes, in fact, I read it. He dressed up as a women to lure drugged women into his van because it was his opinion that they would let them be helped by a woman and would be wary of men trying to help them. Also, please explain since when cross-dressing is the same as being trans? 

 

If we go by that rule many more books/films/tv shows are problematic since there is more media out there with gay people being serial killers. Not to mention there have been famous gay serial kilelrs in the past....

It’s an age-old cliche a writer (I hope) as intelligent as JK Rowling has no business using. 
 

TERFs continuously refer to trans women as “crossdressers” and insist they make them feel unsafe and having a character like that only feeds into that sentiment.
 

Think of the entire “bathroom issue” for a second and the message it is trying to send under the guise of “safety” and telling women to feel unsafe around other trans women cause they are just crossdressing as women. This is similar.
 

Many books are in fact problematic and while anyone can write their characters in whichever way they see fit it’s still alarming someone with the sizeable audience she has would go to these lengths knowing damn well she’s going against a minority group she can only further hurt with her remarks or even characters that are a problematic incarnation of old stereotypes. 
 

I’m certain she’s more creative than that

Link to post
Share on other sites

Also funny how all the people defending her are suddenly mum in here when it comes to understanding/facing the damage to an already marginalized community she's doing. :deadbanana4:

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Almost Home said:

Also funny how all the people defending her are suddenly mum in here when it comes to understanding/facing the damage to an already marginalized community she's doing. :deadbanana4:

Regarding our discussion, let's agree to disagree on this topic. And honestly, I don't see that much harm in her book and I find it a reach, I found her essay more harmful in many ways. You appear to be more hurt by this than me, so to you it sucks that she made those comments and couldn't keep it to herself. I do agree she should know better. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Almost Home said:

Also funny how all the people defending her are suddenly mum in here when it comes to understanding/facing the damage to an already marginalized community she's doing. :deadbanana4:

They've moved on to "regional income inequality". 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, chester said:

Regarding our discussion, let's agree to disagree on this topic. And honestly, I don't see that much harm in her book and I find it a reach, I found her essay more harmful in many ways. You appear to be more hurt by this than me, so to you it sucks that she made those comments and couldn't keep it to herself. I do agree she should know better. 

Well I certainly agree she's made it so much worse with her social media behavior, statements she's put out and essays. Her essay is definitely the biggest TERF piece of the puzzle and the talking points are just... well lets not get into that now.

 

The book/character itself is problematic but I wouldn't bring out the pitchfork over that isolated incident. I would expect better but I wouldn't hold it against her to make an error in judgment and have a lack of foresight like anyone can.

 

In her case at this point we can both see there's a clear pattern of behavior that can't be denied. If she has her own past traumas, issues or misconceptions about the trans community she should be more wary of airing them out so publicly knowing how marginalized the trans community already is and how big her platform is. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a good idea to not view Rowling's posts if they are of no use to you. People are complaining against a woman sharing an opinion and unfortunately, she's one of the most famous and influential people in the world who could better use the platform she has. Nevertheless, I chose to read two trans-related articles featuring a trans person rather than the same topic arising again every few months. Choices.

Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Banksy said:

It's a good idea to not view Rowling's posts if they are of no use to you. People are complaining against a woman sharing an opinion and unfortunately, she's one of the most famous and influential people in the world who could better use the platform she has. Nevertheless, I chose to read two trans-related articles featuring a trans person rather than the same topic arising again every few months. Choices.

Well a lot of us choose to get educated by people with actual insight and experience but sadly that's not the case for a great deal of individuals and then there's a lot of them (specifically TERFs in this case) who will simply use her status as a way to legitimize their existing anti-trans bigoted views. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Oni said:

This thread smells very

 

tumblr_pdx1yqzxfM1w3ryav_1280.jpg

 

0edf8f60ba1826c92c23b1f272729a69cc5ef481

LMAO right. Most of the stuff she said was not that bad, and in fact the responses in this threat and attempt to deny biological sex if anything is the reason why trans rights are lagging. Doctors, nurses and midwives are now being told to use gender inclusive terminology and avoid terms like "mothers with breasts" for "people with chests", ridiculous.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9241217/Hospital-tells-midwives-use-terms-like-birthing-parents-human-milk.html

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Orsay said:

one of the responses to this thread in particular :biblio:

 

she is disgusting! and it was not one tweet, her actions over the past few years amount to an all out assault on the trans community veiled in bullsh*t statements about "well i support trans people!" meanwhile making it clear through her language that, because of their biology, she will never truly see trans women as women. she also alerted her followers to the "crisis" of de-transitioning among young people and has spoken way too comfortably about a issues that she has no place as a straight, cis white woman speaking on. as if the "think about the children!!" narrative hasn't been weaponized by homophobes and transphobes alike for decades.

Trans women will never be biological women. That's all she is saying, from what I take. PMS, Childbirth etc and many biological functions of cis women are integral to their womanhood, and has been since the very beginning of humanity. If pointing that out is triggering, you need to grow thicker skin. We cannot deny/downplay biology for the comfort of a tiny minority. Some people black/brown people are born with albinism, does that mean we should stop considering darker skin a fundamental part of their identity and how they experience oppression?

 

And detransitioning is a major concern. Especially with FTM trans people, where there's also a strong correlation between autism and detransitioning. Whilst mtf referrals have also risen, ftm has risen exponentially, much faster. Of course that's not necessarily a bad thing, more trans people feeling comfortable seeking treatment and becoming who they are etc, but there's no denying there's also a rise of people who will regret their decision, don't fully understand the implications of their decisions and even their own gender identity at such a young age.

Link to post
Share on other sites
×
×
  • Create New...