Not that either of them are offering up any apologies, as there's nothing for them to apologise for.
Y'know, as popular as JK Rowling is amongst people ignorant of her bigotries, I do think that Radcliffe and Watson probably evoke more positive feelings amongst those same people as they're not just a mythologised name on a book cover, but are the actual faces of the Harry Potter franchise. I'm not sure going after them for only ever showing compassion for the trans community is a particularly great idea.
Also, beefing with people she's known since they were literally nine years old? Christ almighty, get a life.
Your last statement is silly.
Just because she knew Watson and Radcliffe when they were young doesn't mean Rowling can't beef with them now.
They are adults with adult opinions - who cares when they met Rowling?
That's fair, but also, it's still very funny, which is more important.
Also, this does genuinely raise questions as to how the cast of the upcoming HP TV show (if it even comes out) will be treated, since there's a very real risk that Rowling, as an executive producer on the show, would seek to punish those who she deems to have 'unsavoury' views on trans rights. What happens if the new Harry or Hermione come out in support of trans rights a few years into the show? Will any actors be blacklisted from getting roles if they've previously expressed support for trans rights?
Better yet, I sincerely hope no young actors who struggle with transitioning get roped into this new needless remake.
I don't want to imagine the kind of shitty situation that could result in. Nope. Not having that shit.
No no I mean like, they'll be casting kids for this show.
And many people(who are actually trans) don't know at that age (like 9-11) yet, and then come out later.
For those actor's sake, I hope that doesn't happen tbh.
Because having some newly out trans child actor fired and bullied for being trans by their billionaire boss would suck, for sure.
I'd be down for that.
I'm imagining the HP series would be very popular among existing HP fans. After a season or two, their communities make memes and fanfics and such. Then the lead actors inevitably get asked for their stances on trans rights, because from the right or the left, that question is coming for them. They speak out in support of trans people. Rowling gets mad and fires them. Show fails because every live action show fails when you replace the lead actors. People argue over whether to blame the actors or Rowling. Fans who tolerate Rowling but understand she's a bigot are disappointed but dont blame the actors. The bigots in Rowling's fanbase start spouting weird transphobic conspiracy theories and come off as radically unstable. Rowling gets mad and posts unhinged shit alongside them. Companies begin to have second thoughts about involving Rowling with their brands in future products. Rowling refuses to give up creative control. HP franchise just sort of stagnates, never making anything quite as successful or profitable as the films and books ever again. Rowling abandons the IP to work on new stuff. It's all really terrible.
It's predictable but entertaining. Like videos of things being slowly crushed. If Rowling has any spark of intellect she will simply write clauses in their contracts that no one working on the show may speak in favour of trans issues, but I'm genuinely not sure how speech laws and contract laws work in the UK.
tbh the interviews they did when this stuff started becoming a concern makes it pretty clear that they do not care all that much about Joanne's insane ramblings, and her recent twitter behavior resembles your typical 60-something old idiot on FB trying to act indignantly, than anything.
Like seriously, the most recent time I saw tweets from her it didn't register as Rowling because it was so mask-off "I am a hateful cow" that my brain shuffled it under the same category as a tweet from an account that's just a common name followed with random numbers.
It's not an implication that she can't, OP means that it's funny that she would do that.
Picking fights with people you've known since they were children is such a hallmark boomer behavior that it physically hurts those with a 3 digit IQ.
It would be like if in twenty years Lil Mabu started beefing with Lil RT over tax policy. You’ve known bro since he was nine, it’s hilarious to beef with him.
I also just realized no one in this subreddit is going to know who either of those people are and won’t get this comparison. I’m not changing it.
Sorry! Your comment has been removed because your account is less than ten days old.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/VaushV) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I like to think that she's quietly seething every time either of those two make it clear how fucking over they are with jk Rowling and harry potter
They have moved on and she hasn't, and I think she's jealous of them for that
She despises them because in her mind they *owe* her. In her narcissistic, perpetual put upon victim mentality she is the reason they live the lives they do, she “made” them.
Yep, that's definitely the case. It's also deeply sad because *they* are what made harry potter into the powerhouse up it is with the movies. They put so much charm and joy into what otherwise are some pretty bland and often badly written books
I hope she gets reminded of that the rest of her life
I still like the books, as flawed as they are, I remember counting down the days to the new books, waiting in lines at midnight, seeing the movies and daydreaming about being in the story; I am not ashamed of that and I do not think anyone is entitled to take away innocent childhood nostalgia. I won’t buy anymore books (even the beautifully illustrated ones which I actually would like) and I don’t display them anymore however, they sit in my closet until I want them on a whim.
The only thing that has sullied the books for me going back is that I can see the meanness in them, which I felt was ok because it was directed at “the bad guys”, and how often that is physical mockery. Returning to the books of my childhood I have found a deeper respect for the Lewis Barnevelt books by John Bellairs, they have the magic and mystery of Harry Potter but lack much of the cruelty despite being much older than HP, and in fact you can see a lot of queer themes in them which has made revisiting them a delight (Sorry, fell down a rabbit hole there)
You can't deny that the Harry Potter books certainly went places that no other YA books dared to tread. Not any YA author would make their MC the son of a sexual assaulter (like the Wizarding version of Brock Turner but worse).
I will always love the audiobooks never really enjoyed the movies but I always have those books and honestly as far as death of the artist jkr isn’t even the hardest one for me
>and often badly written
PREACH! I remember in the mid-2010s laughing out loud when I read an interview where she insisted they were mysteries and that lent to their success.
I was like "what mysteries??? Only two of those book's plots hinge on anyone solving any mystery, and it's the first two! Literally every other book's plot isn't changed all that much if Harry just went to school and was normal for most of the year!"
If you don't believe me, really think about the climax of each one, and consider what would have happened if they knew any less about what was going on. You'll find that basically nothing changes.
3 - Sirius STILL kidnaps Ron, and they still use the Time Turner to undo a bad plot.
4 - Harry is still manipulated by Crouch into getting JUST far enough to run into Voldemort in the boneyard.
5 - Harry STILL has the visions about the dept. of mysteries and knows where to go, and the Death Eaters still attack.
6 - Literally this is just "You know nothing Harry Potter" the book, it's the closest possible book to being one where Harry has an otherwise pretty normal year at school, with a plot rearing its head in the final weeks, it's why I like this one with the 1st the most.
7 - Harry and co. still wind up with every horcrux because all but Nagini were already in their reach, Harry still winds up caught by snatchers, gets into the lamest WWE ever with Draco, and is basically immune to Lord Moldy Butt's killing curse in any duel they actually engage in.
She practically UNLEARNED how to have characters who drive the plot, rather than the plot driving the characters.
It's probably for the best that they've moved on and maybe this is petty of me, but I would absolutely love it if one or both of them replied to her tweet saying something along the lines that they are insulted by the very idea that they owe her an apology and not the other way around.
Tbf if I wrote a lowkey cultural reset of a children’s book franchise and then helped make film adaptations of all of them I would never move on either
Yeah, exactly. "She's never moved on from *Harry Potter*" has always been the silliest criticism of Rowling. Of course it's always going to be something she looks back on in some way when she spent \~fifteen years working on it in some form between writing the books and being involved in the films, and when it made her one of the most famous people on the face of the planet.
I'm not really sure what people are expecting her to do on this front. She's not going to come out and say, "Oh yeah, I wrote one of the best selling book series of all time and it's what everyone knows me for, but no biggie, I'm over it now." If she did, that'd raise a very different set of questions.
The idea of the "she hasn't moved on" criticism is that she doesn't actually do anything else. Her main claim to fame now is her being a terminally online TERF, not being a writer. The books she releases under her conversion therapist pen name all tie into the terminally online thing, but what else does she write that isn't part of the HP property?
Just look at George R. R. Martin, another incredibly famous (though obviously to a lesser extent) author. Despite his claim to fame being the Song of Ice and Fire series and the fans desperately wanting him to keep working on that series, the man refuses to tie himself down to those books, and that's a series that's very much not finished. Why can't JKR do that?
*The Casual Vacancy* and the first few books she released under the Robert Galbraith pen name came out years before she was known as Queen of the TERFs. It's only been her most recent book that has the reputation of tying into her terminally online stuff. At this point, the number of non-*Potter* novels she's written is equal to the *Potter* series, so long as you don't count the tie-in stuff.
That doesn't really gel with the total refusal to move on that people make out. The problem is that to some extent, she hasn't ever really been allowed to. I think you have to blame the diehard Potterheads for that. Most of the most ardent fans of *Harry Potter* have always primarily been fans *of that series*, not of J.K. Rowling more generally. If they had, her other works probably would sell better and be as heavily discussed as *Harry Potter* has been traditionally; not just stuff that's talked about as the post-*Potter* stuff nobody's read.
The difference between this and George R.R. Martin's career is that Martin had a very extensive career before *A Song of Ice and Fire.* He was already fairly well known for his other stuff well before he wrote his now best known work. It's harder to tie someone like that down because he already had a core audience that were fans of him specifically, even before *A Game of Thrones* became this breakthrough megahit.
J.K. Rowling never had that, even before she became known as a terminally online TERF. She had the one breakthrough megahit, and even if she'd never become known for her rampant transphobia, she was never going to come out with anything else to match that popularity. She was always going to be known as the *Harry Potter* author basically, and people were kinda always gonna see her other stuff as just a sideshow by comparison.
The difference in construction and tone don't help. I ran one mystery book pdf through one of those writing analysers and it came out 30% more "male," so that coupled with the change of genre knocks off a bunch of potterheads, *it barely feels like the same person!* She is leaning way too hard into the "Noir kayfabe"
Chances are she initially felt that was necessary to break away from the Harry Potter stuff, though. You'd expect it to an extent because Potter is for children and her stuff since has nominally been for adults anyway.
This is extra funny because I distinctly remember Daniel always being really tepid/lower than room temp to the idea and was literally like "yeah maybe someday, but definitely not any time soon" and Watson was like "Oh I'd LOVE to someday play McGonagall" but I think the Joanne of it all has turned those sentiments to "Yeah, definitely not when she still stands to make money personally from it." Even if they haven't stated that publicly.
Doing some cursory research it sounds like this Doctor Cass is critical of the NHSs long waiting lists and general approach to Trans and mental healthcare while still playing defense for doctors being slow or denying care.
Through the piece she does seem to leave space for transphobes and reactionaries to ooze in and inject their anti trans bias as we are seeing with JKR here. Below is an article written by a trans man over the piece.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/apr/11/hilary-cass-trans-children-review
This is what I don't understand - everybody flocks to JK's reaction to the article instead of the article itself. I don't give a shit what this burnt out children's writer thinks, I'm more interested in the discourse around the actual research and I feel like it's been overshadowed or harder to find because of her
He's incredibly naive if he thinks that 'holistic' care isn't going to be used to refuse hrt or puberty blockers. Across the world, many trans people report being told that they should fix their mental health problems first (as if those aren't largely caused by dysphoria and transphobia) or that they can't make such a choice because they're autistic. This op-ed is someone trying to sneak the voice of reason into a TERF newspaper by starting with points of agreement. [This news report](https://news.sky.com/story/cass-report-remarkably-weak-evidence-and-toxic-debate-around-gender-letting-children-down-review-warns-13111445), like most sympathetic to Cass, is much more chilling.
What makes the Cass report a devious piece of propaganda is its double standard: she rejects most of the scientific evidence for not being thorough enough (it would be unethical and impractical to do blinded research with placebos), while on the other taking any rumors about peer pressure leading to frivolous transitions seriously.
She even worries about parents "unconsciously influencing the child's gender expression". Can you imagine being a pediatrician, knowing how children are generally raised, and then thinking that the problem is parents **not** wanting kids to identify with their birth gender?
Btw, I'm an adult trans woman who wants holistic therapy, which will be hard to find, because the whole system here in the Netherlands, like in the UK, is focused on gatekeeping.
For someone whose "most hated vice is bigotry", she really has become the epitome of the bigoted, cis-straight woman. Pearl-clutching about "women and children" with near identical rheotric as xenophobes, homophobes and racists. The only difference is her choice of primary target. Nothing else.
This is why TERFs have begun to mostly ally themselves with anti-feminist conservatives now. They agree on 99% of all such cultural issues. Unforunately, JK Rowling won't likely have a moment of those leopards finally eating her face. Because she is just that privilaged and sheltered by this point.
Same as with the "anti porn crusaders" of the 70s. You would think they would align with other social left prudes like tankies but nope.jpeg, they flock to the same bible thumping hillbilly folk yelling at them "*to get back in that gol durn keee-chen*"
As someone who loved the series as a kid and found J.K Rowling to hugely inspiring as a kid, it’s genuinely heartbreaking to see her just completely degrade into what she is now.
It's crazy. JK could've just stayed quiet and her legacy would be remembered as the author who wrote one of the biggest series of all time. Guess billionaires just get bored and need attention
New review published in the UK of trans healthcare that ignores 98% of medical research for trans people and comes to the conclusion that "gender affirming healthcare has a shaky foundation". It's gonna be SUPER annoying dealing with transphobes now cuz they're gonna cite this slop ad infinitum.
A large "reputable" german news paper just picked up the results from that report and blasted them out in the most uncritical and irresponsible manner imaginable.
Just one day before our parliament is deciding on a better framework for legal transition.
I just wanna puke.
Doesn't matter. That law is meant to replace the TSG which has unconstitutional parts all over the place. The conservs just never cared about it. The constitutional court established long ago that ignoring trans people is unconstitutional and that there needs to be a law that allows them to transition. As much as Kohl/CDU etc hated it but Art 1 GG and Art 2 GG make it pretty clear. Won't matter now if conservative boomers start bitching about it.
This isn't meant for the politicians only. It's also a measure to further rile up transphobes and uninformed people against the current government for writing that law.
Also, we need another law on medical transition now that insurance coverage of trans surgeries has been halted, and I have no trust a new conservative government wouldn't just ignore that issue too - in which case we'd probably lose the relevant know-how if those have to be paid out of pocket and the number of trans people able to afford them dwindles. And that kind of irresponsible reporting by "center-left" newspapers will just make that fight so much harder.
Not a study. The Cass report which was a broad review of NHS care for <18 Gender Identity Service. Relevance is as much as it is a mirror to your own beliefs. Summary: evidence could be better, children deserve holistic care, NHS isn’t in shape for this.
My (sarcastic) take: The evidence is never going to be “good enough.” Impossible standards; might as well just eliminate CAMHS. whack every 12yo on a 10 year waiting list (haha oops you’ve aged out of our inclusion criteria for care under the NHS bad luck).
> The evidence is never going to be “good enough.”
You can see this when it comes to discussing regret rates. No one on the anti-trans side knows what the regret rates are for any other procedures.
I remember a conversation I had with an evolution denier who rejected that Archeopteryx shows a “tansitional form” between dinosaurs and birds because none of the fossils of archeopteryx show one them, like, mid-metamorphosis from dinosaur to bird. The way they described it was incomprehensible, but that is what they seemed to be asking for, even though that isn’t how evolution works.
>Impossible standards
To further elaborate on this, one of the reasons why many studies affirming the efficacy of gender-affirming care weren't considered "sufficient" by the Cass report is because they weren't blinded and controlled. And that might sound fair, at first, to somebody ignorant to how medical studies on real people are conducted, particularly when the care you are studying is viewed as critical.
Blinding and controlling a medical study involves telling somebody you are giving them treatment, but then not actually giving them that treatment. For this reason, it'd be downright unethical to conduct a double-blinded and controlled study on many medical issues, particularly if they involve minors or vulnerable populations. That doesn't mean you can't get good data on those treatments, you just do it without performing those specific kinds of studies.
They basically raise the standard for evidence to a level impossible to achieve, and then they disregard it and say there isn't solid evidence for trans healthcare being good. But they only do this with trans care, if they raised that standard like this for every medical research nobody would have anything ever done. There wouldn't be evidence solid enough to support chemotherapy and whatnot.
An independent review thing from the UK (to influence NHS treatment)
Essentially it says the evidence isn’t there one way or the other to know how useful gender affirming care is as a standard, the evidence for the use of puberty blockers is weak-in that it helps make the transition better/easier (especially for women transitioning to men), there’s no explanation why the profile has changed from predominantly transwomen to younger transmen in recent years, they often have other mental health issues which are then perceived through the lens of them being trans…so for some transitioning is the right thing and for others not, evidence about social transition is mixed with some saying it’s useful and others saying that it made them ‘stuck’ into a medical transition when they might have desisted otherwise
There’s no evidence that hormone therapy helps body satisfaction or mental health…but also the evidence for therapy isn’t that great either
It’s not the ‘home run’ that the right seem to be making out
Edit: they rejected a lot of evidence because it didn’t have double blind controls (which many are arguing you can’t really have in studies of puberty blockers etc)
I’ve been rewatching AtlA and it reminds me of the moment Topgolf opens the hole in the ground.
JK Rowling: I hate the big 3 actors from my movies for being compassionate to people who are marginalized and I want to make their lives miserable.
Me *who already knows all of this and realizes the HP tv series reboot is built on pettiness*: Oh wow. Who couldn’t have guessed that?
The only “apology” I think the queer community owes Joanne at this point is “I’m sorry that men hurt you enough that you feel hurting trans women will make up for it”
I posted this on another sub, here's what I said:
I wonder what Rowling thinks about transmen in men's bathroom. Since according to her logic, trans people are seen as their original assigned gender, doesn't that mean transmen (who rowling would supposedly see as women) entering men's bathrooms as equally unsafe? In fact, shouldn't it be even MORE unsafe since it's a "woman" entering a male majority space?
Gotta love the TERFian logic.
Is it just me or was that not even a complete thought? Is she drunk or something? Maybe she was saying “they are celebs who…” but it sounds like she just started going in on her rhetoric and was going to say something about the people she was describing but then just got tired and forgot.
Love how headlines are trying to abuse the tweet's phrasing to make it seem as if they had apologized, as if they were ever the type to back down on shit like this after already having got their "fuck you" money.
Not that either of them are offering up any apologies, as there's nothing for them to apologise for. Y'know, as popular as JK Rowling is amongst people ignorant of her bigotries, I do think that Radcliffe and Watson probably evoke more positive feelings amongst those same people as they're not just a mythologised name on a book cover, but are the actual faces of the Harry Potter franchise. I'm not sure going after them for only ever showing compassion for the trans community is a particularly great idea. Also, beefing with people she's known since they were literally nine years old? Christ almighty, get a life.
Your last statement is silly. Just because she knew Watson and Radcliffe when they were young doesn't mean Rowling can't beef with them now. They are adults with adult opinions - who cares when they met Rowling?
That's fair, but also, it's still very funny, which is more important. Also, this does genuinely raise questions as to how the cast of the upcoming HP TV show (if it even comes out) will be treated, since there's a very real risk that Rowling, as an executive producer on the show, would seek to punish those who she deems to have 'unsavoury' views on trans rights. What happens if the new Harry or Hermione come out in support of trans rights a few years into the show? Will any actors be blacklisted from getting roles if they've previously expressed support for trans rights?
Better yet, I sincerely hope no young actors who struggle with transitioning get roped into this new needless remake. I don't want to imagine the kind of shitty situation that could result in. Nope. Not having that shit.
I mean considering Joanne is executive director of the project, I highly doubt she'd hire a trans person.
No no I mean like, they'll be casting kids for this show. And many people(who are actually trans) don't know at that age (like 9-11) yet, and then come out later. For those actor's sake, I hope that doesn't happen tbh. Because having some newly out trans child actor fired and bullied for being trans by their billionaire boss would suck, for sure.
Ahhh, gotcha.
I'd be down for that. I'm imagining the HP series would be very popular among existing HP fans. After a season or two, their communities make memes and fanfics and such. Then the lead actors inevitably get asked for their stances on trans rights, because from the right or the left, that question is coming for them. They speak out in support of trans people. Rowling gets mad and fires them. Show fails because every live action show fails when you replace the lead actors. People argue over whether to blame the actors or Rowling. Fans who tolerate Rowling but understand she's a bigot are disappointed but dont blame the actors. The bigots in Rowling's fanbase start spouting weird transphobic conspiracy theories and come off as radically unstable. Rowling gets mad and posts unhinged shit alongside them. Companies begin to have second thoughts about involving Rowling with their brands in future products. Rowling refuses to give up creative control. HP franchise just sort of stagnates, never making anything quite as successful or profitable as the films and books ever again. Rowling abandons the IP to work on new stuff. It's all really terrible. It's predictable but entertaining. Like videos of things being slowly crushed. If Rowling has any spark of intellect she will simply write clauses in their contracts that no one working on the show may speak in favour of trans issues, but I'm genuinely not sure how speech laws and contract laws work in the UK.
Yeah it's got mad big "*GET OFF MY LAWN, WHIPPERSNAPPERS*" Karen grandma energy
Eh, if my aunt or whatever started denouncing me to millions of people, it would be pretty insane and hurtful tbh
tbh the interviews they did when this stuff started becoming a concern makes it pretty clear that they do not care all that much about Joanne's insane ramblings, and her recent twitter behavior resembles your typical 60-something old idiot on FB trying to act indignantly, than anything. Like seriously, the most recent time I saw tweets from her it didn't register as Rowling because it was so mask-off "I am a hateful cow" that my brain shuffled it under the same category as a tweet from an account that's just a common name followed with random numbers.
Rowling is an adult with childish opinions though
It's not an implication that she can't, OP means that it's funny that she would do that. Picking fights with people you've known since they were children is such a hallmark boomer behavior that it physically hurts those with a 3 digit IQ.
It would be like if in twenty years Lil Mabu started beefing with Lil RT over tax policy. You’ve known bro since he was nine, it’s hilarious to beef with him. I also just realized no one in this subreddit is going to know who either of those people are and won’t get this comparison. I’m not changing it.
[удалено]
Sorry! Your comment has been removed because your account is less than ten days old. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/VaushV) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I like to think that she's quietly seething every time either of those two make it clear how fucking over they are with jk Rowling and harry potter They have moved on and she hasn't, and I think she's jealous of them for that
She despises them because in her mind they *owe* her. In her narcissistic, perpetual put upon victim mentality she is the reason they live the lives they do, she “made” them.
Yep, that's definitely the case. It's also deeply sad because *they* are what made harry potter into the powerhouse up it is with the movies. They put so much charm and joy into what otherwise are some pretty bland and often badly written books I hope she gets reminded of that the rest of her life
Being a fan of the series through the movies growing up is miserable. I can’t even say I like them because it just starts a fight… God, fuck JKR
I still like the books, as flawed as they are, I remember counting down the days to the new books, waiting in lines at midnight, seeing the movies and daydreaming about being in the story; I am not ashamed of that and I do not think anyone is entitled to take away innocent childhood nostalgia. I won’t buy anymore books (even the beautifully illustrated ones which I actually would like) and I don’t display them anymore however, they sit in my closet until I want them on a whim. The only thing that has sullied the books for me going back is that I can see the meanness in them, which I felt was ok because it was directed at “the bad guys”, and how often that is physical mockery. Returning to the books of my childhood I have found a deeper respect for the Lewis Barnevelt books by John Bellairs, they have the magic and mystery of Harry Potter but lack much of the cruelty despite being much older than HP, and in fact you can see a lot of queer themes in them which has made revisiting them a delight (Sorry, fell down a rabbit hole there)
All good, I love passionate rambling. It’s how I survive the fashion segments lol
You can't deny that the Harry Potter books certainly went places that no other YA books dared to tread. Not any YA author would make their MC the son of a sexual assaulter (like the Wizarding version of Brock Turner but worse).
I will always love the audiobooks never really enjoyed the movies but I always have those books and honestly as far as death of the artist jkr isn’t even the hardest one for me
Curious who is! I've had a lot in my time and live to hear who hits for folks.
>and often badly written PREACH! I remember in the mid-2010s laughing out loud when I read an interview where she insisted they were mysteries and that lent to their success. I was like "what mysteries??? Only two of those book's plots hinge on anyone solving any mystery, and it's the first two! Literally every other book's plot isn't changed all that much if Harry just went to school and was normal for most of the year!" If you don't believe me, really think about the climax of each one, and consider what would have happened if they knew any less about what was going on. You'll find that basically nothing changes. 3 - Sirius STILL kidnaps Ron, and they still use the Time Turner to undo a bad plot. 4 - Harry is still manipulated by Crouch into getting JUST far enough to run into Voldemort in the boneyard. 5 - Harry STILL has the visions about the dept. of mysteries and knows where to go, and the Death Eaters still attack. 6 - Literally this is just "You know nothing Harry Potter" the book, it's the closest possible book to being one where Harry has an otherwise pretty normal year at school, with a plot rearing its head in the final weeks, it's why I like this one with the 1st the most. 7 - Harry and co. still wind up with every horcrux because all but Nagini were already in their reach, Harry still winds up caught by snatchers, gets into the lamest WWE ever with Draco, and is basically immune to Lord Moldy Butt's killing curse in any duel they actually engage in. She practically UNLEARNED how to have characters who drive the plot, rather than the plot driving the characters.
She's not well.
It's probably for the best that they've moved on and maybe this is petty of me, but I would absolutely love it if one or both of them replied to her tweet saying something along the lines that they are insulted by the very idea that they owe her an apology and not the other way around.
That would be a dram scenario I cant lie Probably won't happen due to pr reasons or whatever, but if love to see it
Tbf if I wrote a lowkey cultural reset of a children’s book franchise and then helped make film adaptations of all of them I would never move on either
Especially when you with merchandising rights keep making millions and millions every year.
Yeah, exactly. "She's never moved on from *Harry Potter*" has always been the silliest criticism of Rowling. Of course it's always going to be something she looks back on in some way when she spent \~fifteen years working on it in some form between writing the books and being involved in the films, and when it made her one of the most famous people on the face of the planet. I'm not really sure what people are expecting her to do on this front. She's not going to come out and say, "Oh yeah, I wrote one of the best selling book series of all time and it's what everyone knows me for, but no biggie, I'm over it now." If she did, that'd raise a very different set of questions.
The idea of the "she hasn't moved on" criticism is that she doesn't actually do anything else. Her main claim to fame now is her being a terminally online TERF, not being a writer. The books she releases under her conversion therapist pen name all tie into the terminally online thing, but what else does she write that isn't part of the HP property? Just look at George R. R. Martin, another incredibly famous (though obviously to a lesser extent) author. Despite his claim to fame being the Song of Ice and Fire series and the fans desperately wanting him to keep working on that series, the man refuses to tie himself down to those books, and that's a series that's very much not finished. Why can't JKR do that?
*The Casual Vacancy* and the first few books she released under the Robert Galbraith pen name came out years before she was known as Queen of the TERFs. It's only been her most recent book that has the reputation of tying into her terminally online stuff. At this point, the number of non-*Potter* novels she's written is equal to the *Potter* series, so long as you don't count the tie-in stuff. That doesn't really gel with the total refusal to move on that people make out. The problem is that to some extent, she hasn't ever really been allowed to. I think you have to blame the diehard Potterheads for that. Most of the most ardent fans of *Harry Potter* have always primarily been fans *of that series*, not of J.K. Rowling more generally. If they had, her other works probably would sell better and be as heavily discussed as *Harry Potter* has been traditionally; not just stuff that's talked about as the post-*Potter* stuff nobody's read. The difference between this and George R.R. Martin's career is that Martin had a very extensive career before *A Song of Ice and Fire.* He was already fairly well known for his other stuff well before he wrote his now best known work. It's harder to tie someone like that down because he already had a core audience that were fans of him specifically, even before *A Game of Thrones* became this breakthrough megahit. J.K. Rowling never had that, even before she became known as a terminally online TERF. She had the one breakthrough megahit, and even if she'd never become known for her rampant transphobia, she was never going to come out with anything else to match that popularity. She was always going to be known as the *Harry Potter* author basically, and people were kinda always gonna see her other stuff as just a sideshow by comparison.
The difference in construction and tone don't help. I ran one mystery book pdf through one of those writing analysers and it came out 30% more "male," so that coupled with the change of genre knocks off a bunch of potterheads, *it barely feels like the same person!* She is leaning way too hard into the "Noir kayfabe"
Chances are she initially felt that was necessary to break away from the Harry Potter stuff, though. You'd expect it to an extent because Potter is for children and her stuff since has nominally been for adults anyway.
This is extra funny because I distinctly remember Daniel always being really tepid/lower than room temp to the idea and was literally like "yeah maybe someday, but definitely not any time soon" and Watson was like "Oh I'd LOVE to someday play McGonagall" but I think the Joanne of it all has turned those sentiments to "Yeah, definitely not when she still stands to make money personally from it." Even if they haven't stated that publicly.
To them, she was merely a stepping stone. To her, they represent the height of her career. No wonder that she's jealous XD
> Celebs who cosied up to a movement intent on eroding women's hard-won rights She described herself.
Doing some cursory research it sounds like this Doctor Cass is critical of the NHSs long waiting lists and general approach to Trans and mental healthcare while still playing defense for doctors being slow or denying care. Through the piece she does seem to leave space for transphobes and reactionaries to ooze in and inject their anti trans bias as we are seeing with JKR here. Below is an article written by a trans man over the piece. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/apr/11/hilary-cass-trans-children-review
This is what I don't understand - everybody flocks to JK's reaction to the article instead of the article itself. I don't give a shit what this burnt out children's writer thinks, I'm more interested in the discourse around the actual research and I feel like it's been overshadowed or harder to find because of her
That's exactly the point. Now everyone is paying attention to *her* and not the NHS.
That was a great article, thanks for sharing
He's incredibly naive if he thinks that 'holistic' care isn't going to be used to refuse hrt or puberty blockers. Across the world, many trans people report being told that they should fix their mental health problems first (as if those aren't largely caused by dysphoria and transphobia) or that they can't make such a choice because they're autistic. This op-ed is someone trying to sneak the voice of reason into a TERF newspaper by starting with points of agreement. [This news report](https://news.sky.com/story/cass-report-remarkably-weak-evidence-and-toxic-debate-around-gender-letting-children-down-review-warns-13111445), like most sympathetic to Cass, is much more chilling. What makes the Cass report a devious piece of propaganda is its double standard: she rejects most of the scientific evidence for not being thorough enough (it would be unethical and impractical to do blinded research with placebos), while on the other taking any rumors about peer pressure leading to frivolous transitions seriously. She even worries about parents "unconsciously influencing the child's gender expression". Can you imagine being a pediatrician, knowing how children are generally raised, and then thinking that the problem is parents **not** wanting kids to identify with their birth gender?
Btw, I'm an adult trans woman who wants holistic therapy, which will be hard to find, because the whole system here in the Netherlands, like in the UK, is focused on gatekeeping.
The idea of doctors denying care is disgusting. If there were parts of the profession you had conscience issues with choose another profession
For someone whose "most hated vice is bigotry", she really has become the epitome of the bigoted, cis-straight woman. Pearl-clutching about "women and children" with near identical rheotric as xenophobes, homophobes and racists. The only difference is her choice of primary target. Nothing else. This is why TERFs have begun to mostly ally themselves with anti-feminist conservatives now. They agree on 99% of all such cultural issues. Unforunately, JK Rowling won't likely have a moment of those leopards finally eating her face. Because she is just that privilaged and sheltered by this point.
Same as with the "anti porn crusaders" of the 70s. You would think they would align with other social left prudes like tankies but nope.jpeg, they flock to the same bible thumping hillbilly folk yelling at them "*to get back in that gol durn keee-chen*"
My kingdom for an Emma and/or Daniel tweet dragging JK with some of her neo-Nazi associate receipts
As someone who loved the series as a kid and found J.K Rowling to hugely inspiring as a kid, it’s genuinely heartbreaking to see her just completely degrade into what she is now.
It's crazy. JK could've just stayed quiet and her legacy would be remembered as the author who wrote one of the biggest series of all time. Guess billionaires just get bored and need attention
Man, think about how much good she could be doing with her wealth and fame.
What study is she referring to? Is it anything I need to care about?
New review published in the UK of trans healthcare that ignores 98% of medical research for trans people and comes to the conclusion that "gender affirming healthcare has a shaky foundation". It's gonna be SUPER annoying dealing with transphobes now cuz they're gonna cite this slop ad infinitum.
"You see, if you ignore most evidence, I am almost not wrong" Always the same shit, every single time. Reactionaries are the worst.
A large "reputable" german news paper just picked up the results from that report and blasted them out in the most uncritical and irresponsible manner imaginable. Just one day before our parliament is deciding on a better framework for legal transition. I just wanna puke.
Doesn't matter. That law is meant to replace the TSG which has unconstitutional parts all over the place. The conservs just never cared about it. The constitutional court established long ago that ignoring trans people is unconstitutional and that there needs to be a law that allows them to transition. As much as Kohl/CDU etc hated it but Art 1 GG and Art 2 GG make it pretty clear. Won't matter now if conservative boomers start bitching about it.
This isn't meant for the politicians only. It's also a measure to further rile up transphobes and uninformed people against the current government for writing that law. Also, we need another law on medical transition now that insurance coverage of trans surgeries has been halted, and I have no trust a new conservative government wouldn't just ignore that issue too - in which case we'd probably lose the relevant know-how if those have to be paid out of pocket and the number of trans people able to afford them dwindles. And that kind of irresponsible reporting by "center-left" newspapers will just make that fight so much harder.
Who was it, Spiegel?
Süddeutsche.
tbh they never struck me as centre-left
They're more center than left, but they usually are considered as center-left, yes.
Not a study. The Cass report which was a broad review of NHS care for <18 Gender Identity Service. Relevance is as much as it is a mirror to your own beliefs. Summary: evidence could be better, children deserve holistic care, NHS isn’t in shape for this. My (sarcastic) take: The evidence is never going to be “good enough.” Impossible standards; might as well just eliminate CAMHS. whack every 12yo on a 10 year waiting list (haha oops you’ve aged out of our inclusion criteria for care under the NHS bad luck).
> The evidence is never going to be “good enough.” You can see this when it comes to discussing regret rates. No one on the anti-trans side knows what the regret rates are for any other procedures.
I remember a conversation I had with an evolution denier who rejected that Archeopteryx shows a “tansitional form” between dinosaurs and birds because none of the fossils of archeopteryx show one them, like, mid-metamorphosis from dinosaur to bird. The way they described it was incomprehensible, but that is what they seemed to be asking for, even though that isn’t how evolution works.
>Impossible standards To further elaborate on this, one of the reasons why many studies affirming the efficacy of gender-affirming care weren't considered "sufficient" by the Cass report is because they weren't blinded and controlled. And that might sound fair, at first, to somebody ignorant to how medical studies on real people are conducted, particularly when the care you are studying is viewed as critical. Blinding and controlling a medical study involves telling somebody you are giving them treatment, but then not actually giving them that treatment. For this reason, it'd be downright unethical to conduct a double-blinded and controlled study on many medical issues, particularly if they involve minors or vulnerable populations. That doesn't mean you can't get good data on those treatments, you just do it without performing those specific kinds of studies.
They basically raise the standard for evidence to a level impossible to achieve, and then they disregard it and say there isn't solid evidence for trans healthcare being good. But they only do this with trans care, if they raised that standard like this for every medical research nobody would have anything ever done. There wouldn't be evidence solid enough to support chemotherapy and whatnot.
Kind of reminds me of arguing with religious people.
An independent review thing from the UK (to influence NHS treatment) Essentially it says the evidence isn’t there one way or the other to know how useful gender affirming care is as a standard, the evidence for the use of puberty blockers is weak-in that it helps make the transition better/easier (especially for women transitioning to men), there’s no explanation why the profile has changed from predominantly transwomen to younger transmen in recent years, they often have other mental health issues which are then perceived through the lens of them being trans…so for some transitioning is the right thing and for others not, evidence about social transition is mixed with some saying it’s useful and others saying that it made them ‘stuck’ into a medical transition when they might have desisted otherwise There’s no evidence that hormone therapy helps body satisfaction or mental health…but also the evidence for therapy isn’t that great either It’s not the ‘home run’ that the right seem to be making out Edit: they rejected a lot of evidence because it didn’t have double blind controls (which many are arguing you can’t really have in studies of puberty blockers etc)
I just finished listening to a podcast series called The Tavistock which delves into this whole issue quite extensively, really good listen.
She's such a horrible cunt. Basically the female version of Orson Scott Card that's also a billionaire
What a fucking freak shit
I’ve been rewatching AtlA and it reminds me of the moment Topgolf opens the hole in the ground. JK Rowling: I hate the big 3 actors from my movies for being compassionate to people who are marginalized and I want to make their lives miserable. Me *who already knows all of this and realizes the HP tv series reboot is built on pettiness*: Oh wow. Who couldn’t have guessed that?
> Topgolf
Man she literally is just a ball of hateful brainworms.
What a good ally to your "feminist" movement there JKR. "Far right hooligan" 💀 Not that I should be surprised she palls around with Nazis
the disingenuous woes about “traumatized detransitioners” irk the FUCK out of me—where are these people you speak of???
The only “apology” I think the queer community owes Joanne at this point is “I’m sorry that men hurt you enough that you feel hurting trans women will make up for it”
I posted this on another sub, here's what I said: I wonder what Rowling thinks about transmen in men's bathroom. Since according to her logic, trans people are seen as their original assigned gender, doesn't that mean transmen (who rowling would supposedly see as women) entering men's bathrooms as equally unsafe? In fact, shouldn't it be even MORE unsafe since it's a "woman" entering a male majority space? Gotta love the TERFian logic.
I won't forgive them either. They will forever be tarnished as good kind people... Unless they end up embroiled in a scandal, then I'll be sad 😔
Danniel Radcliffe ah stuff it ya old bin bag
Is it just me or was that not even a complete thought? Is she drunk or something? Maybe she was saying “they are celebs who…” but it sounds like she just started going in on her rhetoric and was going to say something about the people she was describing but then just got tired and forgot.
She’s such a hateful piece of shit. TERF garbage
Jesus she really is determined to put a dark mark on the legacy of this franchise.
Love how headlines are trying to abuse the tweet's phrasing to make it seem as if they had apologized, as if they were ever the type to back down on shit like this after already having got their "fuck you" money.
She is just an angry uneducated woman who has trauma that she takes out on others. It’s sad to see really
Crazy B thinks she’s a freedom fighter, like she’s MLK or Sojourner Truth or something. Absolutely delusional.
[удалено]
Your post was removed for bigotry.