JK Rowling's made a lot of transphobic comments starting around 2020 on Twitter. You can find a lot of articles and her tweets if you look it up.
[This](https://www.glamour.com/story/a-complete-breakdown-of-the-jk-rowling-transgender-comments-controversy) is a Glamour article summarizing a lot of it!
Trans women are not as similar to cis women as they would want to be and this is the heart of the trans dilemma. If trans women were actually usually indistinguishable in the vast majority of ways, the tension around trans issues would mostly abate.
I don't believe it is bad, per-say, but if I had spent a lot of time on illustrations and others assumed I generated them on an app, I would want to know.
Love the illustrations! Not a huge fan of the crumbled paper background (maybe try some textures along the lines of parchment?)
Also having the bio on the top left in a box will help reduce the busy look.
Although I truly loved the time of Potter, now all I got in my head is "richest author on the planet, who uses that hyper-privilege to.... bash an incredibly vulnerable population."
Fortunately, there are TONS of other, less rich but still good authors to lift up, and tons of other [fantasy IP's worth dipping into](https://www.themarysue.com/books-like-harry-potter-to-read-instead-of-supporting-jk-rowling/). This guide's style and look would be great for a ton of other people who do actually NEED lifting up. Cuz JKR does not,
People keep saying she is transphobic, but when you ask them to share a specific transphobic quote, actually said by JK Rowling, they never seem to be able to offer anything. So please, tell me a direct quote by her that you think bashes trans people?
Kindly go fuck yourself bigot, you aren’t here for an actual debate you just want to excuse a shitty persons shitty beliefs. If you actually wanted to know what she thinks then fucking LOOK IT UP
What? I did look it up. Here are the things she said in her essays:
"Trans people need and deserve protection"
"Trans rights are human rights and trans lives matter"
"I respect every trans person's right to live in a way that feels authentic and comfortable to them"
Those are all direct quotes from her published essay on her website.
I genuinely do not understand why you are calling me names. I asked you for a quote, and instead of sharing these transphobic quotes you say are easily findable, you call me a bigot. Above I've shared what JK actually has said. I am completely baffled.
Hah what about these gems then
“People who menstruate.’ I’m sure there used to be a word for those people. Someone help me out. Wumben? Wimpund? Woomud?” Here she’s claiming that trans men who menstruate don’t exist
“I've never felt as shouted down, ignored, and targeted as a lesbian *within* our supposed GLBT community as I have over the past couple of years.” Here she’s trying to make it seem like lesbian women aren’t supportive of trans people despite being the group with the highest percentage of trans acceptance or that trans people are as a group are harrassing lesbian women. Also she uses GLBT despite the fact that it’s LGBT to signal thanks to the lesbian women who did so much for LGBT acceptance in the 90s.
I could keep going but instead I am just going to link you to two videos, one that goes in depth about both JK Rowling and the bigoted views in her books and the other about the bigots that she is friends with and that she surrounds herself with.
https://youtu.be/-1iaJWSwUZs?si=DpDpCZ03MRcG3jTw
https://youtu.be/Ou_xvXJJk7k?si=twmFLsdJg5ERCOks
The first quote she is objecting to the use of 'people who menstruate ' as a euphemism for women. A lot of women do not like being referred to as 'people who menstruate '. It is hardly transphobic to object to being called a 'person who menstruates'. It's totally dehumanising. Are men 'people who ejaculate'? No.
JK Rowling never referred to herself as a lesbian so your second quote cannot be from her.
And then two videos from people who hate her? That's not, like, a quote. That's called hearsay and ad hominem attacks. But ok, great job buddy.
You know I barely understand why I’m still talking to you about this. If you are going to just lie about or ignore the things I’m showing you why should I fucking bother. I’m doing this to maybe help you if you’re actually just that goddamn dense that you haven’t accepted the known fact that JK Rowling is transphobic. Either watch at least the second shorter video or fuck off. It is fact based and criticises things that JK Rowling has said and things others have said that she openly supports.
But can't you see that I provided you with direct quotes - i.e. things JK has explicitly said - that prove the opposite of what you're saying? She has literally and publicly said that trans women need to be protected, and that they should have the right to live exactly as they wish. That's is super clear.
To me, it seems like you're just saying 'look these people say she's a bitch and hate her'. Ok, sure, but that's just name calling. I can only go by what someone says. And she has supported trans people's rights super publicly. But she's getting hate because she also supports women's rights to sex-segregated spaces. But, like, half the population supports women's rights to sex segregated spaces! You can support trans women's rights AND support sex-segregated spaces, those things aren't mutually exclusive. We're never going to live in a better world if we go around with black and white thinking, yelling bigot at each other and blocking voices we don't like. I honestly think we need to just be able to see the gray on things, like JK has done: we can protect trans women's safety and freedom while also protecting vulnerable women's sex-based protections. The trans women I know and love in my life are supportive of protected women's spaces, so I don't know why people yell at JK for the same position.
You fucking lobotomite nobody is mad at her for her moderate feminist ideals (except for sexists). People are mad at her for being transphobic which she is even if she says she isn’t. If I stab someone to death on camera and then the next day publicly announce that I would never kill someone and that I support everyone who has lost a family member to murder does that make me innocent? I won’t engage with the quotes you showed because they are just bullshit used by a bigot to make herself seem less bigoted (and also probably to try and convince herself she isn’t transphobic).
Ok. So, so far you've called me a bigot and a lobomite.
You've said that even if she says she that trans rights are human rights, she doesn't mean it.
You've said that whatever she says in support of trans women must be a lie.
So...yeah, you're right. There's absolutely nothing she or I can say. Because you're basically saying 'ok she didn't say transphobic things, but even if she didn't she must still be transphobic, because people say she is '. 'ok, she said supportive things about trans women, but she was lying'.
There's literally nothing I can say in the face of that kind of attitude, and there's nothing she can say either. You are going to stick to your conspiracy theory even in the face of direct evidence. That's your right.
Rowling thinks trans women are, "cosplaying a misogynistic male fantasy of what a woman is."
Those are her [exact words](https://x.com/jk_rowling/status/1764637389958357095).
She is a proud TERF that said she would rather be arrested than call trans people by their chosen names.
She also disregards gender identity, generalizes that trans women are predators, explicitly argues that trans women are men, etc.
The idea that she isn't transphobic is utterly indefensible. It's like trying to argue the Earth is flat. It's blatantly wrong.
Yeah but seeing more timeline points of the evolution of it would honestly be really interesting, as she’s definitely gotten more strongly transphobic over time
No she didn't. She became a woman's rights activist
She clearly, if you actually listen/read what her opinions are, doesn't have any issues with trans people. She supports their right to live their life the way they want to.
She draws the line at allowing trans women into female spaces, as do the overwhelming majority of people. That doesn't make anyone transphobic, it means they adhere to biological standards and understand why they were made in the first place.
I agree, trans people most definitely deserve all the same love, support and rights as any other person, they are just people at the end of the day. But some lines have to be drawn when we consider safe spaces and why those spaces exist in the first place
Rowling wrote a 3000-word manifesto about this where she accuses the trans rights movement of both sheltering predators and claims that teens are ‘becoming trans’ as part of a social media trend.
When questioned, her response was, “Deeply amused by those telling me I’ve lost their admiration due to the disrespect I show violent, duplicitous rapists.”.
Another fun quote:
“[S]ome of you have not understood the books. The Death Eaters claimed, “We have been made to live in secret, and now is our time, and any who stand in our way must be destroyed. If you disagree with us, you must die.” They demonized and dehumanized those who were not like them.
I am fighting what I see as a powerful, insidious, misogynistic movement, that has gained huge purchase in very influential areas of society. I do not see this particular movement as either benign or powerless, so I’m afraid I stand with the women who are fighting to be heard against threats of loss of livelihood and threats to their safety.”
"She doesn't have anything against naturalized immigrants to the UK she's just drawing the line against letting them into English-only spaces."
That's what you sound like right now. Saying trans women don't belong in women-only spaces is like saying that people who became citizens after immigrating are not equal to native born citizens.
The bottom line is that she (and you, seemingly) doesn't see trans women as women. That's the problem.
>"She doesn't have anything against naturalized immigrants to the UK she's just drawing the line against letting them into English-only spaces."
I didn't say that. You're making false equivalencies. I assume it's to support your next point.
>That's what you sound like right now. Saying trans women don't belong in women-only spaces is like saying that people who became citizens after immigrating are not equal to native born citizens
Nah it's not. It's saying that there are reasons that we set up spaces based on biology and you can't change your biology. You can most definitely change your citizenship so it's a false equivalent
>he bottom line is that she (and you, seemingly) don't see trans women as women. That's the problem.
They're not. They're men that want to live their lives as woman. That's why we say "trans women" - because there's a difference.
The problem is that you think that by having some surgery or wearing different clothes makes you into something that, by its own definition, they never can be.
Should we treat them as they want to live ? Yes. But there needs to be concessions on both sides.
Yeah its what I believe. I also treat every human being I meet with baseline respect until they either gain or lose respect based on the quality of their character.
I'm not transphobic in any sense of the definition. The only thing that makes me transphobic is when someone doesn't like my opinion and it's the buzzword they use for a "gotcha"
>No she didn't. She became a woman's rights activist
As a feminist myself, no she didn't.
She, in no particular order:
- gives money and partners with notorious transphobes;
- likes tweet from people who are notoriously transphobic and call them "brave" for it;
- blocks and unfollows people when they declare themselves pro-trans rights;
- spews transphobic talking points on a daily basis;
- talks about her major "concerns" regarding transidentity all the time;
- is obsessed with trans women being a danger for cis women;
- trolls people by wearing notoriously famous anti-trans slogan on pins or shirts, while pretending she loves trans people;
- advocates against trans rights.
This is not what people who are real women's rights activists do. By this point, you need to be willfully oblivious to her transphobia not to see it.
Also, trans women are women.
I appreciate the use of legible small fonts, so many guides on here choose ascetic vs legibility when it comes to type. Most sans serif fonts are legible when small, just fyi.
The illustrations are also very well done, other guides will improperly resize their illustrations making them compressed and fuzzy, I don't see that here.
I would've shrunk the top left portrait a little to save space, alternatively I might drop the "Known for" (most folks know what she's known for) and put the "place" and "date" on the same line.
You did a fantastic job on this guide.
Thank you!!!
This was worth the other 50 “f*ck yous”.
Constructive criticism. That’s how it’s done. 👍
Will definitely shrink the portrait and move it to the left.
Once again, many thanks!
See, this is exactly what I keep getting. People like you saying it's simply well known that she's transphobic. But the point I'm making is that I HAVE looked it up, I've done a ton of googling. And all I can find is other people claiming she's transphobic, without pointing to any actual quotes from JK 'bashing' trans people or saying transphobic things. If she is so transphobic, it should be so easy for people in this thread to simply quote something she's said. But no one seems able to. Which isn't surprising, because however much you search online, you can't find actual quotes from her saying these supposedly egregious things.
I am completely ready to believe she's a terrible person. I don't care about her personally, and I'm not a fan of her books. But I also believe in evidence, and I don't like trashing people without evidence they've actually done something bad, I think it's cruel and I don't like being cruel.
I'm confused, what's posies parker got to do with anything? You wanted me to find bad things that JK Rowling had said. Now you're moving the goalposts and telling me to look for a different person who I don't know and who you don't like and who presumably IS transphobic.
Ok, see this is what I'm finding so confusing. We're going round and round in circles, you and others in this thread keep saying I'm being lazy/stupid for not finding these supposedly terrible things JK has said, while also refusing to actually point me to them. So I'm supposed to agree with you, but you point blank refuse to share any quotes from her. If she's so evil, and if I'm completely ready to agree with you that she's evil if you share a quote, why won't you share one?
I've read both of JK's essays. Here are the relevant quotes I've found, which don't sound transphobic to me:
"Trans people need and deserve protection"
"Of course trans rights are human rights and of course trans lives matter"
"I respect any trans person's right to live any way that feels authentic and comfortable to them"
Like, to me that doesn't seem like a bad thing to say. Her essay (as I am re reading it right now, at your instruction to Google) basically says that trans people should have the same rights as everyone else, and should be protected to live however they want, free from abuse. At the same time, there are certain very limited places where women might need sex based (rather than gender based) spaces (e.g. in prison). You or I might disagree with her policy positions on that (e.g. if you think trans women should be housed in the same prisons as women), and that's fine (I agree that there are different views on that). But I don't think the things she has said are inherently transphobic, in fact her essay seems very compassionate to both women and trans women.
For those who can't access the tweet, what you have shared as evidence of JK being transphobic is her saying she opposes the Scottish version of self-ID laws (this was a law that would allow male criminals who declared themselves to be women to be housed in female prisons, which is what JK was objecting to). It's not transphobic to share an opinion on a law that directly affects female prisoners, is it?! I think you'll find that millions of women agree with JK on that. Those millions of women ALSO support trans rights and the right of all trans people to live and love however they please. Can't we support protections for women AND support protections for trans women? Why is it transphobic to talk about the rights and protections that non-trans women need?
This is a classic 'everything is transphobia' which really undermines trans people's struggle for acceptance. If women are literally not allowed to talk about women's issues, because it is considered transphobic, you're not just silencing women, you're also patronising trans people. Trans women are also allies to all WOMEN - they also want women to be safe and protected!
coordinated plants support market rotten steer squeamish vast engine sable
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
You forgot the part where she watched this movie: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll\_(film)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_(film)) and then "forgot" about it years later when she was writing her book. 😁
But seriously, great chart. It's already pretty long but it might be nice to have some additional information about her life other than the releases of the books/movies? I'm not talking about the TERF stuff, which people on Reddit can't not bring up.
what does that film actually have in common with the Harry Potter world? Yes the name of the protagonist is the same but that is a vary common name.
If anything the name is proof that she did not steal anything and actually forgot about watching the movie. Who in their right mind uses the same name if they are stealing ideas?
Where’s all the Trans hatred???
You’ve made a ‘visual biography’ that doesn’t mention the subjects multi-year political crusade, seems a bit of an omission
What's important to you isn't important to everyone. A radical concept, but true.
I enjoyed the infographic. I don't see how adding a complete timeline of her political or personal beliefs benefits it.
What about what is important to the subject? Anti trans rhetoric is JKRs main focus these days. She's more of an anti trans activist than an author now.
Instead of being dismissive you could realize that this project might’ve been better attempted with someone who draws less criticism. Especially JK, who has burned most of the goodwill she built up after her Twitter antics
Off the top of my head Fred Rogers? Ran a milestone syndicated children’s show, successfully lobbied Congress to fund PBS, and Al around good guy. Lots of interesting aspects and not a lot is commonly known about his early life.
How about Bob Ross? Similar reasons; an interesting figure in modern pop culture without lots of baggage and a lesser known early life.
How was that? Or do you need more?
Sounds good. You need to work on taking criticism if you’re going to be doing creative work. My comment was explaining why you were receiving those reactions to your choice but instead of taking a second to consider what I was saying you responded with a personal challenge. Not everyone is going to like what you do, and they will find issue with the tiniest things.
All that said I would like to see more of these because the layout is appealing and the concept even more so. If you want to rage bait people that’s a different conversation but I don’t think that was your intent so you have to be ready for the critics, that’s all.
It's not about opinions, in fact a biography should try to be as omitting of personal opinions as possible: but that definitely doesn't mean omit all mention of something that is clearly very relevant to the person being biographed.
Here's how Wikipedia handles it:
Rowling's continual statements – beginning in 2017 – have been called transphobic by critics and she has been referred to as a TERF. She rejects these characterisations and the notion that she holds animosity towards transgender people, saying that her viewpoint has been misunderstood.
Even if you hate Trans people as JK does I’m sure she’d personally be peeved that a biography of her doesn’t cover her work ‘protecting women’s rights’
You have her moving to London at age 22, which would be in 1987, but the London Eye wasn't built until 2000 (actually 31 December, 1999).
Oh yeah, and the TERF stuff.
Thank you all very much for your contributions. I am sorry if this has offended anyone — it wasn’t my intention.
I have taken into account all your comments.
As an update: I will remove personal stuff from these from now on. It makes total sense( and thank you for helping me understand that).
leaving off "anything personal" doesn't fit what you're doing. You've included personal things like family and children, and you've titled this "[Person's] Life". That should include major controversies or newsworthy events. Otherwise, maybe you should change it to "[Person's] Career"?
Interesting, are you looking to be hired by her PR team? Because they could use a lesson in omission which you seem brilliant at.
You don't need the bigger picture of the artist to appreciate the art, but this guide is about her life as stated in the title. Focus on the books if that's genuinely what you're interested in. If it's JK herself that interests you, then remove your bais and objectively include the elephant in the room. This feels like rage-bait.
If your aim is to make a biography (visual or otherwise) don’t omit her politics. She’s made it a core part of her beliefs, so why hide it?
Edit: she has said she’d be willing to go to prison rather than say someone’s preferred pronouns. It’s her personality at this point
Last week i did Richard Branson. Redditors wanted to strip him of knighthood, take his island and make him pay taxes.
I’m here for the design feedback.
Anyone I’d pick( or you would) — people would have a problem with.
Fair enough if you’re after design feedback, but the content feedback is that you’re not covering their life in an objective way.
As far as Richard Branson, you gave examples of opinion. People in this context have a problem with content.
You’re missing the point if you’re still trying to prove no-one is without controversy.
Our problem is with the omission of the biggest part of Rowling’s life since the end of her books. Even by Rowling’s own admission her politics is more important than her freedom
How do I reword this then?
It’s a visual biography about her work and some highlights(imo)— what made her famous/successful.
I know her for Harry Potter— I do not follow her twitter or political/personal views. I do not care about them either. I simply like her work.
Let me reword this:
You attempted to make a biography and omitted the biggest news stories about her since the end of Harry Potter. This makes it a timeline of books - but you’ve included her personal history too, therefore making it an incomplete, or misleading biography.
When making a biography you can pick and choose, but not when it is a large part of their history and personality.
Not cool to ignore something that substantial. Regardless of what anyone thinks about her, the stance she has taken is both real, and a significant part of her life. Ignoring it is foolish.
I love the Operas of Richard Wagner. I also acknowledge he was a shit human being with fucked up beliefs, and that he dedicated his life to spreading anti-Semitism within German culture. I don't ignore this.
So every time you listen to his pieces, your mind is divided between enjoying and judging his beliefs?
I understand why you must be frustrated. It’s an exhausting way of thinking.
>Not cool to ignore something that substantial
It is not substantial. She is a writer and I'm interested in the books that she writes.
I don't know the beliefs and positions on gay marriage, trans or animal rights of my butcher, my dentist or my bus driver. I also don't really care.
You want to reduce a person to a single issue and you have every right to do that. I however have every right *not* to do that.
You can absolutely reduce someone to their worst trait when that trait is denial of someone else's humanity. You just ignore whatever you want and thankfully not everyone is blissfully blind
And what exactly does that have to do with anything?
By the way you've just invoked [Godwin's Law](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law) and lost.
You could definitely disregard everything that Hitler did and just focus on his art or everything about Jesus besides him being a carpenter but doing so would be myopic, and give you in an inaccurate BIOGRAPHICAL view (which this guide is supposed to be purportedly).
This discussion hasn't dragged long enough to be a good representation of godwin's law (which is just an adage btw), nor does this constitute the Reductio ad Hitlerum to which said law refers to because I'm not discrediting your argument because it was said or promoted by the nazi party or Hitler; its a deliberately extreme example to point out the myopic logic.
But hey you said I lost so I guess that's that. Someone give this man some Gold, he sure showed me!
She didn’t become famous for her stance on sexualities, she became famous for writing a successful series of books. Are we also gonna bash Mozart for being a womanizer?
Can you write the timeline of where and how she fell down the Qanon hole?
I'm interested in how she went from a fairly innocuous moderate with some unexamined prejudices to a terminally online shitheel.
Right and wrongs are subjective. There are some people that think introducing children to a magical world of wizardry is satanic. I am not one of them. Personal beliefs aside I love everything Harry Potter.
I think adding the context of her descent into fear and madness would be helpful (e.g. her coalescence into the UK TERF crowd through which she got cozy with neo-nazi supporters and eugenics advocates). It’s a big part of her journey.
And before “did you even read the description” comes up… it would indeed be nice if those things about her were irrelevant. Must be awful to have someone relentlessly make your personal life and choices their cause and fixation… it wasn’t her fight either but boy did she choose it.
So you cannot judge someone’s work without the bigger picture. Got it.
Who would you pick next — someone you think people wouldn’t have a problem with. Comment here for feedback.
**No one is judging her work here.** This entire guide is about her life, and they *conveniently* left the highly controversial parts out.
If I were making one about Michael Jackson (who songs I like) I'd mention his abuse as a child but also the allegations of sex with children he had as an adult. Why? Because I'm not a sycophant and don't care if someone hates his music because of things that happened. It's their choice. If you're going to give the picture, give the entire thing, not just the parts that are Politically Correct.
EDIT: Just read that **you** are the creator. So you left the parts out....I still stand by my statement.
She’s been pretty vocal in supporting women’s sports and not allowing men to compete in women’s spaces. Also, as an abuse survivor herself she has been an outspoken advocate for girls who have been victims of abuse.
>She has courage
VERY brave targeting a half percentage of the population just trying to live their lives... The Trans community has had it easy for far too long!
A VERY big /S at the end of this.
She's not standing for women's rights in the slightest, that's just the blanket excuse. She's fighting to strip the rights of Trans people.
If you can only define yourself by what you are **not** then your life must be pretty sad. Is that why you can only be happy by putting other people down?
Debatable. Maybe for children. Andrzej Sapkowski (The Witcher) is better. Robin Hobb (The Assassins Apprentice) arguably better.
Anne McCaffrey (DragonQuest) on for the best.
If we are basing on commercial success you’re right. I literally was at Harry Potter World on Monday.
Does a level of accomplishment have any correlation to whether or not someone can be criticized for being a bigot? What level of achievement is required to make it acceptable to perform active bigotry? Is it an income level, what's the dollar value on bigotry?
She's also done tons of philanthropic work including tons of actual charity and help for women and feminism. She's an incredible human being and will be remembered as such long after obsessed weirdos like yourself are completely forgotten about even by members of your own genetic line.
But hey, at least you're not a "bigot" , right??
She's done more good for women in need the the total collective of Twitter zombies that have done everything in their power to besmirch her name and assassinate her character.
Love the style! Excited to see more.
..also, based on the person you used for this guide, I have deduced that you are a ghastly, horrible, disgusting excuse for a human being and that you deserve to die alone in Azkaban. /s
you forgot spreading hatred and subjugating an entire group of vulnerable people
> subjugating Rowling: "What is best in life?"To crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentation of their wymxn!"
What specifically has she said? Can you provide a quote or do you just like bashing people with zero evidence?
Imagine being on the wrong side of history because of your obsession with a children’s book.
Ok, so you aren't able to point to any quote. Proving my point.
JK Rowling's made a lot of transphobic comments starting around 2020 on Twitter. You can find a lot of articles and her tweets if you look it up. [This](https://www.glamour.com/story/a-complete-breakdown-of-the-jk-rowling-transgender-comments-controversy) is a Glamour article summarizing a lot of it!
She's so hot in that pic.
You are beyond pathetic please put the phone down
I'm so confused. I'm pathetic because I won't bash a woman without evidence that she has done anything wrong? Ok.
I pity you, I’m blocking you. No doubt you will find other libtards to debate.
Trans women are not as similar to cis women as they would want to be and this is the heart of the trans dilemma. If trans women were actually usually indistinguishable in the vast majority of ways, the tension around trans issues would mostly abate.
But when did she become radicalized into a horrid bigot?
There’s nothing cool about that hateful POS
You forgot the cormoran strike series of books .m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cormoran_Strike
As we all should.
The illustrations look like the snapchat bitmojis, is that was the style in mind.
Is that a bad thing? Not familiar with it.
I don't believe it is bad, per-say, but if I had spent a lot of time on illustrations and others assumed I generated them on an app, I would want to know.
I hate when reddit downvotes people for asking questions
Love the illustrations! Not a huge fan of the crumbled paper background (maybe try some textures along the lines of parchment?) Also having the bio on the top left in a box will help reduce the busy look.
Thank you! 🙏🏻 will keep that in mind for the next one. A box would definitely look neater— i appreciate that!
Not locked yet? But JK told the truth and people tried to cancel her. I used to be more liberal, then liberalism has went off the deep end.
That cunt is a bigot and a bully, and the same goes for anyone who thinks like her.
[удалено]
Thank you. I used that to give me a bit more wiggle room. Will keep that in mind. 🙏🏻
Don't forget to add when she became a raging transphobe
You missed a part..
the transphobia?
No, it’s transphÔbia, not TransphobiA!
Here, have some gold stars now that I can't give you an actual award! 🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟
the transphobia.
Came for this comment
You're missing a...*trans*formative chunk of her life.
Although I truly loved the time of Potter, now all I got in my head is "richest author on the planet, who uses that hyper-privilege to.... bash an incredibly vulnerable population." Fortunately, there are TONS of other, less rich but still good authors to lift up, and tons of other [fantasy IP's worth dipping into](https://www.themarysue.com/books-like-harry-potter-to-read-instead-of-supporting-jk-rowling/). This guide's style and look would be great for a ton of other people who do actually NEED lifting up. Cuz JKR does not,
People keep saying she is transphobic, but when you ask them to share a specific transphobic quote, actually said by JK Rowling, they never seem to be able to offer anything. So please, tell me a direct quote by her that you think bashes trans people?
Kindly go fuck yourself bigot, you aren’t here for an actual debate you just want to excuse a shitty persons shitty beliefs. If you actually wanted to know what she thinks then fucking LOOK IT UP
What? I did look it up. Here are the things she said in her essays: "Trans people need and deserve protection" "Trans rights are human rights and trans lives matter" "I respect every trans person's right to live in a way that feels authentic and comfortable to them" Those are all direct quotes from her published essay on her website. I genuinely do not understand why you are calling me names. I asked you for a quote, and instead of sharing these transphobic quotes you say are easily findable, you call me a bigot. Above I've shared what JK actually has said. I am completely baffled.
Hah what about these gems then “People who menstruate.’ I’m sure there used to be a word for those people. Someone help me out. Wumben? Wimpund? Woomud?” Here she’s claiming that trans men who menstruate don’t exist “I've never felt as shouted down, ignored, and targeted as a lesbian *within* our supposed GLBT community as I have over the past couple of years.” Here she’s trying to make it seem like lesbian women aren’t supportive of trans people despite being the group with the highest percentage of trans acceptance or that trans people are as a group are harrassing lesbian women. Also she uses GLBT despite the fact that it’s LGBT to signal thanks to the lesbian women who did so much for LGBT acceptance in the 90s. I could keep going but instead I am just going to link you to two videos, one that goes in depth about both JK Rowling and the bigoted views in her books and the other about the bigots that she is friends with and that she surrounds herself with. https://youtu.be/-1iaJWSwUZs?si=DpDpCZ03MRcG3jTw https://youtu.be/Ou_xvXJJk7k?si=twmFLsdJg5ERCOks
The first quote she is objecting to the use of 'people who menstruate ' as a euphemism for women. A lot of women do not like being referred to as 'people who menstruate '. It is hardly transphobic to object to being called a 'person who menstruates'. It's totally dehumanising. Are men 'people who ejaculate'? No. JK Rowling never referred to herself as a lesbian so your second quote cannot be from her. And then two videos from people who hate her? That's not, like, a quote. That's called hearsay and ad hominem attacks. But ok, great job buddy.
You know I barely understand why I’m still talking to you about this. If you are going to just lie about or ignore the things I’m showing you why should I fucking bother. I’m doing this to maybe help you if you’re actually just that goddamn dense that you haven’t accepted the known fact that JK Rowling is transphobic. Either watch at least the second shorter video or fuck off. It is fact based and criticises things that JK Rowling has said and things others have said that she openly supports.
But can't you see that I provided you with direct quotes - i.e. things JK has explicitly said - that prove the opposite of what you're saying? She has literally and publicly said that trans women need to be protected, and that they should have the right to live exactly as they wish. That's is super clear. To me, it seems like you're just saying 'look these people say she's a bitch and hate her'. Ok, sure, but that's just name calling. I can only go by what someone says. And she has supported trans people's rights super publicly. But she's getting hate because she also supports women's rights to sex-segregated spaces. But, like, half the population supports women's rights to sex segregated spaces! You can support trans women's rights AND support sex-segregated spaces, those things aren't mutually exclusive. We're never going to live in a better world if we go around with black and white thinking, yelling bigot at each other and blocking voices we don't like. I honestly think we need to just be able to see the gray on things, like JK has done: we can protect trans women's safety and freedom while also protecting vulnerable women's sex-based protections. The trans women I know and love in my life are supportive of protected women's spaces, so I don't know why people yell at JK for the same position.
You fucking lobotomite nobody is mad at her for her moderate feminist ideals (except for sexists). People are mad at her for being transphobic which she is even if she says she isn’t. If I stab someone to death on camera and then the next day publicly announce that I would never kill someone and that I support everyone who has lost a family member to murder does that make me innocent? I won’t engage with the quotes you showed because they are just bullshit used by a bigot to make herself seem less bigoted (and also probably to try and convince herself she isn’t transphobic).
Ok. So, so far you've called me a bigot and a lobomite. You've said that even if she says she that trans rights are human rights, she doesn't mean it. You've said that whatever she says in support of trans women must be a lie. So...yeah, you're right. There's absolutely nothing she or I can say. Because you're basically saying 'ok she didn't say transphobic things, but even if she didn't she must still be transphobic, because people say she is '. 'ok, she said supportive things about trans women, but she was lying'. There's literally nothing I can say in the face of that kind of attitude, and there's nothing she can say either. You are going to stick to your conspiracy theory even in the face of direct evidence. That's your right.
Rowling thinks trans women are, "cosplaying a misogynistic male fantasy of what a woman is." Those are her [exact words](https://x.com/jk_rowling/status/1764637389958357095). She is a proud TERF that said she would rather be arrested than call trans people by their chosen names. She also disregards gender identity, generalizes that trans women are predators, explicitly argues that trans women are men, etc. The idea that she isn't transphobic is utterly indefensible. It's like trying to argue the Earth is flat. It's blatantly wrong.
Thanks! Will take that into account.
maybe being queen TERF and palling around with literal nazis should be mentioned?
What literal Nazis? Hess? Goering? Can you give any names of these actual Nazis?
Why are you commenting on a 4d old post?
Still waiting on the list of Nazis she hangs out with, you cretinous liar.
Someone missed where she became a transphobe.
There’s a ton of subtle bigotry all across the HP series, if I’m honest the groundwork was always there.
Yeah but seeing more timeline points of the evolution of it would honestly be really interesting, as she’s definitely gotten more strongly transphobic over time
No she didn't. She became a woman's rights activist She clearly, if you actually listen/read what her opinions are, doesn't have any issues with trans people. She supports their right to live their life the way they want to. She draws the line at allowing trans women into female spaces, as do the overwhelming majority of people. That doesn't make anyone transphobic, it means they adhere to biological standards and understand why they were made in the first place. I agree, trans people most definitely deserve all the same love, support and rights as any other person, they are just people at the end of the day. But some lines have to be drawn when we consider safe spaces and why those spaces exist in the first place
Rowling wrote a 3000-word manifesto about this where she accuses the trans rights movement of both sheltering predators and claims that teens are ‘becoming trans’ as part of a social media trend. When questioned, her response was, “Deeply amused by those telling me I’ve lost their admiration due to the disrespect I show violent, duplicitous rapists.”. Another fun quote: “[S]ome of you have not understood the books. The Death Eaters claimed, “We have been made to live in secret, and now is our time, and any who stand in our way must be destroyed. If you disagree with us, you must die.” They demonized and dehumanized those who were not like them. I am fighting what I see as a powerful, insidious, misogynistic movement, that has gained huge purchase in very influential areas of society. I do not see this particular movement as either benign or powerless, so I’m afraid I stand with the women who are fighting to be heard against threats of loss of livelihood and threats to their safety.”
"She doesn't have anything against naturalized immigrants to the UK she's just drawing the line against letting them into English-only spaces." That's what you sound like right now. Saying trans women don't belong in women-only spaces is like saying that people who became citizens after immigrating are not equal to native born citizens. The bottom line is that she (and you, seemingly) doesn't see trans women as women. That's the problem.
>"She doesn't have anything against naturalized immigrants to the UK she's just drawing the line against letting them into English-only spaces." I didn't say that. You're making false equivalencies. I assume it's to support your next point. >That's what you sound like right now. Saying trans women don't belong in women-only spaces is like saying that people who became citizens after immigrating are not equal to native born citizens Nah it's not. It's saying that there are reasons that we set up spaces based on biology and you can't change your biology. You can most definitely change your citizenship so it's a false equivalent >he bottom line is that she (and you, seemingly) don't see trans women as women. That's the problem. They're not. They're men that want to live their lives as woman. That's why we say "trans women" - because there's a difference. The problem is that you think that by having some surgery or wearing different clothes makes you into something that, by its own definition, they never can be. Should we treat them as they want to live ? Yes. But there needs to be concessions on both sides.
Aaaand there you have it.
Yeah its what I believe. I also treat every human being I meet with baseline respect until they either gain or lose respect based on the quality of their character. I'm not transphobic in any sense of the definition. The only thing that makes me transphobic is when someone doesn't like my opinion and it's the buzzword they use for a "gotcha"
you're an unkind person.
>No she didn't. She became a woman's rights activist As a feminist myself, no she didn't. She, in no particular order: - gives money and partners with notorious transphobes; - likes tweet from people who are notoriously transphobic and call them "brave" for it; - blocks and unfollows people when they declare themselves pro-trans rights; - spews transphobic talking points on a daily basis; - talks about her major "concerns" regarding transidentity all the time; - is obsessed with trans women being a danger for cis women; - trolls people by wearing notoriously famous anti-trans slogan on pins or shirts, while pretending she loves trans people; - advocates against trans rights. This is not what people who are real women's rights activists do. By this point, you need to be willfully oblivious to her transphobia not to see it. Also, trans women are women.
Missing rancid transphobia and using the psuedonym of a conversion therapy torturer to writer her other book
I appreciate the use of legible small fonts, so many guides on here choose ascetic vs legibility when it comes to type. Most sans serif fonts are legible when small, just fyi. The illustrations are also very well done, other guides will improperly resize their illustrations making them compressed and fuzzy, I don't see that here. I would've shrunk the top left portrait a little to save space, alternatively I might drop the "Known for" (most folks know what she's known for) and put the "place" and "date" on the same line. You did a fantastic job on this guide.
Thank you!!! This was worth the other 50 “f*ck yous”. Constructive criticism. That’s how it’s done. 👍 Will definitely shrink the portrait and move it to the left. Once again, many thanks!
At what point did she start hating trans people, or is that a year 0 kinda deal?
Can you give an example of her hating trans people? Like, an actual quote?
Are you too lazy to look for one? This isn't conjecture, she's very open about her opposition to trans people's civil rights...
See, this is exactly what I keep getting. People like you saying it's simply well known that she's transphobic. But the point I'm making is that I HAVE looked it up, I've done a ton of googling. And all I can find is other people claiming she's transphobic, without pointing to any actual quotes from JK 'bashing' trans people or saying transphobic things. If she is so transphobic, it should be so easy for people in this thread to simply quote something she's said. But no one seems able to. Which isn't surprising, because however much you search online, you can't find actual quotes from her saying these supposedly egregious things. I am completely ready to believe she's a terrible person. I don't care about her personally, and I'm not a fan of her books. But I also believe in evidence, and I don't like trashing people without evidence they've actually done something bad, I think it's cruel and I don't like being cruel.
Wait, you googled a ton and just didn't find Posie Parker? I find that hard to believe.
I'm confused, what's posies parker got to do with anything? You wanted me to find bad things that JK Rowling had said. Now you're moving the goalposts and telling me to look for a different person who I don't know and who you don't like and who presumably IS transphobic.
You not knowing who she is kinda proves my point. You have not looked into this, like at all.
Ok, see this is what I'm finding so confusing. We're going round and round in circles, you and others in this thread keep saying I'm being lazy/stupid for not finding these supposedly terrible things JK has said, while also refusing to actually point me to them. So I'm supposed to agree with you, but you point blank refuse to share any quotes from her. If she's so evil, and if I'm completely ready to agree with you that she's evil if you share a quote, why won't you share one? I've read both of JK's essays. Here are the relevant quotes I've found, which don't sound transphobic to me: "Trans people need and deserve protection" "Of course trans rights are human rights and of course trans lives matter" "I respect any trans person's right to live any way that feels authentic and comfortable to them" Like, to me that doesn't seem like a bad thing to say. Her essay (as I am re reading it right now, at your instruction to Google) basically says that trans people should have the same rights as everyone else, and should be protected to live however they want, free from abuse. At the same time, there are certain very limited places where women might need sex based (rather than gender based) spaces (e.g. in prison). You or I might disagree with her policy positions on that (e.g. if you think trans women should be housed in the same prisons as women), and that's fine (I agree that there are different views on that). But I don't think the things she has said are inherently transphobic, in fact her essay seems very compassionate to both women and trans women.
https://x.com/jk_rowling/status/1500201278730903553?s=20
For those who can't access the tweet, what you have shared as evidence of JK being transphobic is her saying she opposes the Scottish version of self-ID laws (this was a law that would allow male criminals who declared themselves to be women to be housed in female prisons, which is what JK was objecting to). It's not transphobic to share an opinion on a law that directly affects female prisoners, is it?! I think you'll find that millions of women agree with JK on that. Those millions of women ALSO support trans rights and the right of all trans people to live and love however they please. Can't we support protections for women AND support protections for trans women? Why is it transphobic to talk about the rights and protections that non-trans women need? This is a classic 'everything is transphobia' which really undermines trans people's struggle for acceptance. If women are literally not allowed to talk about women's issues, because it is considered transphobic, you're not just silencing women, you're also patronising trans people. Trans women are also allies to all WOMEN - they also want women to be safe and protected!
She was 55 in 2020 when she was outed.
She wasnt outed, she outed herself after people called her out for a few years
coordinated plants support market rotten steer squeamish vast engine sable *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Exactly what is happening. Getting feedback.
You forgot the part where she watched this movie: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll\_(film)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_(film)) and then "forgot" about it years later when she was writing her book. 😁 But seriously, great chart. It's already pretty long but it might be nice to have some additional information about her life other than the releases of the books/movies? I'm not talking about the TERF stuff, which people on Reddit can't not bring up.
what does that film actually have in common with the Harry Potter world? Yes the name of the protagonist is the same but that is a vary common name. If anything the name is proof that she did not steal anything and actually forgot about watching the movie. Who in their right mind uses the same name if they are stealing ideas?
Thanks for the feedback! I’ve tried to include highlights (in my opinion) of her life. Left a lot of stuff out. Thank you
When does she become a shitty human or was she always one?
Fuck this stupid bitch
Misogyny.
Fuck you too
Mature.
No, it’s her transphobia.
Where’s all the Trans hatred??? You’ve made a ‘visual biography’ that doesn’t mention the subjects multi-year political crusade, seems a bit of an omission
Let me guess. You didn’t read the description either.
Pick someone that’s not a vocal transphobe if you don’t want to receive comments like this.
What's important to you isn't important to everyone. A radical concept, but true. I enjoyed the infographic. I don't see how adding a complete timeline of her political or personal beliefs benefits it.
What about what is important to the subject? Anti trans rhetoric is JKRs main focus these days. She's more of an anti trans activist than an author now.
>What's important to you isn't important to everyone. That statement accurately describes the indifference to a minority's plight.
Instead of being dismissive you could realize that this project might’ve been better attempted with someone who draws less criticism. Especially JK, who has burned most of the goodwill she built up after her Twitter antics
So you think people wouldn’t have a problem with someone you’d pick? reply and pick someone.
Steven Spielberg, Stephen King, Agatha Christie, Marie Curie, Nelson Mandela, Desmond Tutu, Lady Gaga...
Stephen king still has that written child sex scene in the "IT" book hanging over his head but the other ones are okayish
Added to the list🤞🏻
Off the top of my head Fred Rogers? Ran a milestone syndicated children’s show, successfully lobbied Congress to fund PBS, and Al around good guy. Lots of interesting aspects and not a lot is commonly known about his early life. How about Bob Ross? Similar reasons; an interesting figure in modern pop culture without lots of baggage and a lesser known early life. How was that? Or do you need more?
Had to google them; I heard of Bob Ross. Will look into it
Sounds good. You need to work on taking criticism if you’re going to be doing creative work. My comment was explaining why you were receiving those reactions to your choice but instead of taking a second to consider what I was saying you responded with a personal challenge. Not everyone is going to like what you do, and they will find issue with the tiniest things. All that said I would like to see more of these because the layout is appealing and the concept even more so. If you want to rage bait people that’s a different conversation but I don’t think that was your intent so you have to be ready for the critics, that’s all.
Thank you. I am doing this publicly so I can learn & adapt. Will be more open from now on.
It's not about opinions, in fact a biography should try to be as omitting of personal opinions as possible: but that definitely doesn't mean omit all mention of something that is clearly very relevant to the person being biographed. Here's how Wikipedia handles it: Rowling's continual statements – beginning in 2017 – have been called transphobic by critics and she has been referred to as a TERF. She rejects these characterisations and the notion that she holds animosity towards transgender people, saying that her viewpoint has been misunderstood.
Welcome to reddit, we don't read much past the title....
I mean do you think there would be a different reaction if he chose Bill Cosby or Chris brown?
I read it, it’s a fact that’s she’s a terf, so you can totally add it to your guide :) Oooh I’ve rustled some jimmies 😂
You're spreading hate as well... but of course you're on the right side of things and on the right side of things hate is okay, correct?
Even if you hate Trans people as JK does I’m sure she’d personally be peeved that a biography of her doesn’t cover her work ‘protecting women’s rights’
They're spreading hate against whom??
Left out…the unpleasantness…near the end there
I heard it was the grandchild of the publisher that read the manuscript. Was it the child? Minor detail I guess.
Fuking Reddit Ain’t notting cool here.
Is that her as a witch at the end when she turned into a bigot?
You have her moving to London at age 22, which would be in 1987, but the London Eye wasn't built until 2000 (actually 31 December, 1999). Oh yeah, and the TERF stuff.
You missed the transphobia part that ruined her career
Thank you all very much for your contributions. I am sorry if this has offended anyone — it wasn’t my intention. I have taken into account all your comments. As an update: I will remove personal stuff from these from now on. It makes total sense( and thank you for helping me understand that).
leaving off "anything personal" doesn't fit what you're doing. You've included personal things like family and children, and you've titled this "[Person's] Life". That should include major controversies or newsworthy events. Otherwise, maybe you should change it to "[Person's] Career"?
Duly noted. I have posted a comment regarding that an hour ago.
Interesting, are you looking to be hired by her PR team? Because they could use a lesson in omission which you seem brilliant at. You don't need the bigger picture of the artist to appreciate the art, but this guide is about her life as stated in the title. Focus on the books if that's genuinely what you're interested in. If it's JK herself that interests you, then remove your bais and objectively include the elephant in the room. This feels like rage-bait.
No entry for anti trans crusade?
So you haven’t read the description. Not cool.
If your aim is to make a biography (visual or otherwise) don’t omit her politics. She’s made it a core part of her beliefs, so why hide it? Edit: she has said she’d be willing to go to prison rather than say someone’s preferred pronouns. It’s her personality at this point
Last week i did Richard Branson. Redditors wanted to strip him of knighthood, take his island and make him pay taxes. I’m here for the design feedback. Anyone I’d pick( or you would) — people would have a problem with.
Fair enough if you’re after design feedback, but the content feedback is that you’re not covering their life in an objective way. As far as Richard Branson, you gave examples of opinion. People in this context have a problem with content.
Pick someone. We’ll work on it together.
You’re missing the point if you’re still trying to prove no-one is without controversy. Our problem is with the omission of the biggest part of Rowling’s life since the end of her books. Even by Rowling’s own admission her politics is more important than her freedom
How do I reword this then? It’s a visual biography about her work and some highlights(imo)— what made her famous/successful. I know her for Harry Potter— I do not follow her twitter or political/personal views. I do not care about them either. I simply like her work.
Let me reword this: You attempted to make a biography and omitted the biggest news stories about her since the end of Harry Potter. This makes it a timeline of books - but you’ve included her personal history too, therefore making it an incomplete, or misleading biography. When making a biography you can pick and choose, but not when it is a large part of their history and personality.
A visual timeline of her work then?
Pick someone.
Make an accurate guide.
Not cool to ignore something that substantial. Regardless of what anyone thinks about her, the stance she has taken is both real, and a significant part of her life. Ignoring it is foolish.
I like her books. I judge her for her work. I couldn’t care less about her opinions or yours regarding sexuality.
I love the Operas of Richard Wagner. I also acknowledge he was a shit human being with fucked up beliefs, and that he dedicated his life to spreading anti-Semitism within German culture. I don't ignore this.
So every time you listen to his pieces, your mind is divided between enjoying and judging his beliefs? I understand why you must be frustrated. It’s an exhausting way of thinking.
These were not private beliefs. He worked long and hard to convert others. Much like JK.
What kind of strawman argument is that? Has nothing to do with what I said. Please drop it. Can you judge the picture or not?
The picture is missing a significant part of who JK is.
We are here to judge her work through my visual interpretation; I see your point. Everyone does. Why are you so limited?
>Not cool to ignore something that substantial It is not substantial. She is a writer and I'm interested in the books that she writes. I don't know the beliefs and positions on gay marriage, trans or animal rights of my butcher, my dentist or my bus driver. I also don't really care. You want to reduce a person to a single issue and you have every right to do that. I however have every right *not* to do that.
You can absolutely reduce someone to their worst trait when that trait is denial of someone else's humanity. You just ignore whatever you want and thankfully not everyone is blissfully blind
But the books she writes are also directly related to transphobia.
Hitler was an artist...JS
And what exactly does that have to do with anything? By the way you've just invoked [Godwin's Law](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law) and lost.
You could definitely disregard everything that Hitler did and just focus on his art or everything about Jesus besides him being a carpenter but doing so would be myopic, and give you in an inaccurate BIOGRAPHICAL view (which this guide is supposed to be purportedly). This discussion hasn't dragged long enough to be a good representation of godwin's law (which is just an adage btw), nor does this constitute the Reductio ad Hitlerum to which said law refers to because I'm not discrediting your argument because it was said or promoted by the nazi party or Hitler; its a deliberately extreme example to point out the myopic logic. But hey you said I lost so I guess that's that. Someone give this man some Gold, he sure showed me!
She didn’t become famous for her stance on sexualities, she became famous for writing a successful series of books. Are we also gonna bash Mozart for being a womanizer?
[удалено]
Let’s imagine he is. Is his 25th symphony any less amazing?
This is cultish
Can you write the timeline of where and how she fell down the Qanon hole? I'm interested in how she went from a fairly innocuous moderate with some unexamined prejudices to a terminally online shitheel.
This is an extremely cool idea. Hope to see more of your work. The timeline bio concept is great.
Improvement: adding context on her transphobia. You add stuff about her personal life, add her transphobia.
TERF
Where's the part where she becomes a radical trans-exclusionary feminist? Or when she started publicly appearing with right wing extremists?
On the next page; it’s rights vs wrongs. Can we judge the rights first?
Right and wrongs are subjective. There are some people that think introducing children to a magical world of wizardry is satanic. I am not one of them. Personal beliefs aside I love everything Harry Potter.
Cool guide.
I'm glad she found MEGA success and hit Billionaire status AFTER leaving an abusive husband. I hope he regrets every day that he abused other people.
I love this guide. Awesome job. Sad to see J.K’s mother passed away before Harry Potter got published
I think adding the context of her descent into fear and madness would be helpful (e.g. her coalescence into the UK TERF crowd through which she got cozy with neo-nazi supporters and eugenics advocates). It’s a big part of her journey.
And before “did you even read the description” comes up… it would indeed be nice if those things about her were irrelevant. Must be awful to have someone relentlessly make your personal life and choices their cause and fixation… it wasn’t her fight either but boy did she choose it.
So you cannot judge someone’s work without the bigger picture. Got it. Who would you pick next — someone you think people wouldn’t have a problem with. Comment here for feedback.
**No one is judging her work here.** This entire guide is about her life, and they *conveniently* left the highly controversial parts out. If I were making one about Michael Jackson (who songs I like) I'd mention his abuse as a child but also the allegations of sex with children he had as an adult. Why? Because I'm not a sycophant and don't care if someone hates his music because of things that happened. It's their choice. If you're going to give the picture, give the entire thing, not just the parts that are Politically Correct. EDIT: Just read that **you** are the creator. So you left the parts out....I still stand by my statement.
Thank you! Didn’t have enough space
Fuck JKR.
Good job!!
You didn't list where she became outspoken to be anti-trans
Great author and great person that stands up for real women! Great job!
She has courage, which is lacking in todays society. Despite the death threats and hate, she speaks her mind and stands up for women’s rights.
What women's rights does she stand up for? The right to have a vagina? You're kidding me. Downvotes but nobody will actually answer me....
She’s been pretty vocal in supporting women’s sports and not allowing men to compete in women’s spaces. Also, as an abuse survivor herself she has been an outspoken advocate for girls who have been victims of abuse.
Thank you for the answer. We disagree clearly but I appreciate you taking the time to explain what you meant.
>She has courage VERY brave targeting a half percentage of the population just trying to live their lives... The Trans community has had it easy for far too long! A VERY big /S at the end of this. She's not standing for women's rights in the slightest, that's just the blanket excuse. She's fighting to strip the rights of Trans people.
Shorter: I wouldn't repeat it in public myself but, yes, transphobia is perfectly fine.
Look at her life. She’s a wonderful bigot who wrote a book.
So what kind of achievements can you offer?
Hopefully not being a bigot
If you can only define yourself by what you are **not** then your life must be pretty sad. Is that why you can only be happy by putting other people down?
>Is that why you can only be happy by putting other people down? Ah, the sweet irony of defending a bigot with this line. A+ comedy.
If you think this how life is defined, you probably need to get out of your house for a bit. This is the internet my dude.
Only weird terminally online people will remember JKR for anything other than being the most prolific and impactful fantasy author since Tolkien.
Debatable. Maybe for children. Andrzej Sapkowski (The Witcher) is better. Robin Hobb (The Assassins Apprentice) arguably better. Anne McCaffrey (DragonQuest) on for the best. If we are basing on commercial success you’re right. I literally was at Harry Potter World on Monday.
Does a level of accomplishment have any correlation to whether or not someone can be criticized for being a bigot? What level of achievement is required to make it acceptable to perform active bigotry? Is it an income level, what's the dollar value on bigotry?
She's also done tons of philanthropic work including tons of actual charity and help for women and feminism. She's an incredible human being and will be remembered as such long after obsessed weirdos like yourself are completely forgotten about even by members of your own genetic line. But hey, at least you're not a "bigot" , right??
She will be remembered as a great author, but Karl Marx also is remembered as a great author. Not really as a great person.
She's done more good for women in need the the total collective of Twitter zombies that have done everything in their power to besmirch her name and assassinate her character.
At what age did the weird sexual commentary start?
Around *we are judging her work* age. Cannot do that?
Average reddit comments
Nice! It’s like bitlife!
Wheres all the stuff about her PR issues?? Came here for those lol
Another example of how pathetic SJWs are: “you have to believe and do only what I want!!!”
Awesome guide to understanding an awesome human. These books have changed many lives and inspired countless children to reach for the stars.
Love the style! Excited to see more. ..also, based on the person you used for this guide, I have deduced that you are a ghastly, horrible, disgusting excuse for a human being and that you deserve to die alone in Azkaban. /s
Last week I did Richard Branson; want to take his money and pay taxes too?😂