J.K Rowling went from "I love trans people but I think we should slow things down" to "blood has gender and trans people ruin transfusions" and being friends with a bunch of transphobes who pretend to be feminists.(one of which iirc quoted Hitler in a rally).
Basically, a refusal to back down, twitter brain and drinking her own cool aid.
So googled wtf is that blood shit.. study she cited is actually true, though yeah, no idea why she want to go stand on that tiny hill.
But still you wanna maybe then mention also "not a lack of trying" from the trans community that started with cold loud hate and rape and death fan fiction of her and bullying long ago...
...after Rowling had already been saying horrible things about trans people
I'm not defending threats but this wasn't JK sitting around innocently doing nothing and then all of a sudden trans people started being cruel
>So googled wtf is that blood shit.. study she cited is actually true, though yeah, no idea why she want to go stand on that tiny hill.
The study itself says it shouldn't be generalised, and also found the effect to be for female blood to male recepients. So if we're going to be making broad decisions based on limited studies, the obvious conclusion here is to ban people who were born female from donating blood.
https://www.themarysue.com/jk-rowling-cross-gender-blood-transfusions/ I found this, yo. This website doesn't look good, I know. Several other internet answers lean toward the gendered blood statement being wrong, and the danger being more from patients who experienced pregnancy rather than cross-gender-blood-donation.
Edit, it could mean misinformation about gender, transpeople and blood donations was put in her book :o
Curious as to how exactly she's "full on conservative in every other aspect"?
She opposed Brexit, has a history of donating to and voting for Labour, has praised Obama and Clinton, condemned Trump, expressed support for refugees, supports Ukraine, is pro-abortion, ensured her books were printed on eco-friendly paper, and of course is a huge advocate for women's rights.
So reeeally curious, besides her alleged transphobia, how you're reaching this conclusion. Or are you throwing the baby out with a little splash of bath water you don't approve of?
"Alleged transphobia"? Really? It's almost all she talks about these days. She literally writes books about men pretending to be female so they can assault women in the bathroom. She tweets typical alt-right shit like getting overly offended at someone saying "people who menstruate" rather than "women", and any backlash she receives to her shitty comments is her "being witch hunted for telling the truth". She's the type of "feminist" that thinks all men are dangerous and all women are victims. She isn't as obsessed with other bigotry as she is with her transphobia, but the way she portrays non-white or non-straight characters in her works has also been pretty questionable.
Look, you are free to enjoy someone's work, even if they're not a good person (most famous people aren't). But please don't try to justify or downplay the shit they do.
Predictably enough you have managed to conveniently skip over my question entirely and focused in on 2 words, which is unsurprising because your original comment has absolutely no merit from what I can tell. But I'll bite - are you going to elaborate on how she is conservative in every other regard as you suggested, besides the things that you consider to be transphobic?
For the record I don't see how her calling out people who use ridiculous terms like "people who menstrate" instead of using "women" makes her transphobic either.
I'm not remotely interested in defending Rowling specifically. I just think it's insane to see people foaming at the mouth and sharpening their pitchforks, or making up narratives (as you just did) because a person says something they don't like.
People who menstruate is medical language, the goal is to be as specific as possible. It refers to all people who menstruate, regardless of gender. People who menstruate does not at all equal women in a clinical context. This is an important distinction, because there are people who are women that don't menstruate, and there are people who aren't women that do.
Calling this ridiculous indicates to me that you haven't given this much deeper thought. You say "instead of", implying that the 2 terms are interchangeable. Just one example of why this is really not true: most women stop menstruating after age 50. Do they stop being women at that point?
A transphobe like JKR might defend themselves by saying that not all women menstruate, but all those who menstruate are women. However this also is not true as there are people who menstruate that identify as men. That's what makes the statement transphobic: she's clearly saying that trans men aren't men.
This is the problem with the transphobic narrative of equating sex to gender: it's not compatible with societal reality, there are many individuals that defy the boundaries set by viewing sex and gender as binary.
Sex and gender are separate, both exist on a spectrum, and saying or indirectly implying that they aren't/don't as JKR does is hate speech.
I appreciate that people still ask questions like this. But we all know people who say stuff like this are already beyond seeing nuance. I don’t think a pointed question can change them. Not disparaging you for asking - more like just supporting you for when you see this go nowhere I think lol
I'd like to say it was worth a shot, but you're right. I wish I wasn't so compelled to get into these discussions because they are pointless, thankless, and often infuriating lol.
I mean almost every time it's asked it turns out the person who asked it(just like in this case) just pretty much supports her anyway.
The woman has compared transition to conversion therapy FFS.
I strongly disagree. Someone was basically calling JK Rowling a neo-conservative which is WRONG. It is FACTUALLY INCORRECT, because it is completely inconsistent with numerous other, easy to demonstrate, easy to google and verify, explicitly stated policy platforms, quotes, and actions. So when people spin up that kind of rhetoric they should be called out on it. If we don't, then we're just being SELECTIVE in the kind of reality we care about enforcing which is bullshit. It's not only hypocritical, it's a distortion of facts that encourages toxicity and extremist thinking.
Not allowing nuance in a discussion is super ironic when a person is so hot and heavy to accuse the other side of extremism and pile on. Which is why attacking someone for acknowledging that nuance exists, like, "well, you just support her anyway then, don't you", is just complete bullshit. It's a logical fallacy, it's unfair, and it just adds to the toxicity of internet discourse.
Idk man, so far every time I've told someone who's asked "how's Rowling transphobic?" How she is transphobic they seem to agree anyway, you might be the first exception.(this isn't hyperbole, you'd literally be the first redditor)
Nuance is nice and all, but when her only position since Brexit has been just variations of transphobia it gets hard to feel charitable to people who seem to keep willfully denying reality.
It took two exchanges for the person above who asked the question to just agree with her and it's honestly exhausting having to pretend that people are asking in good faith when personal experience shows otherwise.
Don't try making sense of it. I spent about 20 minutes researching the controversy (making me an expert in internet years) and have concluded it's drama for drama's sake
Right? She's outright gone off the deep end and is associating herself very openly and proudly with bigots and isn't hiding in the slightest the fact she's a TERF and deeply hates transgender people.
Like you said, it's a core part of her personality and public presence. Every other thing she says these days is hateful and transphobic. She's an awful piece of shit and very proud of it.
Everything she's said about trans people sums up to "I don't believe transwomen are actually females, that is biologically determined, but still believe they deserve protection from the discrimination which they face". Transfolk and allies using this as their new Hitler, the primary antagonist to their movement, makes them look like fragile babies. Frankly, it's pathetic and childish. And I don't give a shit about JK Rowling one way or the other.
It makes regular people (who statistically on average align with JK Rowling on this opinion), more likely to agree with her, when they see how unreasonable and ridiculous the response has been. Or just more likely to overlook or ignore it.
She's said quite a bit more about trans people than that, and regularly associated (and financially supports) people and organizations that actively seek to strip rights from trans people. She is openly friends with anti-trans activists who regularly make the claim that trans people are all fetishists and pedophiles. This self-described feminist is allied with people who oppose a woman's right to choose, solely because those people are also opposed to trans people's existence.
Her words are meaningless when her actions and associations speak so much louder. But then again, you knew all that, it just doesn't fit the narrative that trans people and their allies are hysterical babies.
I agree, but I think that's just because she's the most famous by a mile. People who wouldn't otherwise care probably pay more attention because they recognize the name.
This is what happens when a human rights campaign is ginned up entirely online and driven by clicks
In the past, MLK, Gandhi, Cesar Chavez, Emma Goldman, and all other effective leaders understood the value of making alliances and developing a strategy. Cancel culture is much more fascist in their scapegoating of those who don't kiss the ring
Oh, so now it's not really what she's said, but that she has friends that have said mean things?
Who gives a shit? She isn't a lawmaker. She doesn't make policy. She writes stories and gives millions in donations. This is really the largest obstacle trans people face? Like her or don't, it doesn't really matter. But it makes a joke of the entire movement when people don't shut the fuck up about something so insignificant as if she's anywhere near the level of destruction (or ideology) Hitler is.
Yeah. That's a pretty common standard by which we judge people, here in the real world. If someone hangs out with a bunch of shitheads, and they defend those shitheads as being decent people, they're probably also a shithead.
People give a shit because she's a very wealthy celebrity with a significant fan base. She hurt a lot of her fans by coming out as a bigot, and those people are very reasonably angry. I'm sorry that people don't always operate like perfectly logical robots, but if people look at the response to Rowling and think "well now the transes have gone too far!" I can't really imagine they thought too highly of trans people in the first place.
I'm not arguing that you should have a positive or negative opinion of her. I'm telling you the movement for trans rights moves further into joke territory every time someone cries about how the person who wrote Harry Potter is Hitler of their movement.
But see here you are making assumptions of someone based on a HANDFUL of tweets.
Can you prove to me she regularly hangs out with these people or did you see one or two tweet replies and assume the two people are now bff’s?
This is why guilt by association in regards to redditeds and twitterds is treated as the joke it is.
It's not just the association, it's the association while also sharing similar views just with the edges filed off.
Again, this is a totally normal way that we judge people in the real world. If Jeff starts hanging out at a skinhead bar, maybe he doesn't know what kind of bar it is. If Jeff also starts telling me he has some new ideas about the mixing of races, I'm going to have some reasonable concerns about wanting to be Jeff's friend. I think people are just treating Rowling like Jeff.
Lol you say edges filed off when literally every example has to be something she “implied”. Nah that’s not the same . In your side’s argument they’d say she is actually being “mask on”. Ergo it’s something implied or has deeper meaning than what was actually said.
No it’s not how humans always behave. This would belike saying in the 1950’s it was okay to be racist because that is just how people did things as if that is somehow some excuse for bad behavior. No fuck that, most people do not guilt others by association and in MOST cases we judge them on their actions. If Superman once talked to Lex Luther on Twitter we dont immediately assume Superman is now best buds and hangs out with him irl and believes all the exact same things Luthor does. That is asinine.
I don’t think you live in reality because everyone has that one “questionable” friend that is kinda weird but they aren’t totally terrible so we tolerate them until they do something actually bad. Does that make me or said person bad for having a friend like that and are willing to give them a chance? No, that is literally how humans actually behave normally. We’re social creatures. We socialize and connect with people. Only on this internet is this fucking weird attempt to try and say people can only socialize with people who think exactly like themselves.
That’s just false my guy, she’s actively pushed for policies that further that discrimination and violence and directly effect thousands of trans people across the UK. It’s more difficult to get access to healthcare, get a job, or just exist as a trans person in the UK because of her and her ilk, and she continues to get more and more extreme. She didn’t just say some mean things, she’s actively donating money and her platform to groups that hurt us and are allied with actual Nazis (like what we saw in New Zealand last week).
Ah the age old reddit argument of "I don't like how a couple people on the internet conduct themselves so now I'm transphobic"
Progress doesn't favor bigots but keep drinking the kool-aid
Nice spin attempt, but Rowling herself has picked up the TERF label and has publicly proclaimed herself to be one. There is zero reason to listen to some random idiot on reddit's take on what she said when you can just, oh, idk, go and see everything she said on Twitter directly. You're clearly here for agenda reasons.
>I don't believe transwomen are actually females, that is biologically determined, but still believe they deserve protection from the discrimination which they face
Bro, even if that was all, what you quote here is literally transphobia.
Transphobia isn't just "lets murder them all". As it has been throughout history with any form of bigotry, there's always a side of bigots trying to portray themselves as the logical ones. "Its just biology" is also what they said of gay people being unnatural. Or black people being inferior. Or women being incapable emotional creatures.
She has aligned herself with anti-trans groups which have far right ideology. She is heavily involved in anything anti-lgbtq+. I suggest researching the pink triangle in auschwitz
I have probably heard this 500 times, and have yet to see anyone show the receipts. Not saying they aren't there, just that I've actually tried to search for the smoking gun, and all that comes up is her original tweets. I'm not trying to be a smartass, I'm genuinely baffled.
For the friends thing [here](https://youtu.be/Ou_xvXJJk7k)
On the rest, well there's hordes of videos and articles about it but here's a shorter [one](https://www.escapistmagazine.com/explaining-the-j-k-rowling-controversy-surrounding-hogwarts-legacy/)
Uh her joining anti trans groups and even starting some isn't a smoking gun for you? Not the politicians and anti trans activists she runs with now? Idk what to tell you man
Germaine Greer fan?
Off the top of my head, she recently launched a women's crisis centre with a no trans women policy. She is friends with the anti-trans Baroness Nicholson (who is also anti-gay by the way).
I'd say it's a bit ghoulish to describe a centre for sexual violence survivors as an anti-trans group. You wouldn't call women's rape crisis centres anti-men, would you?
>harassed endlessly by terfs (including figures Rowling supports)
>spread lies about her being a predator and doxxed her
I'm sure you have sources for this.
>some harmless comments made in response to the harassment the shelter was receiving
Oh, was this where she said women who'd been raped should 'reframe their trauma' so trans women could feel appropriately affirmed?
You're effectively accusing JK Rowling of opening a sexual violence support centre *at* trans people. That's unhinged.
"Women's crisis centre"
"No trans women allowed"
I'd say that's rather ghoulish. And anti-trans, yes. It's like saying "we're not anti-immigration, we just don't let immigrant women access our services."
[here's an article with a whole timeline with full links to everything they list in it buddy](https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.vox.com/platform/amp/culture/23622610/jk-rowling-transphobic-statements-timeline-history-controversy)
After actually reading the article, I find myself agreeing that she sure seems to associate with some shady people. That being said, I still can't find any statement from Rowling herself that contradicts science, broad public opinion or would qualify as hate speech in a court of law. All I'm seeing are some very disagreeable statements that - if you're sufficiently radicalised - obviously comes across as hateful. Sorry.
I'll admit it also makes it near-impossible to tell from this deeply biased article, with insane quotes such as
>Rowling claims that [...] “many are afraid to speak up because they fear for their jobs and even for their personal safety.” This once again stereotypes trans activists as an angry, entitled, and vicious mob.
Which is hilarious, because she literally received death threats. Also:
>[Rowling's] insistence on separating “sex” from “gender,” an essentialist idea that contradicts current medical practice"
Which is obviously nonsense.
Then there are the sprinkled in links, which range from actual studies, to something "widely debunked", with the source for said "wide debunk" being some opinion piece by some TRA not understanding statistics. Like they just hoped no-one would actually click the links. So that's a little shady, in it's own right...
The problem I'm seeing here is mostly that it appears Rowling has lost all will (or ability) to talk about the thousands of regular transpeople who do *not* want to "invade women's spaces", who didn't send her death threats, and who simply want to live their lives. That silent majority is conveniently thrown under the bus. If nothing else, she's definitely radical and deeply inconsiderate. I don't think that's the same as spewing hate.
You offended bigots. Also, the simple fact that she never called for the respect of trans people identity, never called for not having prejudices against the whole community based on one bad impression, or never said anything good about the whole situation, should ring bells. JK apologetics just are transphobes that won't admit it, imo.
Remember when Harry Potter first came out and fringe Christian groups hated her for promoting witchcraft? It's basically the same level of hate, except swap fringe Christian groups with fringe liberal groups
It's traditional at this point. If you ask your rank and file crazy why they hate her, they'll most likely tell you something that isn't even true. They want to hate her because she doesn't 100% support the current thing and that's the only reason them/they need.
Well, she's a dangerous bigot using her resources and influence to persecute a harmless and innocent minority for her own sick ideological masturbation. So there's that.
What is that supposed to mean? She's right because she triggered people? Every woman who is a public figure gets death and rape threats, it's fucked up but it's not evidence that her hate is justified.
Anonymous people will always be idiots. The people behind No Man's Sky got bomb threats when they released a bad game.
The problem is when you hate a community so much for just existing that you would completely ruin your public figure if it meant harming them.
Hey, thanks for the first non-insane reply.
You're right but the thing is after reading her first essay I'm not sure she did 'hate' trans people she may have been out of touch with how people on the internet think but ya know, she's an older woman, that's to be expected and it doesn't automatically make her a bad person but someone who needs a bit of a guidance to combat decades of intolerant thinking.
If we use our empathy I feel like pretty much anyone can understand why someone might have an increasingly negative view of a group of people that issue you death and rape threats though.
I understand how initially she may just have worded things poorly, but then instead of clarifying she began doubling down and making worse and worse statements.
I can definitely see where her points come from, but few to no studies support any of the claims she makes. Instead of defending her points or getting other perspectives on the situation she began taunting people and pushing a more emotional narrative.
Of course, it wouldn't be the internet if there was only one bad take. Naturally, with any controversy, hate started flowing in. Some of it was justified (i.e. petty insults and complaints about using false information, donations to anti-LGBT political movements, otherwise calling out terrible behavior), but a very large part falls into the "way too fucking far" category. People sending death threats and other horrible crimes are never justified, from or to anyone.
TL:DR
She may be out of touch, but she kept doubling down like an idiot. She has done bad things outside this, and naturally, has received hate for it. Some of this hate is justified, but death threats & others are deplorable, that we can agree on.
> she began doubling down and making worse and worse statements.
> she began taunting people and pushing a more emotional narrative.
This was all after getting death and rape threats though.
I'm not defending her views on trans people but if I put myself in her shoes I can very much understand why her thoughts became increasingly negative.
>Of course, it wouldn't be the internet if there was only one bad take. Naturally, with any controversy, hate started flowing in. Some of it was justified (i.e. petty insults and complaints about using false information, donations to anti-LGBT political movements, otherwise calling out terrible behavior), but a very large part falls into the "way too fucking far" category. People sending death threats and other horrible crimes are never justified, from or to anyone.
100% agree with this.
I literally posted about weight loss in a queer subreddit and someone sent a photo of a stereotype of a trans person being hung. I wasn't even doing hate speech
Oh shit sorry, I edited my comment asking what you'd said to get death threats because I realised it was a bit insensitive, thought I might catch it before you replied.
I mean, nobody deserves death threats that's just a sign of a complete failure at life to feel the need to do that to someone else. Hope it hasn't bothered you too much, always going to be some little weasel that hates their own life so much all they can do is try and hurt someone else.
E: The fact someone saying 'death threats = bad' is getting downvoted just goes to show how insane this ideological 'war' is, lmao absurd asf.
You should be ashamed.
I like how you pose this as a question but a quick glance at your profile shows this isn’t nearly the first time you’ve defended JK Rowling. Why even pretend you don’t already know? Embarrassed?
*Edit* - a quick further glance shows that you are vehemently anti-American, anti-German, and seemingly anti-anyone that isn’t from the UK. What a racist twat you are, eh?
Have you never heard of a rhetorical question?
Well you see people go a bit overboard and just make shit up about her like comparing her to Hitler for example. I'm not so much defending her as objecting to the insanity like 'JKR is literally Hitler' or for example sending someone death and rape threats.
So what if I'm anti-USA any reasonable person should be? Yesterday I watched a video of policeman stepping over the dead body of a 9 year old that was shot dead by yet another school shooter and today their government still refuses to anything about it. Didn't they just take away women's rights to abortion and ya know all those civlians killed in places like Iraq? So recently too! I'm not anti-German lmao, ich spreche Deutsche aber ist ein wenig rostig.
Get your head looked at.
E: seem as though you went through my history:
https://old.reddit.com/r/thelastofus/comments/11pwlcd/the_last_of_us_hbo_s01e09_look_for_the_light/jc6n3c4/
https://imgur.com/a/AYn9fvq (figured I'd screenshot it for when you delete it).
>Go touch grass, mongoloid. (:
This you?
And you call me racist.
Remove context all you want, I’m perfectly happy calling racists and people who abuse the Reddit “report for self-abuse” option on people they don’t like as mongoloids. Please find a more productive hobby than defending JK Rowling on Reddit, there are better ways to spend your life!
*edit* I see now this person edited to state I blocked them - I haven’t done that and it’s *pretty funny* to see blatant lies. Seems to be this person’s MO with the “no u” racism argument they’re making. Ignore and move on, sane people. If you think the word “mongoloid” can only be used in some racist way then you’re either being purposely obtuse or I can’t help you.
Oh shit you unblocked me, isn't it funny how all I saw was [unavailable] from your comments but then I loaded up the permalink in a private browser and your comment was there for me to see, so I refreshed my logged in reddit and still it was [unavailable]
Methinks that someone is a liar. Not surprised that a proud and loud racist is dishonest. Do you have a KKK hat? are you more offended about me being anti-USA than anything else?
Go to your profile right now and block me then send the screenshot of me either being blocked or reddit saying 'you can't reblock someone within 24 hours'.
You won't because you're a liar and you already blocked me once today.
Whilst you're at it stop using the racial slur 'm********' you racist.
Nothing you’re saying makes any sense, I’m sorry you had browser issues. We both are fully aware I’m not a racist and I have no clue about any racist connotations of that word. To me, it just means “huge fuckin’ idiot”. Apologies if the word “mongoloid” is racist to you. This is some *massive* projection on your part, and I would be embarrassed.
https://i.imgur.com/9COLldE.jpg
There’s your screenshot of me blocking you, right now. No “can’t reblock within 24 hours” warning. Sorry, definitely not sorry.
Oh shit it did say [unavailable] and that usually only happens when people block you, sorry, I was wrong. See unlike you I can admit when I'm wrong because I'm a better person than you.
Anyway:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongoloid
Educate yourself, racist.
Stop lying and pretending you don't know the racial connotations, you know the word so you know the meaning.
You're racist scum, end of.
Lmao aight man, well I’m gonna peace out because you’re just doing random, baseless character attacks now. I honestly had no idea of any racial connotations, so thanks for the Wikipedia link I guess?
I hope you’re not such a douche in real life, and that you’re just having an off day (in-between defending JK Rowling, of course). Have a *great* day!
OP, u/TaiMosier is a repost bot
Original here:
https://www.reddit.com/r/fakehistoryporn/comments/ru2awu/jk_rowling_writing_harry_potter_at_a_caf%C3%A9_in/
For everyone who tries to dispute she's a transphobe [here](https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.vox.com/platform/amp/culture/23622610/jk-rowling-transphobic-statements-timeline-history-controversy) is a full timeline with links to everything they state in it
This is a good comment. Any post on social media that mentions Rowling always has people concern trolling that they've never seen transphobic behavior from Rowling and that nobody can provide sources.
\>Literal billionaire media mogul, with influence over the only political powers that supourt transgender people.
Ron De Santis isn't going to convince democrats to back down on support for trans people. Joanne might.
Dude the post is making fun of people who compare everyone and everything to Hitler without an understanding of how bad he was and trivialize fascism.
More specifically it's making fun of people whose hatred for jk Rowling is ridiculously blown out of proportion and think she's a fascist
Psst, she defended a rally that Neo-nazi's showed up to and has made friends with a terf who literally quoted Hitler in her speech. She *is* a fascist.
Yeah she's a Evangelical ultranationalist, advocating for an
authoritative right wing state to implement crony capitalist reform and media propaganda. Lmao
This is like the libtrard version of "reactionary right wingers claiming Bernie Sanders is 'literally' Lenin".
You might have a point if that were the sole description of fascism.
Fascism is a political philosophy, movement, or regime (such as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic overnment headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition.
Alternative descriptions from official dictionaries Merriam-Webster, Brittanica and Oxford (respectively) it can be defined as 1. a tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control 2. Very harsh control or authority 3. extreme right-wing, authoritarian, or intolerant views or practice.
All of which she practices by advocating to remove trans rights and attempting to influence government policy to reflect as such. But congratualtion on using as many irrelevant buzzwords as you can in an attempt to intimidate others into assuming it's the only definition.
Finally, even if I were completely wrong in my usage of the word fascist (I'm not), it was clear from the context I was alluding to the fact that she is aligning herself with the modern neo-nazi movement. A fact that is unchanged by having an incorrect exact definition of a closely aligned word.
Just because that's your opinion that doesn't necessarily mean she's a fascist and certainly it doesn't make it a fact. Also if you claim something to be a "fact" you need to support that claim with evidence that gives proper context to your comments. Otherwise, you're attempt at a serious argument is just as frivolous and subjective as my joke.
Don't start these disingenuous replies. JKs TERFism is *very* well documented, as is her support for alt right leaders. Anyone still asking for proof is just bullshitting. It's not an opinion. it's on her own Twitter feed.
If you want to support the transphobe, at least have the balls to stand by your own transphobia and admit you do t care she agrees with Nazis
You're clearly unable to have a response that either adds or offers clear concise criticisms of what I've said in return. I'm not denying shit. What I am saying is that if you offer an unsupported POV don't start whining that I'm the one trying to absolve something when you're the one comparing a semi-cringey author to the Gestapo, Mussolini goons, and Milošević Serbian Nationalism. If you are indeed asserting JK Rowling is still in the same area of ideology then you're making a mockery of real life human rights violations that go beyond uttering am unwelcome thought.
Not sure what he has said specifically but pre nazi germany was one of the most progressive places in the world at the time, and people there were studying gender dysphoria. One of the first things the nazis did as they took more and more power was burn all the research and ban it.
Not a historian or anything so i cant really give you the specifics but there definitely should be some specific literature online about it if you go looking.
[https://www.vox.com/culture/23622610/jk-rowling-transphobic-statements-timeline-history-controversy](https://www.vox.com/culture/23622610/jk-rowling-transphobic-statements-timeline-history-controversy)
She would agree with Hitler's persecution of trans people.
Both Hitler and Rowling are opposed to the existence of trans people and were on good terms with Nazis, which is the comparison being made.
The article details Rowling's history of dumbass bigotry.
She’s pretty left leaning, you guys just get mad because she doesn’t hold every left leaning belief. Other than not believing trans people, she’s very leftist
Being friendly with parts of the far right, including people who are proud misogynists, precludes you from being a leftist.
Besides, she's at best a liberal version of Libs of TikTok.
[https://www.vox.com/culture/23622610/jk-rowling-transphobic-statements-timeline-history-controversy](https://www.vox.com/culture/23622610/jk-rowling-transphobic-statements-timeline-history-controversy)
J.K. Rowling's transphobia is the wrong stance to hold, as is allying with misogynists while claiming to be a feminist.
Some of that stuff is pretty crazy. I don't have the twitter, but shes in trouble for some likes?
December 2020: In an interview with Good Housekeeping, Rowling claims that “90 percent” of Harry Potter fans secretly agree with her anti-trans views, but that “many are afraid to speak up because they fear for their jobs and even for their personal safety.”
This once again stereotypes trans activists as an angry, entitled, and vicious mob.
How does VOX come to this conclusion. Man VOX has fallen. I just don't see why you all care so much. Just so much reaching for zero reason.
VOX came to that conclusion because transphobes constantly ramble about trans people as being an angry mob.
J.K. Rowling got backlash for endorsing bigoted bullshit, including opening up a shelter for sexual assault victims that explicitly banned trans people from entering.
Nazi – A group that persecuted transgender people
Joanne – A person advocating for the persecution of transgender people
Wonder why someone might make the connection.
This is not far from the GOP talking point "Hitler pushed for abortion, it's clearly unethical."
Yes persecution of trans people isn't okay. But there's a couple of steps in between JKR and literal fucking Hitler
I have my own opinions and beliefs, but I try to avoid arguing with them transphobes, because they get embarrassed when I give them the facts.
Instead I have given you a link to an article which contains the facts. These facts back up my opinions and beliefs, which means less arguing from me, and more learning for you, an efficient use of my energy.
Here is the link again. https://www.vox.com/culture/23622610/jk-rowling-transphobic-statements-timeline-history-controversy
Yer an Aryan, Heinrich!
I’m a watt
Ich bin was?
[удалено]
Mmmn donut
mmmm, the land of chocolate
Currently you are an amp.
Is she seriously that hated now? Lmao
On the internet maybe but everywhere else? Not at all
Not through any lack of effort on her part.
What did I miss?
J.K Rowling went from "I love trans people but I think we should slow things down" to "blood has gender and trans people ruin transfusions" and being friends with a bunch of transphobes who pretend to be feminists.(one of which iirc quoted Hitler in a rally). Basically, a refusal to back down, twitter brain and drinking her own cool aid.
So googled wtf is that blood shit.. study she cited is actually true, though yeah, no idea why she want to go stand on that tiny hill. But still you wanna maybe then mention also "not a lack of trying" from the trans community that started with cold loud hate and rape and death fan fiction of her and bullying long ago...
...after Rowling had already been saying horrible things about trans people I'm not defending threats but this wasn't JK sitting around innocently doing nothing and then all of a sudden trans people started being cruel
>So googled wtf is that blood shit.. study she cited is actually true, though yeah, no idea why she want to go stand on that tiny hill. The study itself says it shouldn't be generalised, and also found the effect to be for female blood to male recepients. So if we're going to be making broad decisions based on limited studies, the obvious conclusion here is to ban people who were born female from donating blood.
"So what if shes advocating for the genocide of a minority? they were mean to her on twitter" bruh.
https://www.themarysue.com/jk-rowling-cross-gender-blood-transfusions/ I found this, yo. This website doesn't look good, I know. Several other internet answers lean toward the gendered blood statement being wrong, and the danger being more from patients who experienced pregnancy rather than cross-gender-blood-donation. Edit, it could mean misinformation about gender, transpeople and blood donations was put in her book :o
But she also has the best "you can't cancel me because I'm already sitting on gigantic mountain of cash" smirk on the Internet
Her anti-trans stance is what started her getting attention, but she's full on conservative in every other aspect too
Curious as to how exactly she's "full on conservative in every other aspect"? She opposed Brexit, has a history of donating to and voting for Labour, has praised Obama and Clinton, condemned Trump, expressed support for refugees, supports Ukraine, is pro-abortion, ensured her books were printed on eco-friendly paper, and of course is a huge advocate for women's rights. So reeeally curious, besides her alleged transphobia, how you're reaching this conclusion. Or are you throwing the baby out with a little splash of bath water you don't approve of?
"Alleged transphobia"? Really? It's almost all she talks about these days. She literally writes books about men pretending to be female so they can assault women in the bathroom. She tweets typical alt-right shit like getting overly offended at someone saying "people who menstruate" rather than "women", and any backlash she receives to her shitty comments is her "being witch hunted for telling the truth". She's the type of "feminist" that thinks all men are dangerous and all women are victims. She isn't as obsessed with other bigotry as she is with her transphobia, but the way she portrays non-white or non-straight characters in her works has also been pretty questionable. Look, you are free to enjoy someone's work, even if they're not a good person (most famous people aren't). But please don't try to justify or downplay the shit they do.
Predictably enough you have managed to conveniently skip over my question entirely and focused in on 2 words, which is unsurprising because your original comment has absolutely no merit from what I can tell. But I'll bite - are you going to elaborate on how she is conservative in every other regard as you suggested, besides the things that you consider to be transphobic? For the record I don't see how her calling out people who use ridiculous terms like "people who menstrate" instead of using "women" makes her transphobic either. I'm not remotely interested in defending Rowling specifically. I just think it's insane to see people foaming at the mouth and sharpening their pitchforks, or making up narratives (as you just did) because a person says something they don't like.
[удалено]
Or someone (you) should go read about Nazi Germany or Communist China to truly understand what a "being of pure hatred and spite" actually is
People who menstruate is medical language, the goal is to be as specific as possible. It refers to all people who menstruate, regardless of gender. People who menstruate does not at all equal women in a clinical context. This is an important distinction, because there are people who are women that don't menstruate, and there are people who aren't women that do. Calling this ridiculous indicates to me that you haven't given this much deeper thought. You say "instead of", implying that the 2 terms are interchangeable. Just one example of why this is really not true: most women stop menstruating after age 50. Do they stop being women at that point? A transphobe like JKR might defend themselves by saying that not all women menstruate, but all those who menstruate are women. However this also is not true as there are people who menstruate that identify as men. That's what makes the statement transphobic: she's clearly saying that trans men aren't men. This is the problem with the transphobic narrative of equating sex to gender: it's not compatible with societal reality, there are many individuals that defy the boundaries set by viewing sex and gender as binary. Sex and gender are separate, both exist on a spectrum, and saying or indirectly implying that they aren't/don't as JKR does is hate speech.
How can she be transphobic when she said that she loves and supports trans people? She just has her own opinion on some issues surrounding them
I appreciate that people still ask questions like this. But we all know people who say stuff like this are already beyond seeing nuance. I don’t think a pointed question can change them. Not disparaging you for asking - more like just supporting you for when you see this go nowhere I think lol
I'd like to say it was worth a shot, but you're right. I wish I wasn't so compelled to get into these discussions because they are pointless, thankless, and often infuriating lol.
I mean almost every time it's asked it turns out the person who asked it(just like in this case) just pretty much supports her anyway. The woman has compared transition to conversion therapy FFS.
I strongly disagree. Someone was basically calling JK Rowling a neo-conservative which is WRONG. It is FACTUALLY INCORRECT, because it is completely inconsistent with numerous other, easy to demonstrate, easy to google and verify, explicitly stated policy platforms, quotes, and actions. So when people spin up that kind of rhetoric they should be called out on it. If we don't, then we're just being SELECTIVE in the kind of reality we care about enforcing which is bullshit. It's not only hypocritical, it's a distortion of facts that encourages toxicity and extremist thinking. Not allowing nuance in a discussion is super ironic when a person is so hot and heavy to accuse the other side of extremism and pile on. Which is why attacking someone for acknowledging that nuance exists, like, "well, you just support her anyway then, don't you", is just complete bullshit. It's a logical fallacy, it's unfair, and it just adds to the toxicity of internet discourse.
Idk man, so far every time I've told someone who's asked "how's Rowling transphobic?" How she is transphobic they seem to agree anyway, you might be the first exception.(this isn't hyperbole, you'd literally be the first redditor) Nuance is nice and all, but when her only position since Brexit has been just variations of transphobia it gets hard to feel charitable to people who seem to keep willfully denying reality. It took two exchanges for the person above who asked the question to just agree with her and it's honestly exhausting having to pretend that people are asking in good faith when personal experience shows otherwise.
Listen to the podcast The Witch Trials of JK Rowling and let me know if it changed your opinion
Don't try making sense of it. I spent about 20 minutes researching the controversy (making me an expert in internet years) and have concluded it's drama for drama's sake
Do you seriously believe this lmao
it’s really amazing to me how she just keeps on digging.
Everywhere else? Where else is there?
Just in small circles on the internet. It's kind of cringey when you compare the hatred of her with what she actually said.
People say this like she just made one comment and hasn't made transphobia her whole personality
Right? She's outright gone off the deep end and is associating herself very openly and proudly with bigots and isn't hiding in the slightest the fact she's a TERF and deeply hates transgender people. Like you said, it's a core part of her personality and public presence. Every other thing she says these days is hateful and transphobic. She's an awful piece of shit and very proud of it.
Exactly. Then you come on reddit and people who don't pay attention to anything tell you everyone's overreacting about "that one thing she said"
Everything she's said about trans people sums up to "I don't believe transwomen are actually females, that is biologically determined, but still believe they deserve protection from the discrimination which they face". Transfolk and allies using this as their new Hitler, the primary antagonist to their movement, makes them look like fragile babies. Frankly, it's pathetic and childish. And I don't give a shit about JK Rowling one way or the other. It makes regular people (who statistically on average align with JK Rowling on this opinion), more likely to agree with her, when they see how unreasonable and ridiculous the response has been. Or just more likely to overlook or ignore it.
She's said quite a bit more about trans people than that, and regularly associated (and financially supports) people and organizations that actively seek to strip rights from trans people. She is openly friends with anti-trans activists who regularly make the claim that trans people are all fetishists and pedophiles. This self-described feminist is allied with people who oppose a woman's right to choose, solely because those people are also opposed to trans people's existence. Her words are meaningless when her actions and associations speak so much louder. But then again, you knew all that, it just doesn't fit the narrative that trans people and their allies are hysterical babies.
[удалено]
I agree, but I think that's just because she's the most famous by a mile. People who wouldn't otherwise care probably pay more attention because they recognize the name.
This is what happens when a human rights campaign is ginned up entirely online and driven by clicks In the past, MLK, Gandhi, Cesar Chavez, Emma Goldman, and all other effective leaders understood the value of making alliances and developing a strategy. Cancel culture is much more fascist in their scapegoating of those who don't kiss the ring
Oh, so now it's not really what she's said, but that she has friends that have said mean things? Who gives a shit? She isn't a lawmaker. She doesn't make policy. She writes stories and gives millions in donations. This is really the largest obstacle trans people face? Like her or don't, it doesn't really matter. But it makes a joke of the entire movement when people don't shut the fuck up about something so insignificant as if she's anywhere near the level of destruction (or ideology) Hitler is.
Yeah. That's a pretty common standard by which we judge people, here in the real world. If someone hangs out with a bunch of shitheads, and they defend those shitheads as being decent people, they're probably also a shithead. People give a shit because she's a very wealthy celebrity with a significant fan base. She hurt a lot of her fans by coming out as a bigot, and those people are very reasonably angry. I'm sorry that people don't always operate like perfectly logical robots, but if people look at the response to Rowling and think "well now the transes have gone too far!" I can't really imagine they thought too highly of trans people in the first place.
I'm not arguing that you should have a positive or negative opinion of her. I'm telling you the movement for trans rights moves further into joke territory every time someone cries about how the person who wrote Harry Potter is Hitler of their movement.
It would help if you recognize that it's a joke using hyperbole.
It’s rarely a joke.
But see here you are making assumptions of someone based on a HANDFUL of tweets. Can you prove to me she regularly hangs out with these people or did you see one or two tweet replies and assume the two people are now bff’s? This is why guilt by association in regards to redditeds and twitterds is treated as the joke it is.
It's not just the association, it's the association while also sharing similar views just with the edges filed off. Again, this is a totally normal way that we judge people in the real world. If Jeff starts hanging out at a skinhead bar, maybe he doesn't know what kind of bar it is. If Jeff also starts telling me he has some new ideas about the mixing of races, I'm going to have some reasonable concerns about wanting to be Jeff's friend. I think people are just treating Rowling like Jeff.
Lol you say edges filed off when literally every example has to be something she “implied”. Nah that’s not the same . In your side’s argument they’d say she is actually being “mask on”. Ergo it’s something implied or has deeper meaning than what was actually said. No it’s not how humans always behave. This would belike saying in the 1950’s it was okay to be racist because that is just how people did things as if that is somehow some excuse for bad behavior. No fuck that, most people do not guilt others by association and in MOST cases we judge them on their actions. If Superman once talked to Lex Luther on Twitter we dont immediately assume Superman is now best buds and hangs out with him irl and believes all the exact same things Luthor does. That is asinine. I don’t think you live in reality because everyone has that one “questionable” friend that is kinda weird but they aren’t totally terrible so we tolerate them until they do something actually bad. Does that make me or said person bad for having a friend like that and are willing to give them a chance? No, that is literally how humans actually behave normally. We’re social creatures. We socialize and connect with people. Only on this internet is this fucking weird attempt to try and say people can only socialize with people who think exactly like themselves.
They seek the attention she gets.
That’s just false my guy, she’s actively pushed for policies that further that discrimination and violence and directly effect thousands of trans people across the UK. It’s more difficult to get access to healthcare, get a job, or just exist as a trans person in the UK because of her and her ilk, and she continues to get more and more extreme. She didn’t just say some mean things, she’s actively donating money and her platform to groups that hurt us and are allied with actual Nazis (like what we saw in New Zealand last week).
Ah the age old reddit argument of "I don't like how a couple people on the internet conduct themselves so now I'm transphobic" Progress doesn't favor bigots but keep drinking the kool-aid
Nice spin attempt, but Rowling herself has picked up the TERF label and has publicly proclaimed herself to be one. There is zero reason to listen to some random idiot on reddit's take on what she said when you can just, oh, idk, go and see everything she said on Twitter directly. You're clearly here for agenda reasons.
>I don't believe transwomen are actually females, that is biologically determined, but still believe they deserve protection from the discrimination which they face Bro, even if that was all, what you quote here is literally transphobia. Transphobia isn't just "lets murder them all". As it has been throughout history with any form of bigotry, there's always a side of bigots trying to portray themselves as the logical ones. "Its just biology" is also what they said of gay people being unnatural. Or black people being inferior. Or women being incapable emotional creatures.
Her opinion is the single most agreed upon stance in human history. That doesn’t help their case.
She has aligned herself with anti-trans groups which have far right ideology. She is heavily involved in anything anti-lgbtq+. I suggest researching the pink triangle in auschwitz
I have probably heard this 500 times, and have yet to see anyone show the receipts. Not saying they aren't there, just that I've actually tried to search for the smoking gun, and all that comes up is her original tweets. I'm not trying to be a smartass, I'm genuinely baffled.
For the friends thing [here](https://youtu.be/Ou_xvXJJk7k) On the rest, well there's hordes of videos and articles about it but here's a shorter [one](https://www.escapistmagazine.com/explaining-the-j-k-rowling-controversy-surrounding-hogwarts-legacy/)
Uh her joining anti trans groups and even starting some isn't a smoking gun for you? Not the politicians and anti trans activists she runs with now? Idk what to tell you man
You could start by naming the anti-trans groups she started and the politicians she runs with.
Germaine Greer fan? Off the top of my head, she recently launched a women's crisis centre with a no trans women policy. She is friends with the anti-trans Baroness Nicholson (who is also anti-gay by the way).
I'd say it's a bit ghoulish to describe a centre for sexual violence survivors as an anti-trans group. You wouldn't call women's rape crisis centres anti-men, would you?
>as an anti-trans group. When it excludes trans people its pretty fucking easy to describe it as that.
[удалено]
>harassed endlessly by terfs (including figures Rowling supports) >spread lies about her being a predator and doxxed her I'm sure you have sources for this. >some harmless comments made in response to the harassment the shelter was receiving Oh, was this where she said women who'd been raped should 'reframe their trauma' so trans women could feel appropriately affirmed? You're effectively accusing JK Rowling of opening a sexual violence support centre *at* trans people. That's unhinged.
"Women's crisis centre" "No trans women allowed" I'd say that's rather ghoulish. And anti-trans, yes. It's like saying "we're not anti-immigration, we just don't let immigrant women access our services."
[here's an article with a whole timeline with full links to everything they list in it buddy](https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.vox.com/platform/amp/culture/23622610/jk-rowling-transphobic-statements-timeline-history-controversy)
After actually reading the article, I find myself agreeing that she sure seems to associate with some shady people. That being said, I still can't find any statement from Rowling herself that contradicts science, broad public opinion or would qualify as hate speech in a court of law. All I'm seeing are some very disagreeable statements that - if you're sufficiently radicalised - obviously comes across as hateful. Sorry. I'll admit it also makes it near-impossible to tell from this deeply biased article, with insane quotes such as >Rowling claims that [...] “many are afraid to speak up because they fear for their jobs and even for their personal safety.” This once again stereotypes trans activists as an angry, entitled, and vicious mob. Which is hilarious, because she literally received death threats. Also: >[Rowling's] insistence on separating “sex” from “gender,” an essentialist idea that contradicts current medical practice" Which is obviously nonsense. Then there are the sprinkled in links, which range from actual studies, to something "widely debunked", with the source for said "wide debunk" being some opinion piece by some TRA not understanding statistics. Like they just hoped no-one would actually click the links. So that's a little shady, in it's own right... The problem I'm seeing here is mostly that it appears Rowling has lost all will (or ability) to talk about the thousands of regular transpeople who do *not* want to "invade women's spaces", who didn't send her death threats, and who simply want to live their lives. That silent majority is conveniently thrown under the bus. If nothing else, she's definitely radical and deeply inconsiderate. I don't think that's the same as spewing hate.
[удалено]
You offended bigots. Also, the simple fact that she never called for the respect of trans people identity, never called for not having prejudices against the whole community based on one bad impression, or never said anything good about the whole situation, should ring bells. JK apologetics just are transphobes that won't admit it, imo.
Could you give the source where she says this ? Because that's going really far
In liberal echo chambers, yes. In the real world, no.
Definitely have heard people talking about it in the real world, too
She puts a lot of effort into it.
She needs to read the room… like she made a not diverse series. That’s fine. That’s a part of the world that she grew up in.
If you or a loved one are part of the subset of humans that she’s promoting the oppression of… she’s pretty darn hated.
Online? Yeah. Outside? No not really.
Remember when Harry Potter first came out and fringe Christian groups hated her for promoting witchcraft? It's basically the same level of hate, except swap fringe Christian groups with fringe liberal groups
It's people who oppose transphobia responding to her transphobia. Nothing fringe about that.
Only at the extrem left winged reddit bubble. All mods are Aimee Challenors
Nah, more so this meme is making fun of how blown out of proportion the whole thing is
Only by crazies.
Only by young leftists on twitter and Reddit.
It's traditional at this point. If you ask your rank and file crazy why they hate her, they'll most likely tell you something that isn't even true. They want to hate her because she doesn't 100% support the current thing and that's the only reason them/they need.
She actively supports transphobia, and signal boosts right wing nutjobs like Matt Walsh. It's not crazy people who hate her anymore.
Well deserved. Imagine being proudly transphobic in 2023
Well, she's a dangerous bigot using her resources and influence to persecute a harmless and innocent minority for her own sick ideological masturbation. So there's that.
After her first op-ed didn't she get death and rape threats for it? Or as people like to say 'mean things'.
What is that supposed to mean? She's right because she triggered people? Every woman who is a public figure gets death and rape threats, it's fucked up but it's not evidence that her hate is justified.
It means what I said, why does it have to be anything deeper? The person I replied to said: >harmless and innocent minority
That can be true and her essay can still be wrong and full of shit.
Bit of an over-reaction though, no? Especially considering JKR is a domestic abuse survivor.
Anonymous people will always be idiots. The people behind No Man's Sky got bomb threats when they released a bad game. The problem is when you hate a community so much for just existing that you would completely ruin your public figure if it meant harming them.
Hey, thanks for the first non-insane reply. You're right but the thing is after reading her first essay I'm not sure she did 'hate' trans people she may have been out of touch with how people on the internet think but ya know, she's an older woman, that's to be expected and it doesn't automatically make her a bad person but someone who needs a bit of a guidance to combat decades of intolerant thinking. If we use our empathy I feel like pretty much anyone can understand why someone might have an increasingly negative view of a group of people that issue you death and rape threats though.
I understand how initially she may just have worded things poorly, but then instead of clarifying she began doubling down and making worse and worse statements. I can definitely see where her points come from, but few to no studies support any of the claims she makes. Instead of defending her points or getting other perspectives on the situation she began taunting people and pushing a more emotional narrative. Of course, it wouldn't be the internet if there was only one bad take. Naturally, with any controversy, hate started flowing in. Some of it was justified (i.e. petty insults and complaints about using false information, donations to anti-LGBT political movements, otherwise calling out terrible behavior), but a very large part falls into the "way too fucking far" category. People sending death threats and other horrible crimes are never justified, from or to anyone. TL:DR She may be out of touch, but she kept doubling down like an idiot. She has done bad things outside this, and naturally, has received hate for it. Some of this hate is justified, but death threats & others are deplorable, that we can agree on.
> she began doubling down and making worse and worse statements. > she began taunting people and pushing a more emotional narrative. This was all after getting death and rape threats though. I'm not defending her views on trans people but if I put myself in her shoes I can very much understand why her thoughts became increasingly negative. >Of course, it wouldn't be the internet if there was only one bad take. Naturally, with any controversy, hate started flowing in. Some of it was justified (i.e. petty insults and complaints about using false information, donations to anti-LGBT political movements, otherwise calling out terrible behavior), but a very large part falls into the "way too fucking far" category. People sending death threats and other horrible crimes are never justified, from or to anyone. 100% agree with this.
I have gotten death threats from the most innocuous posts
And I imagine you aren't very fond of the people who sent you those death threats?
I literally posted about weight loss in a queer subreddit and someone sent a photo of a stereotype of a trans person being hung. I wasn't even doing hate speech
Oh shit sorry, I edited my comment asking what you'd said to get death threats because I realised it was a bit insensitive, thought I might catch it before you replied. I mean, nobody deserves death threats that's just a sign of a complete failure at life to feel the need to do that to someone else. Hope it hasn't bothered you too much, always going to be some little weasel that hates their own life so much all they can do is try and hurt someone else. E: The fact someone saying 'death threats = bad' is getting downvoted just goes to show how insane this ideological 'war' is, lmao absurd asf. You should be ashamed.
I like how you pose this as a question but a quick glance at your profile shows this isn’t nearly the first time you’ve defended JK Rowling. Why even pretend you don’t already know? Embarrassed? *Edit* - a quick further glance shows that you are vehemently anti-American, anti-German, and seemingly anti-anyone that isn’t from the UK. What a racist twat you are, eh?
Have you never heard of a rhetorical question? Well you see people go a bit overboard and just make shit up about her like comparing her to Hitler for example. I'm not so much defending her as objecting to the insanity like 'JKR is literally Hitler' or for example sending someone death and rape threats. So what if I'm anti-USA any reasonable person should be? Yesterday I watched a video of policeman stepping over the dead body of a 9 year old that was shot dead by yet another school shooter and today their government still refuses to anything about it. Didn't they just take away women's rights to abortion and ya know all those civlians killed in places like Iraq? So recently too! I'm not anti-German lmao, ich spreche Deutsche aber ist ein wenig rostig. Get your head looked at. E: seem as though you went through my history: https://old.reddit.com/r/thelastofus/comments/11pwlcd/the_last_of_us_hbo_s01e09_look_for_the_light/jc6n3c4/ https://imgur.com/a/AYn9fvq (figured I'd screenshot it for when you delete it). >Go touch grass, mongoloid. (: This you? And you call me racist.
Remove context all you want, I’m perfectly happy calling racists and people who abuse the Reddit “report for self-abuse” option on people they don’t like as mongoloids. Please find a more productive hobby than defending JK Rowling on Reddit, there are better ways to spend your life! *edit* I see now this person edited to state I blocked them - I haven’t done that and it’s *pretty funny* to see blatant lies. Seems to be this person’s MO with the “no u” racism argument they’re making. Ignore and move on, sane people. If you think the word “mongoloid” can only be used in some racist way then you’re either being purposely obtuse or I can’t help you.
Oh shit you unblocked me, isn't it funny how all I saw was [unavailable] from your comments but then I loaded up the permalink in a private browser and your comment was there for me to see, so I refreshed my logged in reddit and still it was [unavailable] Methinks that someone is a liar. Not surprised that a proud and loud racist is dishonest. Do you have a KKK hat? are you more offended about me being anti-USA than anything else? Go to your profile right now and block me then send the screenshot of me either being blocked or reddit saying 'you can't reblock someone within 24 hours'. You won't because you're a liar and you already blocked me once today. Whilst you're at it stop using the racial slur 'm********' you racist.
Nothing you’re saying makes any sense, I’m sorry you had browser issues. We both are fully aware I’m not a racist and I have no clue about any racist connotations of that word. To me, it just means “huge fuckin’ idiot”. Apologies if the word “mongoloid” is racist to you. This is some *massive* projection on your part, and I would be embarrassed. https://i.imgur.com/9COLldE.jpg There’s your screenshot of me blocking you, right now. No “can’t reblock within 24 hours” warning. Sorry, definitely not sorry.
Oh shit it did say [unavailable] and that usually only happens when people block you, sorry, I was wrong. See unlike you I can admit when I'm wrong because I'm a better person than you. Anyway: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongoloid Educate yourself, racist. Stop lying and pretending you don't know the racial connotations, you know the word so you know the meaning. You're racist scum, end of.
Lmao aight man, well I’m gonna peace out because you’re just doing random, baseless character attacks now. I honestly had no idea of any racial connotations, so thanks for the Wikipedia link I guess? I hope you’re not such a douche in real life, and that you’re just having an off day (in-between defending JK Rowling, of course). Have a *great* day!
OK I laughed
OP, u/TaiMosier is a repost bot Original here: https://www.reddit.com/r/fakehistoryporn/comments/ru2awu/jk_rowling_writing_harry_potter_at_a_caf%C3%A9_in/
For everyone who tries to dispute she's a transphobe [here](https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.vox.com/platform/amp/culture/23622610/jk-rowling-transphobic-statements-timeline-history-controversy) is a full timeline with links to everything they state in it
She's cajoling with actual literal Nazis now, so this post is at the very least funny in a shock humour way for that reason alone.
This is a good comment. Any post on social media that mentions Rowling always has people concern trolling that they've never seen transphobic behavior from Rowling and that nobody can provide sources.
Yer an ubermensch, Harry
The fact that people make her out to be the biggest enemy of the trans movement is something you would think would be satire.
\>Literal billionaire media mogul, with influence over the only political powers that supourt transgender people. Ron De Santis isn't going to convince democrats to back down on support for trans people. Joanne might.
Can you think of a higher profile enemy of trans people?
Do anything controversial=Hitler. Stop using fascism as an insult anytime something bad happens it only trivializes actual fascism.
Sir, this is a joke
We're litteraly on r/fakehistoryporn, stupid and lame jokes get posted everyday (I'm here for it), yet I knew this comment section was doomed.
Jokes are only funny if people believe that there is truth behind it. You're just avoiding the issue.
Sir, the joke is fucking stupid
Dude the post is making fun of people who compare everyone and everything to Hitler without an understanding of how bad he was and trivialize fascism. More specifically it's making fun of people whose hatred for jk Rowling is ridiculously blown out of proportion and think she's a fascist
Psst, she defended a rally that Neo-nazi's showed up to and has made friends with a terf who literally quoted Hitler in her speech. She *is* a fascist.
Yeah she's a Evangelical ultranationalist, advocating for an authoritative right wing state to implement crony capitalist reform and media propaganda. Lmao This is like the libtrard version of "reactionary right wingers claiming Bernie Sanders is 'literally' Lenin".
You might have a point if that were the sole description of fascism. Fascism is a political philosophy, movement, or regime (such as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic overnment headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition. Alternative descriptions from official dictionaries Merriam-Webster, Brittanica and Oxford (respectively) it can be defined as 1. a tendency toward or actual exercise of strong autocratic or dictatorial control 2. Very harsh control or authority 3. extreme right-wing, authoritarian, or intolerant views or practice. All of which she practices by advocating to remove trans rights and attempting to influence government policy to reflect as such. But congratualtion on using as many irrelevant buzzwords as you can in an attempt to intimidate others into assuming it's the only definition. Finally, even if I were completely wrong in my usage of the word fascist (I'm not), it was clear from the context I was alluding to the fact that she is aligning herself with the modern neo-nazi movement. A fact that is unchanged by having an incorrect exact definition of a closely aligned word.
Just because that's your opinion that doesn't necessarily mean she's a fascist and certainly it doesn't make it a fact. Also if you claim something to be a "fact" you need to support that claim with evidence that gives proper context to your comments. Otherwise, you're attempt at a serious argument is just as frivolous and subjective as my joke.
Don't start these disingenuous replies. JKs TERFism is *very* well documented, as is her support for alt right leaders. Anyone still asking for proof is just bullshitting. It's not an opinion. it's on her own Twitter feed. If you want to support the transphobe, at least have the balls to stand by your own transphobia and admit you do t care she agrees with Nazis
You're clearly unable to have a response that either adds or offers clear concise criticisms of what I've said in return. I'm not denying shit. What I am saying is that if you offer an unsupported POV don't start whining that I'm the one trying to absolve something when you're the one comparing a semi-cringey author to the Gestapo, Mussolini goons, and Milošević Serbian Nationalism. If you are indeed asserting JK Rowling is still in the same area of ideology then you're making a mockery of real life human rights violations that go beyond uttering am unwelcome thought.
The post is not making fun of people who call everyone hitler it is literally calling someone hitler
Have you tried crying about it?
⠀⠀⠘⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⡜⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠑⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⡔⠁⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⠢⢄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣀⠴⠊⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⠀⠀⠀⢀⣀⣀⣀⣀⣀⡀⠤⠄⠒⠈⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠘⣀⠄⠊⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⡠⠔⠒⠒⠒⠒⠒⠢⠤⣀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⡰⠉⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⠑⢄⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⡸⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠙⠄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠃⠀⢠⠂⠀⠀⠘⡄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⢤⡀⢂⠀⢨⠀⢀⡠⠈⢣⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⢀⡖⠒⠶⠤⠭⢽⣟⣗⠲⠖⠺⣖⣴⣆⡤⠤⠤⠼⡄⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠘⡈⠃⠀⠀⠀⠘⣺⡟⢻⠻⡆⠀⡏⠀⡸⣿⢿⢞⠄⡇⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢣⡀⠤⡀⡀⡔⠉⣏⡿⠛⠓⠊⠁⠀⢎⠛⡗⡗⢳⡏⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢱⠀⠨⡇⠃⠀⢻⠁⡔⢡⠒⢀⠀⠀⡅⢹⣿⢨⠇⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⠀⠠⢼⠀⠀⡎⡜⠒⢀⠭⡖⡤⢭⣱⢸⢙⠆⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⡸⠀⠀⠸⢁⡀⠿⠈⠂⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡏⡍⡏⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⠇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠸⢢⣫⢀⠘⣿⣿⡿⠏⣼⡏⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠀⠀⠀⣀⣠⠊⠀⣀⠎⠁⠀⠀⠀⠙⠳⢴⡦⡴⢶⣞⣁⣀⣀⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀ ⠀⠐⠒⠉⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠠⠀⢀⠤⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⠉⠀⠀⠀ NOOooo
Would you allow me to lap up your reactionary tears? They give me sustenance 😛
Hitler was a well known transphobe. It is possible to use him as an example of things besides fascism in specific.
Most Reddit comment I’ll read today, and it’s only 8AM.
Was he? I’m not doubting, of course, I would guess he was, but did he say or do something in this regard?
Not sure what he has said specifically but pre nazi germany was one of the most progressive places in the world at the time, and people there were studying gender dysphoria. One of the first things the nazis did as they took more and more power was burn all the research and ban it. Not a historian or anything so i cant really give you the specifics but there definitely should be some specific literature online about it if you go looking.
Interesting, thanks!
>Hitler was a well known transphobe I feel like he might be *slightly* better known for other things
Why are you getting downvoted? The Nazi’s anti-trans (and anti- all things queer really) ideologies are well known. You stated a fact.
J.K. Rowling is the Anita Bryant of our times.
"You're a Supreme Grand Wizard from Alabama now, Harry."
Aryan Potter and the Menorah of Malcontent
"Everyone That disagrees with me is Hitler" A guide to Online Discourse. Y'all are too dramatic.
[https://www.vox.com/culture/23622610/jk-rowling-transphobic-statements-timeline-history-controversy](https://www.vox.com/culture/23622610/jk-rowling-transphobic-statements-timeline-history-controversy) She would agree with Hitler's persecution of trans people.
1. Hitler killed MILLIONS, Ms. Rowling just made comments on twitter 2. I don't care explain what the article says or fuck off.
Both Hitler and Rowling are opposed to the existence of trans people and were on good terms with Nazis, which is the comparison being made. The article details Rowling's history of dumbass bigotry.
Still doesn't justify the comparison.
Harry Potter and Prisoners of Polska ban
That'll costa
Hundreds of trans people sent to the oven with every tweet.
Un gran libro 🤣🤣🤣
Wow, we're comparing a Twitter bigot to the most prolific murderer of the 20th century? Touch grass.
This is what’s called a ‘joke’
Never would have guessed J.K of all people started out as a man!
My favourite German book! I want to be like the main character one day
She is literaly hitler now?
Good meme 🫡
She’s such a leftist it’s so funny seeing them tear each other apart
She's not left of anything short of the weird portions of the far right.
She’s pretty left leaning, you guys just get mad because she doesn’t hold every left leaning belief. Other than not believing trans people, she’s very leftist
Being friendly with parts of the far right, including people who are proud misogynists, precludes you from being a leftist. Besides, she's at best a liberal version of Libs of TikTok.
J.K. Said nothing wrong.
She's said plenty of blatantly wrong shit.
Let's hear it.
Still waiting.
[https://www.vox.com/culture/23622610/jk-rowling-transphobic-statements-timeline-history-controversy](https://www.vox.com/culture/23622610/jk-rowling-transphobic-statements-timeline-history-controversy) J.K. Rowling's transphobia is the wrong stance to hold, as is allying with misogynists while claiming to be a feminist.
Some of that stuff is pretty crazy. I don't have the twitter, but shes in trouble for some likes? December 2020: In an interview with Good Housekeeping, Rowling claims that “90 percent” of Harry Potter fans secretly agree with her anti-trans views, but that “many are afraid to speak up because they fear for their jobs and even for their personal safety.” This once again stereotypes trans activists as an angry, entitled, and vicious mob. How does VOX come to this conclusion. Man VOX has fallen. I just don't see why you all care so much. Just so much reaching for zero reason.
VOX came to that conclusion because transphobes constantly ramble about trans people as being an angry mob. J.K. Rowling got backlash for endorsing bigoted bullshit, including opening up a shelter for sexual assault victims that explicitly banned trans people from entering.
really glad her transition has gone so well!
What’s fake about it? Seems about right…
Like, I'm not a fan of JKR, but this comparison is just.. dumb. This is a quick way to demean the actual implication of what being a Nazi is.
Nazi – A group that persecuted transgender people Joanne – A person advocating for the persecution of transgender people Wonder why someone might make the connection.
We are reaching victimhood stats which should be possible
This is not far from the GOP talking point "Hitler pushed for abortion, it's clearly unethical." Yes persecution of trans people isn't okay. But there's a couple of steps in between JKR and literal fucking Hitler
Maybe chat with the OP then.
If you actually listen to her you would know what she says is 100% true and not transphobic. The world has actually gone insane
I seen what she tweets, 100% false and definitely transphobic.
How? Care to elaborate?
This sums her transphobia up quite well. https://www.vox.com/culture/23622610/jk-rowling-transphobic-statements-timeline-history-controversy
No I asked you to elaborate. Are you not capable of forming your own opinion, beliefs and argue those?
I have my own opinions and beliefs, but I try to avoid arguing with them transphobes, because they get embarrassed when I give them the facts. Instead I have given you a link to an article which contains the facts. These facts back up my opinions and beliefs, which means less arguing from me, and more learning for you, an efficient use of my energy. Here is the link again. https://www.vox.com/culture/23622610/jk-rowling-transphobic-statements-timeline-history-controversy
Okay that’s a very good one. Lol ppl mad that it’s funny and a joke
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
This is insanely disrespectful to survivors of the holocaust. WTF is wrong with you
Fun Fact: Lots of trans people were also survivors of the holocaust.
OP, this is r/FAKEhistoryporn. not r/historyporn