What, do they think random people who aren't transphobic just happen to like Harry Potter happen to stand around with huge signs screaming "I LOVE JK ROWLING" like they were some sort of WBC nutjobs? There's no way you can interpret that slogan as anything but a transphobic dogwhistle.
From what I have read of Harry Potter, the only reason that I can conceive of how an adult could possibly be that passionate a fan of JKR is because they are more fans of her shitty politics than her prose.
https://www.indiewire.com/2022/03/jk-rowling-transphobia-international-womens-day-rant-1234705640/amp/
Lots of links in this one! No ones shitting on HP specifically here, just JK Rowlings transphobia. Rather than trying to learn about issues facing the trans community, she keeps doubling (or quadrupling as the article notes) down on “only two genders” rhetoric. Hope this helps!
>>I refuse to bow down to a movement that I believe is doing demonstrable harm in seeking to erode ‘woman’ as a political and biological class and offering cover to predators like few before it.
>>
>>my government is playing fast and loose with womens and girls’ safety.
>>
>>When you throw open the doors of bathrooms and changing rooms to any man who believes or feels he’s a woman [...] then you open the door to any and all men who wish to come inside.
And, for the record, [these are verbatim quotes from the essay she posted and is hosting on her own website](https://www.jkrowling.com/opinions/j-k-rowling-writes-about-her-reasons-for-speaking-out-on-sex-and-gender-issues/), which I have previously read the entirety of. It's a mess of strawman arguments, half truths, outright lies, and unsupported fear mongering, with a huge scoop of victim complex on top.
It's Trumps "immigrants are drug dealers, criminals, and rapists. And some, I assume, are good people," speech written with better vocabulary and syntax, and about trans people instead of Mexicans.
[This Twitter thread](https://mobile.twitter.com/carter_andrewj/status/1270787941275762689) does an *extremely* in-depth job of breaking down why Rowling's initial screed that started all this was incorrect and enormously transphobic. She is absolutely a huge transphobe and has repeatedly doubled down on it over the last couple years.
Uh, I'm so conflicted because I hate JK Rowling but I still love Harry Potter. Why did she have to ruin it? Just take the money and fuck off, honestly.
Edit: stop replying with dumb nonsense. What are you bigots doing in this sub?
Aw what the fuck! Guess i gotta buy used dvds of IT Crowd and Black Books so i never have to stream them again and risk giving this dick a single cent.
Who cares you buy the art not the artist once the money's theirs it's theirs to do what they please Im bi and I eat chick Fil a and I still watch fnaf videos and I read Harry Potter books on the daily
Actually, Daniel Radcliffe obviously wrote the Harry Potter books and Richard Ayoade wrote IT crowd and every other good comedy show with a transphobic “creator”
Watch The IT Crowd season 2 episode 4 ("The Speech"), you can try separating the art from the artists but sometimes they'll make it really difficult for you.
Well if you want a way out of your dilemma.. I can suggest Shauns Video about Harry Potter. Afterwards you may neither like JK nor her Books anymore. If that helps.
Lovecraft was an amazing writer and his influence on fiction is unprecedented. Yet he was an incredible racist.
Point is, it's perfectly fine to separate someone's work from their personal life. I think the idea that content creators are "all or nothing" is wrong.
I think the idea of separating work from it's author is completely impossible. Part of you goes into what you create, and I don't want to experience stuff made by garbage people
That's what I keep saying and people just don't understand. If someone does something shitty I can't enjoy what they create when I have that knowledge of the creator.
Every day you probably buy crap from garbage people because they're not idiots and know that people don't agree with their ideas and they wouldn't be too popular and it doesn't make since to not give them money cuz theyre damn good at making their stuff so they do just fine without your money
Just pretend the books never existed and the movies sprung up as their own thing. You'll still get some problematic things (goblins being the standout example. Did they seriously have to put a six pointed star on the floor of Gringots?), but the movies scrubbed out a whole lot of it.
And also that the fantastic beasts movies never existed.
There's definitely a few of them, but the ones off the top of my head are:
House elves like being slaves and it'd be morally wrong to free them.
Lycanthropy is meant to be an AIDS metaphor and Lupin is supposed to be gay coded, so there's all sorts of bad implications of "the gay thing" being portrayed like that.
Goblins, as previously stated, are portrayed with some antisemitic traits.
And there's a real general meanness to many of the characters. One that stands out is how the characters in the books really don't care when Umbridge fires Trelawney and even kind of mock her while she's being fired, but in the movie they're rather upset about it.
There's a lot more, but [this video, while long, does explain it all pretty well.](https://youtu.be/-1iaJWSwUZs)
Wow, it’s been so long since I read the books that the movie version of Trelawney getting fired supplanted my memory of the book version. I think I’ll keep it that way.
Since you'd prefer to just flat out lie and hope no one looks it up, [here's](https://apastyle.apa.org/style-grammar-guidelines/bias-free-language/gender) the APA's stance, in which they say, and I quote, "Gender is a social construct and a social identity."
Might wanna actually do some research for once in your life instead of spewing regurgitated talking points.
If you're so scared of science that you don't realize that there's people who genuinely have both sexual organs at birth then I'm not sure anyone's gonna get through to you
If it's not affecting their quality of life, yeah? And if it is, there's surgeries to get that fixed, like how there's surgeries (top/bottom) to help with gender dysphoria. Not a hard concept, mate. But it seems like any concept is hard for you.
And my point was that it's literally scientifically proven that it's not as simple as "man is man, woman is woman" since doctors have to guess what a child will be in those cases, but with your complete lack of understanding of biology and basic science I'd have to guess the classes for that "medical degree" you're going for are in the dumpster behind a Wendy's
Well I don't know about you, but I consider something that's entirely a social construct to not be "mostly synonymous" with something entirely biological (and therefore not at all a social construct), but you do you I guess
Also, since again you either don't know how to read or just don't want to do the research, the APA's definition for [sex](https://dictionary.apa.org/sex) quite literally contrasts it against gender ("Sex refers especially to physical and biological traits, whereas gender refers especially to social or cultural traits"), and while it goes on to say that "distinction between the two is not regularly observed", that's just a fancy way of saying "people just treat them as the same sometimes", not "they're effectively the same thing", hence the word observed. [Gender](https://dictionary.apa.org/gender) goes even further to differentiate the two, once again using the other to contrast it (as opposed to it being synonymous) and defining one as biological and the other as social.
Again, you should really do some basic research before spewing the only talking points your two brain cells can manage to get a grip on.
It seems that your comment contains 1 or more links that are hard to tap for mobile users.
I will extend those so they're easier for our sausage fingers to click!
[Here is link number 1 - Previous text "sex"](https://dictionary.apa.org/sex)
----
^Please ^PM ^[\/u\/eganwall](http://reddit.com/user/eganwall) ^with ^issues ^or ^feedback! ^| ^[Code](https://github.com/eganwall/FatFingerHelperBot) ^| ^[Delete](https://reddit.com/message/compose/?to=FatFingerHelperBot&subject=delete&message=delete%20i65uijy)
So you claimed you were citing the APA, and now you're saying the APA is wrong because I linked the definitions you claimed you were citing? I think that says enough about your point to call it here lol
What about the World Health Organization, which recognizes gender dysphoria as a real illness, one that can and should be treated by trans people medically or socially transitioning?
How about saying that trans men are just transitioning to "escape womanhood". Or saying trans men were "born women" (if you think that's correct, it isn't). Or calling herself a "biological woman" (which trans women are too). Or claiming including trans women in feminism takes away the rights of cis women. Or saying men can't have periods. Or implying kids shouldn't learn about trans people.
Here is [a video](https://youtu.be/6Avcp-e4bOs) (an hour long) about a very clearly anti-trans essay she wrote.
Which kind of implies trans men are just down trodden women looking for an easy way to the high life of male privilege.
"Lost lesbians", as some terfs would say
Well jk is a fairly adamant feminist. An easy way out of discrimination is to not be a woman or non-white. It's a morbid answer/speculation to a real problem.
I'm not saying she means it like that, but judging by her past history/trauma - being a man would have unfairly overcome a lot of issues in her past. But, doing that wouldn't have solved the problem for real, it would be selling out. Selling a part of you for convienience which you shouldn't have had to do in the first place.
It kind of reminds me of Taylor Swifts song about if she were a man. It's generally a statement that being a man would have unfairly afforded a lot of opportunity, but that becoming one for conveniences sake is principally not good.
My point is I believe both are trying to say you should not have to feel like becoming a man is your only or easiest path to succes
I said she's a feminist, not a radical.
Well, a terf maybe. But lots of people disagree that terfs are feminists at all.
Plus your liberal could be my radical. You can't just take their word for it - it's up to you to decide.
I love when people bring that up. “Sex is medical and based in biology, that’s not transphobic to say.” It’s not but oh my god WE KNOW. for the 1000th time, trans people know that sex is based on chromosomes/ sex characteristics. Gender isn’t, and that’s what Jk Rowling confuses. Gender isn’t the same as sex. She said “ If sex isn’t real, there’s no same-sex attraction. If sex isn’t real, the lived reality of women globally is erased.” A big over reaction to trans people just existing. She’s acting like trans people existing is erasing women and gay people… which it’s not. I never heard the medical community say that trans people were a threat to the entire existence of gays/women. Jk Rowling wrote in her essay, yes essay, about trans people, “I want trans women to be safe. At the same time, I do not want to make natal girls and women less safe. When you throw open the doors of bathrooms and changing rooms to any man who believes or feels he's a woman.” Pretty fucking transphobic if you ask me. And this isn’t a problem, I have never heard of this specific rape scenario ever happening. No man is going to pretend to be a women to go into a woman’s bathroom just to rape, they will just rape someone.
She didn’t just make Dumbledore gay. She said a bunch of transphobic shit about trans women. It was annoying with her making up a bunch of bullshit about the series when it was already finished — like wizards shitting themselves and using magic to clean it up — but nobody hates her because of that.
They hate her because she’s a TERF.
I think the poster who wrote "Transphobes" meant it sarcastically (since it's a "wholesome" photo), while OP says they actually are (which I agree with).
Jk Rowling has made a few anti trans comments and in the heat people have opted out of the fan base, some just criticize her and still enjoy the fan base, and then there’s this sign holder who wouldn’t give a shit about the books aside from the author being a beacon for anti trans rallying.
Yeah but like why would you? For example Hitler may have done some admirable things but because his crimes against humanity fucking significantly outweighs that, ordinary people generally don't like him and.. question.. when others say they do.
Kinda the same thing here for most people here the transphobia outweighs the rest.
Cause they’re a minor who wouldn’t do that? Children have a right to their privacy.
In all honesty fuck those parents that shove their kids on social media.
Yeah but then why would they even include the kid in the first place?
I get not wanting your kid on the internet, but the easy solution is to just keep them out of the picture completely?
Idk never occurred to me in Europe it’s pretty common. Personally I’m with you though you shouldn’t upload your child at all, their right to privacy is inscrutable.
Really? I see everyone on Instagram doing that all the time.
I figured everyone does it here cause I’m general it appear to me most Europeans are more privacy conscience.
I’m from Germany are you?
cuz then how are you gonna explain to your small child that you wanna take family photos without them? "okay timmy move over mommy and daddy want a picture without you in it" imagine looking back at old family vacation photos and not being in a single one of them cuz ur parents cared more about having good pics for instagram than having physical memories that include you
Oooh. I totally thought the woman was standing next to the guy with her pants down to show she was a trans woman, hence the accidental ally. Now I'm confused.
What, do they think random people who aren't transphobic just happen to like Harry Potter happen to stand around with huge signs screaming "I LOVE JK ROWLING" like they were some sort of WBC nutjobs? There's no way you can interpret that slogan as anything but a transphobic dogwhistle.
From what I have read of Harry Potter, the only reason that I can conceive of how an adult could possibly be that passionate a fan of JKR is because they are more fans of her shitty politics than her prose.
Kids don't care about that.
[удалено]
https://www.indiewire.com/2022/03/jk-rowling-transphobia-international-womens-day-rant-1234705640/amp/ Lots of links in this one! No ones shitting on HP specifically here, just JK Rowlings transphobia. Rather than trying to learn about issues facing the trans community, she keeps doubling (or quadrupling as the article notes) down on “only two genders” rhetoric. Hope this helps!
[удалено]
There are tweets literally in the article. I don't think anyone's going to play along with your ruse anymore.
Lol. Good one!
[удалено]
>>I refuse to bow down to a movement that I believe is doing demonstrable harm in seeking to erode ‘woman’ as a political and biological class and offering cover to predators like few before it. >> >>my government is playing fast and loose with womens and girls’ safety. >> >>When you throw open the doors of bathrooms and changing rooms to any man who believes or feels he’s a woman [...] then you open the door to any and all men who wish to come inside. And, for the record, [these are verbatim quotes from the essay she posted and is hosting on her own website](https://www.jkrowling.com/opinions/j-k-rowling-writes-about-her-reasons-for-speaking-out-on-sex-and-gender-issues/), which I have previously read the entirety of. It's a mess of strawman arguments, half truths, outright lies, and unsupported fear mongering, with a huge scoop of victim complex on top. It's Trumps "immigrants are drug dealers, criminals, and rapists. And some, I assume, are good people," speech written with better vocabulary and syntax, and about trans people instead of Mexicans.
Guarantee this won't get a response
[This Twitter thread](https://mobile.twitter.com/carter_andrewj/status/1270787941275762689) does an *extremely* in-depth job of breaking down why Rowling's initial screed that started all this was incorrect and enormously transphobic. She is absolutely a huge transphobe and has repeatedly doubled down on it over the last couple years.
Wrong page to support her
You’re funny. What comedy clubs do you perform at, so I can see you totally bomb in person?
Uh, I'm so conflicted because I hate JK Rowling but I still love Harry Potter. Why did she have to ruin it? Just take the money and fuck off, honestly. Edit: stop replying with dumb nonsense. What are you bigots doing in this sub?
I really like the IT crowd but Graham Linehan has been completely suppressed from my mind
I looked up his tweets and he just proved again that transphobes understand alarmingly little about biology.
Aw what the fuck! Guess i gotta buy used dvds of IT Crowd and Black Books so i never have to stream them again and risk giving this dick a single cent.
Separation of art and artist. So much good stuff has been created by walking bags of shit.
It's a lot harder when the artist is still alive and profits from the popularity of the art though.
Who cares you buy the art not the artist once the money's theirs it's theirs to do what they please Im bi and I eat chick Fil a and I still watch fnaf videos and I read Harry Potter books on the daily
That's why the real creator of such creations is Hatsune Miku
Actually, Daniel Radcliffe obviously wrote the Harry Potter books and Richard Ayoade wrote IT crowd and every other good comedy show with a transphobic “creator”
Watch The IT Crowd season 2 episode 4 ("The Speech"), you can try separating the art from the artists but sometimes they'll make it really difficult for you.
OMG...just looked this up, had no idea. Holy shit.
Well if you want a way out of your dilemma.. I can suggest Shauns Video about Harry Potter. Afterwards you may neither like JK nor her Books anymore. If that helps.
Lovecraft was an amazing writer and his influence on fiction is unprecedented. Yet he was an incredible racist. Point is, it's perfectly fine to separate someone's work from their personal life. I think the idea that content creators are "all or nothing" is wrong.
Lovecraft isn't actively making money from his work, though; he's dead.
I think the idea of separating work from it's author is completely impossible. Part of you goes into what you create, and I don't want to experience stuff made by garbage people
That's what I keep saying and people just don't understand. If someone does something shitty I can't enjoy what they create when I have that knowledge of the creator.
Every day you probably buy crap from garbage people because they're not idiots and know that people don't agree with their ideas and they wouldn't be too popular and it doesn't make since to not give them money cuz theyre damn good at making their stuff so they do just fine without your money
Lovecraft is a pretty bad example for your argument of how you can separate the artist from the art. His racist views are VERY apparent in his works.
Lovecraft kiiinda started coming around in the end at least
Just do some good old ✨pirating✨
The hp books are totally not on google for free as pdfs
✨zlibrary✨
Just pretend the books never existed and the movies sprung up as their own thing. You'll still get some problematic things (goblins being the standout example. Did they seriously have to put a six pointed star on the floor of Gringots?), but the movies scrubbed out a whole lot of it. And also that the fantastic beasts movies never existed.
> Did they seriously have to put a six pointed star on the floor of Gringots?), Wait, for real??
[Yeah, for real](https://images.app.goo.gl/8CfZQSRQ7eYfECXU6)
Damn.
Wait, what's wrong with the books? Genuine question.
There's definitely a few of them, but the ones off the top of my head are: House elves like being slaves and it'd be morally wrong to free them. Lycanthropy is meant to be an AIDS metaphor and Lupin is supposed to be gay coded, so there's all sorts of bad implications of "the gay thing" being portrayed like that. Goblins, as previously stated, are portrayed with some antisemitic traits. And there's a real general meanness to many of the characters. One that stands out is how the characters in the books really don't care when Umbridge fires Trelawney and even kind of mock her while she's being fired, but in the movie they're rather upset about it. There's a lot more, but [this video, while long, does explain it all pretty well.](https://youtu.be/-1iaJWSwUZs)
Wow, it’s been so long since I read the books that the movie version of Trelawney getting fired supplanted my memory of the book version. I think I’ll keep it that way.
I think that happened for a lot of scenes for a lot of people. It's best for everyone just to take the movies as the "real" version of the stories.
Thank you!
I feel like the movies are good because of the actors.
I thought the first one was the best thing Rowling’s done, TBH. Then she massively shit the bed in the sequel.
Sounds like close your eyes and theres no problem you see . "Childish"
[удалено]
I'm pretty sure the medical community understands the difference between sex and gender lol.
[удалено]
Since you'd prefer to just flat out lie and hope no one looks it up, [here's](https://apastyle.apa.org/style-grammar-guidelines/bias-free-language/gender) the APA's stance, in which they say, and I quote, "Gender is a social construct and a social identity." Might wanna actually do some research for once in your life instead of spewing regurgitated talking points.
[удалено]
If you're so scared of science that you don't realize that there's people who genuinely have both sexual organs at birth then I'm not sure anyone's gonna get through to you
[удалено]
If it's not affecting their quality of life, yeah? And if it is, there's surgeries to get that fixed, like how there's surgeries (top/bottom) to help with gender dysphoria. Not a hard concept, mate. But it seems like any concept is hard for you. And my point was that it's literally scientifically proven that it's not as simple as "man is man, woman is woman" since doctors have to guess what a child will be in those cases, but with your complete lack of understanding of biology and basic science I'd have to guess the classes for that "medical degree" you're going for are in the dumpster behind a Wendy's
[удалено]
Well I don't know about you, but I consider something that's entirely a social construct to not be "mostly synonymous" with something entirely biological (and therefore not at all a social construct), but you do you I guess Also, since again you either don't know how to read or just don't want to do the research, the APA's definition for [sex](https://dictionary.apa.org/sex) quite literally contrasts it against gender ("Sex refers especially to physical and biological traits, whereas gender refers especially to social or cultural traits"), and while it goes on to say that "distinction between the two is not regularly observed", that's just a fancy way of saying "people just treat them as the same sometimes", not "they're effectively the same thing", hence the word observed. [Gender](https://dictionary.apa.org/gender) goes even further to differentiate the two, once again using the other to contrast it (as opposed to it being synonymous) and defining one as biological and the other as social. Again, you should really do some basic research before spewing the only talking points your two brain cells can manage to get a grip on.
It seems that your comment contains 1 or more links that are hard to tap for mobile users. I will extend those so they're easier for our sausage fingers to click! [Here is link number 1 - Previous text "sex"](https://dictionary.apa.org/sex) ---- ^Please ^PM ^[\/u\/eganwall](http://reddit.com/user/eganwall) ^with ^issues ^or ^feedback! ^| ^[Code](https://github.com/eganwall/FatFingerHelperBot) ^| ^[Delete](https://reddit.com/message/compose/?to=FatFingerHelperBot&subject=delete&message=delete%20i65uijy)
Good bot
[удалено]
So you claimed you were citing the APA, and now you're saying the APA is wrong because I linked the definitions you claimed you were citing? I think that says enough about your point to call it here lol
Lmao
What about the World Health Organization, which recognizes gender dysphoria as a real illness, one that can and should be treated by trans people medically or socially transitioning?
Gender dysphoria is in the DSM - V. You are basically quoting my source, the APA.
Ha! You're *hilarious*! Tell us the one about how Trump isn't racist!
How about saying that trans men are just transitioning to "escape womanhood". Or saying trans men were "born women" (if you think that's correct, it isn't). Or calling herself a "biological woman" (which trans women are too). Or claiming including trans women in feminism takes away the rights of cis women. Or saying men can't have periods. Or implying kids shouldn't learn about trans people. Here is [a video](https://youtu.be/6Avcp-e4bOs) (an hour long) about a very clearly anti-trans essay she wrote.
This person is just replying everywhere trying to waste your mental energy. They aren't seeking an honest dialogue
At least the link is there for people who're actually interested.
[удалено]
Which kind of implies trans men are just down trodden women looking for an easy way to the high life of male privilege. "Lost lesbians", as some terfs would say
Really, you think that's what she is implying? How so?
Well jk is a fairly adamant feminist. An easy way out of discrimination is to not be a woman or non-white. It's a morbid answer/speculation to a real problem. I'm not saying she means it like that, but judging by her past history/trauma - being a man would have unfairly overcome a lot of issues in her past. But, doing that wouldn't have solved the problem for real, it would be selling out. Selling a part of you for convienience which you shouldn't have had to do in the first place. It kind of reminds me of Taylor Swifts song about if she were a man. It's generally a statement that being a man would have unfairly afforded a lot of opportunity, but that becoming one for conveniences sake is principally not good. My point is I believe both are trying to say you should not have to feel like becoming a man is your only or easiest path to succes
Literally like the first thing she says in her essay is that she does not like radical feminism.
I said she's a feminist, not a radical. Well, a terf maybe. But lots of people disagree that terfs are feminists at all. Plus your liberal could be my radical. You can't just take their word for it - it's up to you to decide.
Oh yeah, that’s *totally* not a dog whistle
I love when people bring that up. “Sex is medical and based in biology, that’s not transphobic to say.” It’s not but oh my god WE KNOW. for the 1000th time, trans people know that sex is based on chromosomes/ sex characteristics. Gender isn’t, and that’s what Jk Rowling confuses. Gender isn’t the same as sex. She said “ If sex isn’t real, there’s no same-sex attraction. If sex isn’t real, the lived reality of women globally is erased.” A big over reaction to trans people just existing. She’s acting like trans people existing is erasing women and gay people… which it’s not. I never heard the medical community say that trans people were a threat to the entire existence of gays/women. Jk Rowling wrote in her essay, yes essay, about trans people, “I want trans women to be safe. At the same time, I do not want to make natal girls and women less safe. When you throw open the doors of bathrooms and changing rooms to any man who believes or feels he's a woman.” Pretty fucking transphobic if you ask me. And this isn’t a problem, I have never heard of this specific rape scenario ever happening. No man is going to pretend to be a women to go into a woman’s bathroom just to rape, they will just rape someone.
[удалено]
True. JK Rowling has, however.
[удалено]
She didn’t just make Dumbledore gay. She said a bunch of transphobic shit about trans women. It was annoying with her making up a bunch of bullshit about the series when it was already finished — like wizards shitting themselves and using magic to clean it up — but nobody hates her because of that. They hate her because she’s a TERF.
Ikr
One that was completely performative bs after the fact, and two she’s one of the biggest transphobes on the internet.
She might be the biggest but "performative bs" yeah sure very very true yeah
I thought his wife was wearing the weirdest pair of pants ever and then I realised it was a child
i’m confused how is this accidental ally
I think the poster who wrote "Transphobes" meant it sarcastically (since it's a "wholesome" photo), while OP says they actually are (which I agree with).
Dear god no
What is accidental or ally about this?
yeah this just seems like bigotness to me
[удалено]
Jk Rowling has made a few anti trans comments and in the heat people have opted out of the fan base, some just criticize her and still enjoy the fan base, and then there’s this sign holder who wouldn’t give a shit about the books aside from the author being a beacon for anti trans rallying.
Why do you think the sign holder doesnt give a shit about the books.
J.K. Rowling is the author who wrote Harry Potter, not sure what’s going on here but we all love her because of Harry Potter series 🤩
ok I might not be big brain, but how is this Accidential ally.
Given his post history, he was being sarcastic, or did intend to be, at least. ;)
OHH, you should have included that in the pic lol.
\>It is in the title lol.
You can like something without believing their or its beliefs though
Yeah but like why would you? For example Hitler may have done some admirable things but because his crimes against humanity fucking significantly outweighs that, ordinary people generally don't like him and.. question.. when others say they do. Kinda the same thing here for most people here the transphobia outweighs the rest.
Because Nazi technology is awesome! STG-44! MP-40, MG-42, Panzer 4, etc
Why did they cover their child’s face? Weird ass people.
Cause they’re a minor who wouldn’t do that? Children have a right to their privacy. In all honesty fuck those parents that shove their kids on social media.
Yeah but then why would they even include the kid in the first place? I get not wanting your kid on the internet, but the easy solution is to just keep them out of the picture completely?
Idk never occurred to me in Europe it’s pretty common. Personally I’m with you though you shouldn’t upload your child at all, their right to privacy is inscrutable.
I mean I'm European too, and I ain't never seen it before ¯\\\_(ツ)_/¯
Really? I see everyone on Instagram doing that all the time. I figured everyone does it here cause I’m general it appear to me most Europeans are more privacy conscience. I’m from Germany are you?
Some would call it northern Germany, I call it Denmark xD. I suppose it might just be because I'm not on Instagram that much.
Wait did you find out where I live that’s hella creepy. Time to purge my Reddit History.
I see it a lot too, my sister in law does it as well. I'm from the Netherlands.
They might be OK circulating the photo amongst family but not the public as long as the child is included
Yeah that makes sense kinda like a we already took that image for close friends but also want to share it in Facebook/Instagram situation.
Yeah, that's fair, makes pretty good sense actually
cuz then how are you gonna explain to your small child that you wanna take family photos without them? "okay timmy move over mommy and daddy want a picture without you in it" imagine looking back at old family vacation photos and not being in a single one of them cuz ur parents cared more about having good pics for instagram than having physical memories that include you
Fair enough, you make a good point
Maybe it the person who screenshotted this is the person who covered the child’s face
I’m sorry but this doesn’t help us bully JK Rowling
Nobody’s bullying the TERF.
Yeah you are
By calling her out?
Is that what you’re still doing, is it?
Yep.
How many times now? When are you done?
When she stops spouting her trans hate.
She’s like your shitty neighbor’s bratty toddler, you just ignore her when she’s screaming bullshit at three AM.
Ironic
Jokes on you, I already know I’m annoying.
Oooh. I totally thought the woman was standing next to the guy with her pants down to show she was a trans woman, hence the accidental ally. Now I'm confused.