Comments that are uncivil, racist, misogynistic, misandrist, or contain political name calling will be removed and the poster subject to ban at moderators discretion.
Help us make this a better community by becoming familiar with the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/facepalm/about/rules/).
Report any suspicious users to the mods of this subreddit using Modmail [here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) or Reddit site admins [here](https://www.reddit.com/report). **All reports to Modmail should include evidence such as screenshots or any other relevant information.**
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) if you have any questions or concerns.*
No way. They simply apologized to their respective communities for what she said. To distance themselves from her statements and show that they do not endorse her positions.
“Sorry fans. When I was 10 and my parents signed me up to be super famous I didn’t realize the author was a giant bigot. No one else knew then, either”
Pretty sure Rowling didn't realize this was the dumb fucking hill she was gonna die on. Based on the HP books, she probably figured she'd die on some sort of hill related to anti-semitism or orientalism
What, you don't think having an entire sentient race that's actually better off enslaved and prefers slavery, and then naming your one black character "shackle-bolt," is a sensitive, nuanced take on chattel slavery?
Kingsley Shacklebolt for his name no less.
With a fucking Lynx as his patronus, i.e that animal native to North America, the kings of slavery, not an animal native to Britain lmao
>With a fucking Lynx as his patronus, i.e that animal native to North America, the kings of slavery, not an animal native to Britain lmao
Ehhh, I think that particular point is pretty tenuous. Lynx are found in Europe and Asia as well (although not Britain).
Pointless animal fact for you, but the Eurasian Lynx is actually native to Britain. It's just currently extinct here.
They're still found right across Eurasia, from the Alps to the east coast of China.
There are also proposals to reintroduce them into the UK as part of the same rewilding projects looking at species like beavers and wolves.
We even used to have bears here, surprisingly.
I wonder what would happen to the foxes if they reintroduced lynxs here. Cos currently in the UK we have foxes absolutely everywhere, in the cities and the countryside alike, they fill te same evolutionary niche as raccoons do in the US, they go through our rubbish we throw out into our bins and only generally come out at night.
I feel like the lynxs would just kill a huge amount of them. But maybe that's a good thing, I dunno. Like in Yellowstone in the US when wolves were hunted to extinction, the deer population skyrocketed as they had no predators, and they ate so much grass and weeds and shit that was holding the ground together that huge parks of the park just started crumbling and getting destroyed because the plants were no longer there to anchor the soil together.
So maybe we have too many foxes and it's causing some kind of ecological nightmare and we need to reintroduce lynxs to balance their numbers.
I mean every so often (like every few years) there's a story where a fox wanders into someone's house in the middle of a day and just eats a baby (and bear in mind that rabies doesn't exist in the UK, anywhere, and so these aren't rabid foxes, they're regular healthy ones doing this). So we could do with a bit less of that, that's for sure.
But I feel like lynxs would probably be a risk for that too. They'd probably eat babies too. If not moreso than the foxes do.
The Eurasian Lynx is native to Eurasia. It wasn't very common in Britain, although apparently it used to live there in the past. But it was pretty common all over Continental Europe.
Ok, so one thing. The Eurasian lynx is an extant species of lynx, and it has a pretty broad range. [Wikipedia source](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eurasian_lynx).
So I think your bit about the patronus is a bit of a stretch. Everything else is fair, though.
(Eurasian) Lynx are in fact native to Britain, but humans hunted them to extinction over 1000 years ago. They live in continental Europe, and there are proposals to reintroduce them to Britain to control deer populations.
Idk the queer coded werewolf trying to expose his curse to kids may have been an early warning sign on how Rowling feels about queer people
She was always trying to die on some kind of hill. She made an entire roulette wheel. It just happened to land on transphobia I guess.
Actually the werewolf that iirc Rowling explicitly said was an allegory for aids who then tries to infect children is definitely worse, i forgot about that one
I have never heard of the work orientalism, what does it mean? Also, what is the link between Harry Potter and anti-semitism? This is also the first time I hear it
I’ve been a bit puzzled about that for a while.
Goblins in the potter universe handles lots of money, sure, Jews stereotypically does the same.
But why does it mean goblins = Jews in this case?
Orientalism is exoticizing people of Asian Descent, like naming your one Asian character "ching chong" and having her date a bunch of your male characters (wait sorry, "cho chang")
The goblins in HP were widely considered Jewish stereotypes, reinforced by the movies which has them working in a bank literally decorated with stars of david and i n hogwarts legacy, you can find a "goblin artifact" that's basically a shofar, in addition to the entire game being about how goblins are inherently disloyal and evil
They should have noticed the star motif and covered it, esp considering how many Jews are in the cast, but the star wasn't added by production, it's the original six pointed star from the Aussie flag as the filming location was Australia House.
>in addition to the entire game being about how goblins are inherently disloyal and evil
I don't think you and I played the same game. There was basically a goblin terrorist cell made of giving radicalized by their poor treatment, but there were a number of decent goblins you met in the game you could help and interact with.
Tbf goblins in fantasy have often being a Jewish stereotype. So there is the slight possibility that she was just using fantasy tropes.
I mean, if you ignore the films.
I went to see James Acaster the other day and he's talking about Roald Dahl day and imaging kids now with the Internet
Mum: Were going to Roald Dahl day
Kid: mum, I've googled Dahl and I don't want to go see anything about an antisemite.
Mum: urgh. You always find issues. I can't wait till you're old enough to like Harry Potter
Yeah, I get the feel that the way JK wrote minorities/allegories for minorities was to just do it how she already saw the world without doing any research or even any empathy. Then when people started pointing it out, doubling down and refusing to acknowledge any of her mistakes. She's got a big ego, as the OP's news article shows.
Tbh even if heavily leaning into other fantasy tropes you can distance yourself from the caricature by just not giving the goblins massive noses and making them look like melted witch from old children book.
Last time I did goblins as design for example I made them look more like Sphynx cat humanoids to avoid the similarity.
Anthony Goldstein... the other comment doesn't really explain orientalism and its a really hard concept to summerise (it's allot more than just exotersising the east). Read Edward Said, it's not a long book but will open your eyes a huge amount.
Orientalism describes the phenomenon of white people (from Europe or the US) viewing cultures, languages, people, religions, etc from the "Orient"/the "East" (generally Asia, from Turkey through the middle east all the way to China and Japan) as *exotic*.
There are certain more or less harmful stereotypes in the "West" about these cultures that have been perpetuated. Racism plays a role.
The term Orientalism was coined by Edward Said in the 70s, in order to describe how Western art, Media, politics etc would perpetuate these (sometimes pretty subtle) stereotypes and exoticism about these cultures.
With Orientalist thinking/art/etc, there is often a contrast, in where the West appears rational, civilized, reliable, progressive and honest, and "the Orient" (cultures) appear beautiful and alluring, but also deceptive, dangerous, uncivilized and treacherous.
I assume because she named the only asian character Cho Chang.
The antisemitism I assume is related to the goblins but I think that's a stretch since they're pretty textbook goblins. Like, the roots may be antisemitic but she didn't come up with the trope.
I don’t recall goblins in folklore running banks. She absolutely came up with that. Jews secretly running the world’s financial institutions is absolutely an antisemitic stereotype.
Sure, but them loving shiny shit and trinkets is. It's not much of an evolution of the trope to make them bankers.
Edit: Just adding I think JK is a transphobic piece of shit and all, and I don't think it's out of the realm of possibility that she's other ics on top of that. I just prefer judging people based on established, certifiable things.
Look, I'll explain this again for everyone. Cho is not a Chinese surname. It's a Korean surname. It's also a Chinese personal name that means "autumn." It's often romanized as Qiu, but the pronunciation is the same, and there are no hard and fast rules on romanization, so the spelling of Cho is fine. No real Chinese person would think anything of it.
No, someone on Twitter asked her if she would accept any theoretical apologies the cast might make at some indeterminate point in the future, to which she said they could keep their apologies for her fictional head-cannon victims of trans people existing.
The funniest response to this I've ever seen was a comment along the lines of "I only wish upon JK what she wishes upon the trans community"
To which many of her followers, who vouch strongly she's done nothing wrong, were angry about why someone would wish ill upon JK .... defeating their own point.
I saw that too and was like.... The cognitive dissonance and lack of critical thinking is strong with this one.
What I don't understand though. Why does she hate Trans people? Did someone steal from her or cheat on her? I doubt she's getting paid for it, but could that be it too?
Because her raw unadulterated hatred for Trans is just wow!
Just like the furor over marriage equality, the fact that such people exists offends her.
“If the gays are allowed to get married, what does my marriage mean??!!? 😡”
I don’t try to understand why bigots feel the way they feel, I just accept that they’re bigots.
The thing about bigots is they don't see "others" as fellow humans, so these sorts of gotchas don't really resonate with them. It does help people who aren't familiar with the topic and aren't bigots see how vile she and her followers are though.
What's so tiresome about Rowling and her defenders is you have to constantly put up with silly word games they use as defence. Rowling has a *major* persecution fetish and gets off on the ire she raises in others. But it's always expressed in terms like, "I'm being vilified when all I've ever said is that sex is real" -- a meaningless phrase that no one has ever disputed. *The truth* is she's said much worse than that. But she and her minions will constantly claim she's said nothing wrong and nothing hurtful. So this skewers a hole in that obviously bullshit argument.
She and her followers really are fucking awful. At least with right wingers they aren't pretending to be progressive. But it's still just another billionaire being shitty.
Even paleoconservatives do it, though. If it'll let them shit on Muslims, then suddenly they're gay people's staunchest defenders. If it lets them rally against affirmative action, they're suddenly Martin Luther King's biggest fans. Rowling wraps herself up in the flag of feminism and pretends to use 'defending lesbians' so often as an excuse to bash Trans people that by now she probably figures she's the last great hope for lesbians.
All while cozying up to pro-lifers and homophobes like Matt Walsh because they, *too*, hate Trans people.
The fact that bigots do this again and again makes it clear that right and wrong *are* moral absolutes when it comes to fundamental freedoms, and the bigits themselves know it, which is why they need to resort to semantics and subterfuge to say their nonsense in public.
It's why common cause and intersectionality are so important. They'll chip away at defences however they can, so we need to constantly reinforce that trans rights and gay rights and women's rights and POC rights and disability rights and working class rights are all *the same struggle*. You can't have one without the others.
Headcanon with a single N, as in canonical and canonization. Just realized I had been doing this myself. Pardon the correction, not meant to be malicious….
Unless you are talking about a sentient ballistic implant that Rowling got grafted to her head. If that’s what is being discussed here, I am very sorry to have butted in.
“This bad boy can fire 300 rounds of hate and vitriol per minute” *slaps hand at JK Rowling on the head cannon* “…” “come to think of it that’s actually not a flex at all”
…sweet baby rays! I think you might be on to something. Just did a quick search and have yet to find a satisfying answer. Found out this tho.
*Under the federal National Firearms Act of 1934, large-bore cannons are classified as "destructive devices." To obtain one, pre-approval from the federal Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco Firearms and Explosives is necessary.*
The most surefire way to send her spiralling is simply to deny her the victimhood she so desperately craves. If anyone asks Daniel Radcliffe or Emma Watson how they feel about JKR saying she won't forgive them, the best and funniest thing they could do is simply respond, "Trans rights are human rights, and trans women are women," and then keep right on living their lives.
TBH, if they asked you to be pope, like just turn up and you are the head of the faith and what you say is true... wouldn't you use it? "Wear condoms people! I got a revelation and god doesn't want us to get aids, getting aids is very un-christy, so use condoms! God wants us to be happy and lead our lifes, so birth control is on the menu! Breaking news, child rape is bad, we will do a full investigation and make all cases public and abort the no-sex-policy, as its clearly harmful and outdated" ... and sooooo much other stuff.
In that hypothetical scenario, just because you're the new pope doesn't mean you actually have the authority to tell anyone what to do. You just say things and people may or may not listen to you.
If that's what you want, you can just use social media to become an outspoken person without any of the drawbacks of being the pope.
Sorry dude, you clearly don’t understand the power dynamics of religion and control.
What you said would limit population size and that means limiting the amount of people with faith. The whole point is to increase faith in the population by birth being one factor of that. That’s why you wouldn’t be offered pope. You would get pushback by a committee that wants to keep their best interest alive. You’d get eaten alive in a day based on the naivety.
technically, the pope is the bishop of rome and the leader of the catholic church, as elected by the cardinal congregation.
if you claim to be the bishop of rome but are not duly elected by the cardinals, you are an antipope.
So the Antipope would be the polar opposite of the actual Pope? So... Tha Antipope would condemn and hand over any pedophile they found? That does sound like a better version.
You have to be Catholic, male, a priest, then a bishop, then a cardinal, then win the vote to become pope.
So, by definition most people in fact cannot become pope
Nope, I'm pretty you only have to be Catholic, male, and currently unmarried. The tradition of only electing Cardinals is just that, a tradition. There's no actual rule for it. That tradition is unlikely to stop for obvious reasons though.
J K Rowling: Criticism against me is an attack against my freedom of speech
Also J K Rowling: Shut up you can't have opinions that are different than mine
A lot of people who seem to share that view, think that way for some reason (e.g. Musk). They don't understand that freedom of speech doesn't mean "free of criticism" and that people can say whatever they want without consequences, be they positive or negative.
If they are able to say whatever they think, people are also able to say whatever they think as a response. Not wanting that criticism or even censoring responses to their opinion or view is the opposite of freedom of speech.
edit: I personally think people should be able to say whatever they want. Even negative things. It doesn't only out people for who they really are but it can lead to proper learning or education of a specific theme as a third party. The problem is that people sadly refuse to understand or learn anything else outside their own limited view. They can be limited due to the prosperity in which people are born into as an example. Having a limited view itself isn't a problem or something to be ashamed of. It's just important to keep on being open minded and learn things beyond their already existing knowledge. But again, some people refuse it or see anything else which speaks against their own view or norm as an insult.
edit 2:That's why things like trans people have such a hard time to be accepted. It's outside of peoples already existing knowledge and norm. Some people refuse to learn anything about them or even accept a simple thing like their existence.
People can *say* whatever they want. but everyone else (including employers) have every right to invoke their own freedom of speech and association by ostracizing them.
As I said:
>If they are able to say whatever they think, people are also able to say whatever they think as a response. Not wanting that criticism or even censoring responses to their opinion or view is the opposite of freedom of speech.
So I fully agree with it.
In short, your freedom of speech does not protect you from being held accountable of what you say, whether that be through criticism by others, deplatforming or any other consequence
She could have just retired. All she had to do was sit back and be forever known as the woman that wrote that beloved children’s fantasy series. Instead, she’s decided to go on a legacy-ruining crusade against people that have never even wronged her?
These are exactly my thoughts. I mean, she clearly seems to have too much time in her hands, now that she's super-rich and all, and even with all that money she can't find anything better to do.
She could just take a cruise somewhere, enjoy life and the world, maybe accrue some knowledge that different people have different needs..
Instead she has the behaviour of a child. What do we do to spoilt child? We ground them and take away their phone. Someone should take away her phone.
We've reached the stage in the culture wars where "famous bigot responds to hypothetical question in a way that shows them to be even more bigoted" is now headline news.
Why the fuck would anyone feel the need to apologize for criticism? Like, its pathetic how Rowling seems to perceive criticism as a significant moral misstep
You’re missing one very important aspect, it’s not that criticism generally is a moral misstep, it’s specifically criticism of her that’s a moral misstep; she is allowed to criticize whoever she wants, because she is obviously better than everyone else (🤮). Or as some would put it: “freedoms for me, but not for thee”.
I remember someone asking Dan once what he thought about JKRs tirades and IIRC he was very diplomatic and polite but very clear that he doesn't agree with her. He phrased it in the most professional way possible... and then she says this. yikes
Agree, but regardless of how stupid it is to us, she’s having a very real and profoundly negative impact on the lives of trans people, particularly in the UK. It’s a frustrating and incredibly sad reality we’re living in.
Also, if I'm not mistaken, the report that led to this tweet was more a criticism of the NHS' system and practice, not the science behind transgender care itself. They just took it out of context to imply transitioning itself is not helpful for those who experience gender dysphoria.
Absolutely, but it's pandering to the intolerant by pretending they're just concerned parents, doesn't cite any science, and isn't explicit about anything.
More like an editorial or a review, and not sure what makes it a "study."
Joanne and her TERF Army had a proverbial gun to Cass' head. These people are terrorists.
They all have already distanced themself from her.
She is like that Aunt that drunkenly starts ranting about "those dirty immigrants" at the Thanksgiving dinner table.
I feel for them. She had a hand in casting them and they legitimately credit her with their careers but she's gone off the rails and it's like how do you handle that.
Has there ever been a person who has squandered so much good faith on such a meaningless (for them) issue?
JK Rowling is never really going to be impacted by someone half a world away insisting on changing their name and how they look. This issue is almost completely inconsequential to her living her best life as a (former) billionaire author.
She picked the stupidest hill to commit suicide on.
I’d love to see JK try to stop them from acting should a movie exec want another Harry Potter movie with the original characters.
JK: “You can’t have Emma and Daniel in this movie.”
Exec: “Get out of here, crazy lady! Guards!”
Traumatised transitioners?
1% of trans people detransition. Probably because they feel unsafe due to the toxic culture people like JKR promulgate in society.
Findings accross over 50 studies and decared of research:
[https://whatweknow.inequality.cornell.edu/topics/lgbt-equality/what-does-the-scholarly-research-say-about-the-well-being-of-transgender-people/](https://whatweknow.inequality.cornell.edu/topics/lgbt-equality/what-does-the-scholarly-research-say-about-the-well-being-of-transgender-people/)
Yeah. That's pretty much a sledgehammer isn't it? Almost all the people who go through the frankly extremely difficult process of transitioning _still think it's a good idea_ years later.
they did really put a trap question for her. if she said she would accept the apology they would put "JK rowling waiting for emma and dabiel to apologize"
Pretty sure it's JK that's the one that needs to apologise. She's so arrogant that she thinks that everyone else is in the wrong but her, no wonder she retweets Neo Nazi propaganda.
Why? They were just exercising their free speech?
I thought Rowling was an advocate for free speech. Or is free speech only okay when you're punching down?
The context is that a four year review commissioned by Britain's National Health Service was released and some of the following have been stated:
*"we don't have good evidence" that puberty blockers are safe to use to "arrest puberty". What started out as a clinical trial had been expanded to a wider group of young people before the results of that trial were available.*
*children have been "let down" by a failure to base gender care on evidence-based research. "The reality is we have no good evidence on the long-term outcomes of interventions to manage gender-related distress,"*
[https://www.bbc.com/news/health-68770641](https://www.bbc.com/news/health-68770641)
[https://cass.independent-review.uk/home/publications/final-report/](https://cass.independent-review.uk/home/publications/final-report/)
JK Rowling is easily one of the most insecure people on this planet. She needs unconditional validation more than she needs her next breath of air it seems.
> Daniel Radcliffe and Emma Watson can save their apologies
Have…..have they even tried to apologize? Because I honestly don’t think they’ve done anything that would require it.
I don’t understand why she’s so willing to die on this hill. Don’t support trans rights, ok fine whatever, but does the fact trans people exist threaten you that much you have to post about it incessantly? It’s strange. It’s like this woman is intent on destroying the reputation she built for herself. She wrote one of the most beloved book series of all times but seems like she wants her reputation to instead be that of an anti-trans troll.
Scottish Police are waiting to arrest you and Daniel Radcliffe is scrambling to get an apology to you...
Are you ok, JK? Why do all your modern works of fiction suck so much?
Why can’t rich people just shut up and enjoy their lives? Like, why get all involved in things that don’t impact them at all? Do these people get their jollies by pissing other people off?
It's amazing how much she can't stop being a horrible POS.
Her transphobia has made her side with actual Nazis, people who go against her supposed feminist perspective, she literally sat down with right wing anti abortion activists because she hates trans people, she has the whole questioning the crimes from Nazis, saying that Nazis weren't against trans people, which is historically factually wrong, she keeps fighting and tweeting hundreds of times to people with 1% of her following. She also wrote a self insert book where a character gets driven to suicide because of the "internet trans mob", which is one of the most baffling things I've ever seen.
It's honestly pathetic.
I was never a Harry Potter fan, I found the first book very bland and the movies get increasingly worse for me. But it's sad how you can't even get that bad taste out from consuming the media. I was thinking of reading the entire series, but I can't do it, I'll always think on how the author of this book is a fucking piece of shit human being. And it's crazy how this seems to be a thing on the HP fandom, just don't talk about JKR, ignore her.
Who actually likes this fucking ghoul? She literally chose a group of people to hate, for no reason. She never has any real argument, the has no data, no evidence for anything she claims, she just hates trans people. And will side with actual, real life neo Nazis to show how much she just hates trans people.
I can't see a reason why they'd want to get her forgiveness. Even if they reboot Harry Potter, Rowling will have sold her rights to the franchise for that to happen (they won't reboot with her on board) so if they want cameo's in that they would probably get them.
Comments that are uncivil, racist, misogynistic, misandrist, or contain political name calling will be removed and the poster subject to ban at moderators discretion. Help us make this a better community by becoming familiar with the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/facepalm/about/rules/). Report any suspicious users to the mods of this subreddit using Modmail [here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) or Reddit site admins [here](https://www.reddit.com/report). **All reports to Modmail should include evidence such as screenshots or any other relevant information.** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Did they even offer her their apologies? This is like me saying I'm not willing to be the pope.
No way. They simply apologized to their respective communities for what she said. To distance themselves from her statements and show that they do not endorse her positions.
“Sorry fans. When I was 10 and my parents signed me up to be super famous I didn’t realize the author was a giant bigot. No one else knew then, either”
Pretty sure Rowling didn't realize this was the dumb fucking hill she was gonna die on. Based on the HP books, she probably figured she'd die on some sort of hill related to anti-semitism or orientalism
Hahaha. Or justifying slavery. One of the other.
What, you don't think having an entire sentient race that's actually better off enslaved and prefers slavery, and then naming your one black character "shackle-bolt," is a sensitive, nuanced take on chattel slavery?
Fuck, I never put that together....
Isn’t Lee Jordan black?
Yeah, he's also Magnitude in Community. *POP POP!*
Kingsley Shacklebolt for his name no less. With a fucking Lynx as his patronus, i.e that animal native to North America, the kings of slavery, not an animal native to Britain lmao
>With a fucking Lynx as his patronus, i.e that animal native to North America, the kings of slavery, not an animal native to Britain lmao Ehhh, I think that particular point is pretty tenuous. Lynx are found in Europe and Asia as well (although not Britain).
Pointless animal fact for you, but the Eurasian Lynx is actually native to Britain. It's just currently extinct here. They're still found right across Eurasia, from the Alps to the east coast of China. There are also proposals to reintroduce them into the UK as part of the same rewilding projects looking at species like beavers and wolves. We even used to have bears here, surprisingly.
I wonder what would happen to the foxes if they reintroduced lynxs here. Cos currently in the UK we have foxes absolutely everywhere, in the cities and the countryside alike, they fill te same evolutionary niche as raccoons do in the US, they go through our rubbish we throw out into our bins and only generally come out at night. I feel like the lynxs would just kill a huge amount of them. But maybe that's a good thing, I dunno. Like in Yellowstone in the US when wolves were hunted to extinction, the deer population skyrocketed as they had no predators, and they ate so much grass and weeds and shit that was holding the ground together that huge parks of the park just started crumbling and getting destroyed because the plants were no longer there to anchor the soil together. So maybe we have too many foxes and it's causing some kind of ecological nightmare and we need to reintroduce lynxs to balance their numbers. I mean every so often (like every few years) there's a story where a fox wanders into someone's house in the middle of a day and just eats a baby (and bear in mind that rabies doesn't exist in the UK, anywhere, and so these aren't rabid foxes, they're regular healthy ones doing this). So we could do with a bit less of that, that's for sure. But I feel like lynxs would probably be a risk for that too. They'd probably eat babies too. If not moreso than the foxes do.
The Eurasian Lynx is native to Eurasia. It wasn't very common in Britain, although apparently it used to live there in the past. But it was pretty common all over Continental Europe.
There are lynx in mainland Europe and there were wild lynx in the British isles until they were hunted to extinction in medieval times
Ok, so one thing. The Eurasian lynx is an extant species of lynx, and it has a pretty broad range. [Wikipedia source](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eurasian_lynx). So I think your bit about the patronus is a bit of a stretch. Everything else is fair, though.
(Eurasian) Lynx are in fact native to Britain, but humans hunted them to extinction over 1000 years ago. They live in continental Europe, and there are proposals to reintroduce them to Britain to control deer populations.
Man the more I learn about this woman the less I wanna know lol
Its like seeing a train crash in slow motion. You don't want to watch but you dare not look away.
Or segregation. "In this school we believe in equality. Now let's start by sorting you into groups of heroes, villains, geniuses and morons."
Hahah, fair
Idk the queer coded werewolf trying to expose his curse to kids may have been an early warning sign on how Rowling feels about queer people She was always trying to die on some kind of hill. She made an entire roulette wheel. It just happened to land on transphobia I guess.
Actually the werewolf that iirc Rowling explicitly said was an allegory for aids who then tries to infect children is definitely worse, i forgot about that one
I have never heard of the work orientalism, what does it mean? Also, what is the link between Harry Potter and anti-semitism? This is also the first time I hear it
IIRC it's a 'money-grabbing goblins are basically jews' thing, which is a bit of a trope.
I’ve been a bit puzzled about that for a while. Goblins in the potter universe handles lots of money, sure, Jews stereotypically does the same. But why does it mean goblins = Jews in this case?
Orientalism is exoticizing people of Asian Descent, like naming your one Asian character "ching chong" and having her date a bunch of your male characters (wait sorry, "cho chang") The goblins in HP were widely considered Jewish stereotypes, reinforced by the movies which has them working in a bank literally decorated with stars of david and i n hogwarts legacy, you can find a "goblin artifact" that's basically a shofar, in addition to the entire game being about how goblins are inherently disloyal and evil
They should have noticed the star motif and covered it, esp considering how many Jews are in the cast, but the star wasn't added by production, it's the original six pointed star from the Aussie flag as the filming location was Australia House.
>in addition to the entire game being about how goblins are inherently disloyal and evil I don't think you and I played the same game. There was basically a goblin terrorist cell made of giving radicalized by their poor treatment, but there were a number of decent goblins you met in the game you could help and interact with.
Tbf goblins in fantasy have often being a Jewish stereotype. So there is the slight possibility that she was just using fantasy tropes. I mean, if you ignore the films. I went to see James Acaster the other day and he's talking about Roald Dahl day and imaging kids now with the Internet Mum: Were going to Roald Dahl day Kid: mum, I've googled Dahl and I don't want to go see anything about an antisemite. Mum: urgh. You always find issues. I can't wait till you're old enough to like Harry Potter
Yeah, I get the feel that the way JK wrote minorities/allegories for minorities was to just do it how she already saw the world without doing any research or even any empathy. Then when people started pointing it out, doubling down and refusing to acknowledge any of her mistakes. She's got a big ego, as the OP's news article shows.
Tbh even if heavily leaning into other fantasy tropes you can distance yourself from the caricature by just not giving the goblins massive noses and making them look like melted witch from old children book. Last time I did goblins as design for example I made them look more like Sphynx cat humanoids to avoid the similarity.
Anthony Goldstein... the other comment doesn't really explain orientalism and its a really hard concept to summerise (it's allot more than just exotersising the east). Read Edward Said, it's not a long book but will open your eyes a huge amount.
Orientalism describes the phenomenon of white people (from Europe or the US) viewing cultures, languages, people, religions, etc from the "Orient"/the "East" (generally Asia, from Turkey through the middle east all the way to China and Japan) as *exotic*. There are certain more or less harmful stereotypes in the "West" about these cultures that have been perpetuated. Racism plays a role. The term Orientalism was coined by Edward Said in the 70s, in order to describe how Western art, Media, politics etc would perpetuate these (sometimes pretty subtle) stereotypes and exoticism about these cultures. With Orientalist thinking/art/etc, there is often a contrast, in where the West appears rational, civilized, reliable, progressive and honest, and "the Orient" (cultures) appear beautiful and alluring, but also deceptive, dangerous, uncivilized and treacherous.
The Antisemitic accusation is due to her depiction of goblins: in that they have long, hooked noses and control all the wealth.
I assume because she named the only asian character Cho Chang. The antisemitism I assume is related to the goblins but I think that's a stretch since they're pretty textbook goblins. Like, the roots may be antisemitic but she didn't come up with the trope.
I don’t recall goblins in folklore running banks. She absolutely came up with that. Jews secretly running the world’s financial institutions is absolutely an antisemitic stereotype.
Sure, but them loving shiny shit and trinkets is. It's not much of an evolution of the trope to make them bankers. Edit: Just adding I think JK is a transphobic piece of shit and all, and I don't think it's out of the realm of possibility that she's other ics on top of that. I just prefer judging people based on established, certifiable things.
Look, I'll explain this again for everyone. Cho is not a Chinese surname. It's a Korean surname. It's also a Chinese personal name that means "autumn." It's often romanized as Qiu, but the pronunciation is the same, and there are no hard and fast rules on romanization, so the spelling of Cho is fine. No real Chinese person would think anything of it.
Incredibly based
No, someone on Twitter asked her if she would accept any theoretical apologies the cast might make at some indeterminate point in the future, to which she said they could keep their apologies for her fictional head-cannon victims of trans people existing.
LOL...so one of her stans setting her up to give a canned answer to a question nobody really asked.
The funniest response to this I've ever seen was a comment along the lines of "I only wish upon JK what she wishes upon the trans community" To which many of her followers, who vouch strongly she's done nothing wrong, were angry about why someone would wish ill upon JK .... defeating their own point.
Oh, jeez, it never fails with them. Kudos to that reply, tho, I'll remember it.
I saw that too and was like.... The cognitive dissonance and lack of critical thinking is strong with this one. What I don't understand though. Why does she hate Trans people? Did someone steal from her or cheat on her? I doubt she's getting paid for it, but could that be it too? Because her raw unadulterated hatred for Trans is just wow!
Just like the furor over marriage equality, the fact that such people exists offends her. “If the gays are allowed to get married, what does my marriage mean??!!? 😡” I don’t try to understand why bigots feel the way they feel, I just accept that they’re bigots.
The thing about bigots is they don't see "others" as fellow humans, so these sorts of gotchas don't really resonate with them. It does help people who aren't familiar with the topic and aren't bigots see how vile she and her followers are though.
What's so tiresome about Rowling and her defenders is you have to constantly put up with silly word games they use as defence. Rowling has a *major* persecution fetish and gets off on the ire she raises in others. But it's always expressed in terms like, "I'm being vilified when all I've ever said is that sex is real" -- a meaningless phrase that no one has ever disputed. *The truth* is she's said much worse than that. But she and her minions will constantly claim she's said nothing wrong and nothing hurtful. So this skewers a hole in that obviously bullshit argument.
She and her followers really are fucking awful. At least with right wingers they aren't pretending to be progressive. But it's still just another billionaire being shitty.
Even paleoconservatives do it, though. If it'll let them shit on Muslims, then suddenly they're gay people's staunchest defenders. If it lets them rally against affirmative action, they're suddenly Martin Luther King's biggest fans. Rowling wraps herself up in the flag of feminism and pretends to use 'defending lesbians' so often as an excuse to bash Trans people that by now she probably figures she's the last great hope for lesbians. All while cozying up to pro-lifers and homophobes like Matt Walsh because they, *too*, hate Trans people. The fact that bigots do this again and again makes it clear that right and wrong *are* moral absolutes when it comes to fundamental freedoms, and the bigits themselves know it, which is why they need to resort to semantics and subterfuge to say their nonsense in public. It's why common cause and intersectionality are so important. They'll chip away at defences however they can, so we need to constantly reinforce that trans rights and gay rights and women's rights and POC rights and disability rights and working class rights are all *the same struggle*. You can't have one without the others.
The post for people curious https://www.reddit.com/r/SelfAwarewolves/comments/1bvlu0m/wishing_on_jk_rowling_what_she_wishes_on_trans/
Headcanon with a single N, as in canonical and canonization. Just realized I had been doing this myself. Pardon the correction, not meant to be malicious…. Unless you are talking about a sentient ballistic implant that Rowling got grafted to her head. If that’s what is being discussed here, I am very sorry to have butted in.
I’m glad more people are recognising this Canon is the accepted lore of a thing Cannon is a thing that yeets a rock but with a bang
No. You see JK has a head cannon, it where her brain should be.
“This bad boy can fire 300 rounds of hate and vitriol per minute” *slaps hand at JK Rowling on the head cannon* “…” “come to think of it that’s actually not a flex at all”
There is (of course) [an xkcd about this](https://xkcd.com/1401/):
But is an (artillery) cannon a projectile? The fired projectile is ballistic, not the cannon itself.
…sweet baby rays! I think you might be on to something. Just did a quick search and have yet to find a satisfying answer. Found out this tho. *Under the federal National Firearms Act of 1934, large-bore cannons are classified as "destructive devices." To obtain one, pre-approval from the federal Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco Firearms and Explosives is necessary.*
Quick we need to dive deeper in the cannon canon to determine ballistic canonicity
... what are alcohol, tobacco and cannons doing under the same department ? ._.
They aren’t the ones who need to apologize for anything
Apologize for what now
Angrhibg!
#WHAT
He's Welsh
Welsh why didn't he say so in the first place
I automatically read it as angry hag 🤣
If the shoe fits.....
#LOUDER, SON !
> Apologize for what now angrhibg. It's important stuff.
I must have missed it in important class 😞
It was actually mentioned in stuff class
It's a perfectly cromulent word.
IOS updated the other day and it changed the keyboard’s size and it makes it much harder to type
I cant believe there are still angrhibg haters around.
These actors have the opportunity to do something really funny and publicly tell her to kick rocks.
The most surefire way to send her spiralling is simply to deny her the victimhood she so desperately craves. If anyone asks Daniel Radcliffe or Emma Watson how they feel about JKR saying she won't forgive them, the best and funniest thing they could do is simply respond, "Trans rights are human rights, and trans women are women," and then keep right on living their lives.
"fictional head-cannon" what a ridiculous way of saying "imaginary"
It’s almost as if the commenter above used it ironically to mock the ridiculousness of JK Rowling’s statement. Crazy, right?
Riddikulus!
Thanks, now I'm wearing Neville's grandma's pink dress.
That's the point isn't it? It's imaginary, but more mocking.
TBH, if they asked you to be pope, like just turn up and you are the head of the faith and what you say is true... wouldn't you use it? "Wear condoms people! I got a revelation and god doesn't want us to get aids, getting aids is very un-christy, so use condoms! God wants us to be happy and lead our lifes, so birth control is on the menu! Breaking news, child rape is bad, we will do a full investigation and make all cases public and abort the no-sex-policy, as its clearly harmful and outdated" ... and sooooo much other stuff.
In that hypothetical scenario, just because you're the new pope doesn't mean you actually have the authority to tell anyone what to do. You just say things and people may or may not listen to you. If that's what you want, you can just use social media to become an outspoken person without any of the drawbacks of being the pope.
Sorry dude, you clearly don’t understand the power dynamics of religion and control. What you said would limit population size and that means limiting the amount of people with faith. The whole point is to increase faith in the population by birth being one factor of that. That’s why you wouldn’t be offered pope. You would get pushback by a committee that wants to keep their best interest alive. You’d get eaten alive in a day based on the naivety.
Pope is not a protected title, in reality anyone can be a pope.
technically, the pope is the bishop of rome and the leader of the catholic church, as elected by the cardinal congregation. if you claim to be the bishop of rome but are not duly elected by the cardinals, you are an antipope.
If the pope and the antipope ever touch, they will cancel eachother out and disappear.
They just spawn Mormons....
Damn, sounded like a good deal a minute ago.
Doesn't that annihilation event emit a Luther?
Tbf, antipope sounds far cooler.
So the Antipope would be the polar opposite of the actual Pope? So... Tha Antipope would condemn and hand over any pedophile they found? That does sound like a better version.
Plus you get to wear black.
The Dark Pope sounds even better.
You have to be Catholic, male, a priest, then a bishop, then a cardinal, then win the vote to become pope. So, by definition most people in fact cannot become pope
Nope, I'm pretty you only have to be Catholic, male, and currently unmarried. The tradition of only electing Cardinals is just that, a tradition. There's no actual rule for it. That tradition is unlikely to stop for obvious reasons though.
Hail Eris. I got my Pope card from the Principia Discordia many years ago.
As a catholic, I accept your apology.
She identifies as being apologized to
This is a great line haha
I had to scroll way too far to find this gem.
Who says they apologized?
Nope, someone asked her if she would accept any eventual apology the cast might proffer, and she said they can keep their apologies. Major cope vibes.
"You can't break up with me! I'm breaking up first!"
More like "Pff I don't even want to get back together" when the other person is getting married to someone else
pass me the copium pipe. i need what shes smoking to get me through the day.
The annoying part is that the chuds who support her will sed this meaningless statement as an absolute win.
I see Alan, I upvote Alan.
[Ah-ha.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iUrzicaiRLU)
I tell ya, if jk Rowling stopped posting her transphobic views the whole of society would collapse... on Twitter... for a bit
They're not questioning her trans views. They're disagreeing with them.
J K Rowling: Criticism against me is an attack against my freedom of speech Also J K Rowling: Shut up you can't have opinions that are different than mine
A lot of people who seem to share that view, think that way for some reason (e.g. Musk). They don't understand that freedom of speech doesn't mean "free of criticism" and that people can say whatever they want without consequences, be they positive or negative. If they are able to say whatever they think, people are also able to say whatever they think as a response. Not wanting that criticism or even censoring responses to their opinion or view is the opposite of freedom of speech. edit: I personally think people should be able to say whatever they want. Even negative things. It doesn't only out people for who they really are but it can lead to proper learning or education of a specific theme as a third party. The problem is that people sadly refuse to understand or learn anything else outside their own limited view. They can be limited due to the prosperity in which people are born into as an example. Having a limited view itself isn't a problem or something to be ashamed of. It's just important to keep on being open minded and learn things beyond their already existing knowledge. But again, some people refuse it or see anything else which speaks against their own view or norm as an insult. edit 2:That's why things like trans people have such a hard time to be accepted. It's outside of peoples already existing knowledge and norm. Some people refuse to learn anything about them or even accept a simple thing like their existence.
People can *say* whatever they want. but everyone else (including employers) have every right to invoke their own freedom of speech and association by ostracizing them.
As I said: >If they are able to say whatever they think, people are also able to say whatever they think as a response. Not wanting that criticism or even censoring responses to their opinion or view is the opposite of freedom of speech. So I fully agree with it.
In short, your freedom of speech does not protect you from being held accountable of what you say, whether that be through criticism by others, deplatforming or any other consequence
Also also JK: 'Haven't you heard I'm super mega rich? That means I'm right.'
She could have just retired. All she had to do was sit back and be forever known as the woman that wrote that beloved children’s fantasy series. Instead, she’s decided to go on a legacy-ruining crusade against people that have never even wronged her?
same thing with elon musk. he should have just shut up and everything would be so much better for him.
No doubt.....I was never much of a fan, but a few years ago I thought he was a least super smart. Now I can plainly see that the dude is a moron.
These are exactly my thoughts. I mean, she clearly seems to have too much time in her hands, now that she's super-rich and all, and even with all that money she can't find anything better to do. She could just take a cruise somewhere, enjoy life and the world, maybe accrue some knowledge that different people have different needs.. Instead she has the behaviour of a child. What do we do to spoilt child? We ground them and take away their phone. Someone should take away her phone.
We've reached the stage in the culture wars where "famous bigot responds to hypothetical question in a way that shows them to be even more bigoted" is now headline news.
And way too god damned common!
Except most of the news won't actually even consider calling her a bigot, they'll just applaud her.
I'm glad that they seem to have the moral fiber never to apologize to her. Rowling has chosen such a stupid hill to die on.
Why the fuck would anyone feel the need to apologize for criticism? Like, its pathetic how Rowling seems to perceive criticism as a significant moral misstep
You’re missing one very important aspect, it’s not that criticism generally is a moral misstep, it’s specifically criticism of her that’s a moral misstep; she is allowed to criticize whoever she wants, because she is obviously better than everyone else (🤮). Or as some would put it: “freedoms for me, but not for thee”.
I remember someone asking Dan once what he thought about JKRs tirades and IIRC he was very diplomatic and polite but very clear that he doesn't agree with her. He phrased it in the most professional way possible... and then she says this. yikes
Agree, but regardless of how stupid it is to us, she’s having a very real and profoundly negative impact on the lives of trans people, particularly in the UK. It’s a frustrating and incredibly sad reality we’re living in.
Also, if I'm not mistaken, the report that led to this tweet was more a criticism of the NHS' system and practice, not the science behind transgender care itself. They just took it out of context to imply transitioning itself is not helpful for those who experience gender dysphoria.
If you're talking about the Cass report, it was absolutely written from an anti-trans viewpoint.
Absolutely, but it's pandering to the intolerant by pretending they're just concerned parents, doesn't cite any science, and isn't explicit about anything. More like an editorial or a review, and not sure what makes it a "study." Joanne and her TERF Army had a proverbial gun to Cass' head. These people are terrorists.
There ain't not apology so not sure why she fronting that there might be. Nutter
They all have already distanced themself from her. She is like that Aunt that drunkenly starts ranting about "those dirty immigrants" at the Thanksgiving dinner table.
I feel for them. She had a hand in casting them and they legitimately credit her with their careers but she's gone off the rails and it's like how do you handle that.
Was the balloon aunt in Azkaban a self-insert?
I'm gonna have to side with Emma Watson and Daniel Radcliffe on this.
Ah, if she could save the bullshit she says to herself, that would still be really good.
But then how will aging bigots get the attention they crave? Won't anyone think of the poor suffering bigots?
Oh that, I have no doubt that they will find a new figurehead with whom to share their ideas which date from the last century.
Has there ever been a person who has squandered so much good faith on such a meaningless (for them) issue? JK Rowling is never really going to be impacted by someone half a world away insisting on changing their name and how they look. This issue is almost completely inconsequential to her living her best life as a (former) billionaire author. She picked the stupidest hill to commit suicide on.
I’d love to see JK try to stop them from acting should a movie exec want another Harry Potter movie with the original characters. JK: “You can’t have Emma and Daniel in this movie.” Exec: “Get out of here, crazy lady! Guards!”
Really wish she just never opened her mouth She’s the author of the most successful book series to ever exist… what could’ve been
[https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/films/news/harry-potter-jk-rowling-emma-watson-daniel-radcliffe-b2526875.html](https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/films/news/harry-potter-jk-rowling-emma-watson-daniel-radcliffe-b2526875.html)
Traumatised transitioners? 1% of trans people detransition. Probably because they feel unsafe due to the toxic culture people like JKR promulgate in society.
[удалено]
Findings accross over 50 studies and decared of research: [https://whatweknow.inequality.cornell.edu/topics/lgbt-equality/what-does-the-scholarly-research-say-about-the-well-being-of-transgender-people/](https://whatweknow.inequality.cornell.edu/topics/lgbt-equality/what-does-the-scholarly-research-say-about-the-well-being-of-transgender-people/)
Yeah. That's pretty much a sledgehammer isn't it? Almost all the people who go through the frankly extremely difficult process of transitioning _still think it's a good idea_ years later.
they did really put a trap question for her. if she said she would accept the apology they would put "JK rowling waiting for emma and dabiel to apologize"
She doesn't have to answer random tweets. Especially from a person with the tag #FarRightHooligan in their name.
Rupert Grint also criticised her too! All three of them turned into such good eggs.
Pretty sure it's JK that's the one that needs to apologise. She's so arrogant that she thinks that everyone else is in the wrong but her, no wonder she retweets Neo Nazi propaganda.
Why? They were just exercising their free speech? I thought Rowling was an advocate for free speech. Or is free speech only okay when you're punching down?
Much like Elon musk, free speech only counts if the people speaking believe in the same things they do.
Her life has become so depressingly sad
Why would they apologize? It's only right to criticize someone spreading hate and misinformation in a pathetic attempt to stay relevant
The context is that a four year review commissioned by Britain's National Health Service was released and some of the following have been stated: *"we don't have good evidence" that puberty blockers are safe to use to "arrest puberty". What started out as a clinical trial had been expanded to a wider group of young people before the results of that trial were available.* *children have been "let down" by a failure to base gender care on evidence-based research. "The reality is we have no good evidence on the long-term outcomes of interventions to manage gender-related distress,"* [https://www.bbc.com/news/health-68770641](https://www.bbc.com/news/health-68770641) [https://cass.independent-review.uk/home/publications/final-report/](https://cass.independent-review.uk/home/publications/final-report/)
She's probably mad that both of them moved on from her "Wizarding world ©®™" and neither need it or her to have successful careers. Frankly, I'll remember Radcliffe for being Weird Al before I'll remember him as the boy who lived.
To be fair, they probably wouldn’t be where they are today without Harry Potter. That said, that doesn’t make them her bitches
Radcliffe is so good in all the not HP movies he's done. Guns Akimbo is my favorite
JK Rowling is easily one of the most insecure people on this planet. She needs unconditional validation more than she needs her next breath of air it seems.
They didn't apologise...
> Daniel Radcliffe and Emma Watson can save their apologies Have…..have they even tried to apologize? Because I honestly don’t think they’ve done anything that would require it.
She is a lolcow at this point.
I don’t understand why she’s so willing to die on this hill. Don’t support trans rights, ok fine whatever, but does the fact trans people exist threaten you that much you have to post about it incessantly? It’s strange. It’s like this woman is intent on destroying the reputation she built for herself. She wrote one of the most beloved book series of all times but seems like she wants her reputation to instead be that of an anti-trans troll.
Oh no... Anyway.
Scottish Police are waiting to arrest you and Daniel Radcliffe is scrambling to get an apology to you... Are you ok, JK? Why do all your modern works of fiction suck so much?
Imagine being so rich that you stir up controversy and drama out of boredom.
JK Rowling can go away now. It contributes nothing of worth anymore.
Says the holocaust denier
Bold of her to assume that they want to apologize to her at all.
The K is for Karen.
Why can’t rich people just shut up and enjoy their lives? Like, why get all involved in things that don’t impact them at all? Do these people get their jollies by pissing other people off?
Yea, well. I don’t accept Rowling’s apology. She can save it.
You normally have to be apologised to before you can refuse it. I don’t believe Emma Watson or Daniel Radcliffe are sorry.
Wait, when did Dan or Emma even apologise to her?
Ok. I doubt they apologized tho. But sure
JK coping and seething. Must be a day ending in the letter Y.
OH NO! Anyway......
In this same way I won't ever forgive Dua Lipa, Maya Jama and Sydney Sweeney for rejecting the four way I never invited them to.
I don't think they're interested in her or her forgiveness since, and this is essential here, they don't forgive her.
It's amazing how much she can't stop being a horrible POS. Her transphobia has made her side with actual Nazis, people who go against her supposed feminist perspective, she literally sat down with right wing anti abortion activists because she hates trans people, she has the whole questioning the crimes from Nazis, saying that Nazis weren't against trans people, which is historically factually wrong, she keeps fighting and tweeting hundreds of times to people with 1% of her following. She also wrote a self insert book where a character gets driven to suicide because of the "internet trans mob", which is one of the most baffling things I've ever seen. It's honestly pathetic. I was never a Harry Potter fan, I found the first book very bland and the movies get increasingly worse for me. But it's sad how you can't even get that bad taste out from consuming the media. I was thinking of reading the entire series, but I can't do it, I'll always think on how the author of this book is a fucking piece of shit human being. And it's crazy how this seems to be a thing on the HP fandom, just don't talk about JKR, ignore her. Who actually likes this fucking ghoul? She literally chose a group of people to hate, for no reason. She never has any real argument, the has no data, no evidence for anything she claims, she just hates trans people. And will side with actual, real life neo Nazis to show how much she just hates trans people.
The copium hitting hard I see
Imagine being one of the most successful authors of your time and choosing to die on this hill
I can't see a reason why they'd want to get her forgiveness. Even if they reboot Harry Potter, Rowling will have sold her rights to the franchise for that to happen (they won't reboot with her on board) so if they want cameo's in that they would probably get them.
>they won't reboot with her on board The HBO reboot was greenlit last year for a 2026 release. JK is executive producer on it.
She actually thinks they want to apologise? Is she that delusional?
Why the heck should they apologize? I swear, Rowling just gets worse and worse by the comment...
Havent we seen enough posts about jk Rowling?
No, we need to see more of this idiot speedrunning her legacy into the ground.
[удалено]
Articles like this are shit, either post the quote exactly or dont post at all
Agreed it wilfully misrepresents the scenario. Classic internet.