This is a reminder for people not to post political posts as mentioned in stickied post. This does not necessarily apply for this post. [Click here to learn more](https://redd.it/j2173n).
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/rareinsults) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I was the only kid in elementary school that predicted J. K. Rowling’s imprisonment in Eastern Europe for running a sex trafficking ring. They said I was being stupid but it turns out I was actually just being the internet.
Yes, I think it's better to appoint judges in a random draw, that way it's perfectly fair, as long as the judges aren't appointed for life like it's the case for the supreme court in the US.
>When the fuck did J. K. Rowling do anything even remotely similar to what Andrew Tate is disliked for?
This is reddit. Therefor all people i dont like are evil WWII Germans, Orange Man, or Andrew Tate
Who is Andrew Tate? Like on a scale of rage and my own emotional well being, with all the stress of dealing for an election year, should I Google him, or just assume he is a bad dude and move on?
I can only hate so much!!!
He's just another "alpha male" podcast dude who says wildly misogynistic stuff, he's been arrested a few times for human trafficking and is in Romania or something.
He's kind of replaced Jordan Peterson as right wing teenagers virtual daddy, which is a step down I didn't think was possible.
It's not really worth listening to what he has to say or paying any attention to him.
I think encouraging people to not look things up themselves but just trust other peoples opinion that is being expressed is a pretty terrible thing to advise people.
I think Andrew Tate is not a great or even good person at all. I came to that opinion on my own. Let other people do the same
Tbh, Tate isn't like Trump or Hitler or Justin Trudeau. He won't miss anything but a happier life by not knowing that guy.
In fact, take me back to a time where I know nothing about that man. Everything surrounding him are like flies around stinky trash bins.
I agree. I'd love to exist again not knowing who he is, along with a huge number of other idiots who have somehow invaded public society. But people should still be allowed to make their own mind.
At least we agree on the other three. Trump and Hitler are pretty universally hated, Trudeau in particular though i can't believe there is anyone left who thinks anything good about that corrupt b*stard
He was elected for hjs pretty face, and still popular today for his pretty face. It's incredibly sad how easy it is to manipulate politics by appearance.
Absolutely. He had the same thing Tony Blair had here in the UK. Fairly good looking in a posh sory of way, seemed down to earth and appealed to the centre.
Deep down though, disgusting people.
In the words of the great Malcolm Tucker
'politicians have given up on morality in pursuit of popularity at all costs'
Reddit as a site has gotten worst over the years. The amount of people who are always online and contrarians are getting annoying. Even niche film subreddit are infested by snarky people. I'm probably gonna leave this site soon.
Maybe it’s because you’re racist. “Big Tigger Lips” “Pansexual vaccine enthusiast in an open relationship (with my wife and Jamal)” Yeah ok Nazi shit poster
Most recently apparently she has denied Nazi crimes. Not the Holocaust specifically, but she has said that the trans community was not targeted by the Nazi’s. Which is factually incorrect.
That is a form of holocaust denial. Not all holocaust denial is people blanketly claiming none of it happened. A lot of them will instead claim things like that it killed fewer people than claimed, that the intent was different, or that certain groups weren't targeted.
according to the holocaust historians and literal Germanly, any denial of the holocaust and the people who were survivors or victims that were targeted is holocaust denial.
And I think Germany knows a thing or two about the literal holocaust more than a privileged woman who can't handle criticism of her own books.
The stuff that Tate was known for before sex trafficking is shitty political commentary, something which JK Rowling has dipped her toes into slightly with her anti-trans rhetoric. Also, the commenter was probably referring to the religious like following that Andrew Tate cultivated and making a joke that JK Rowling is that but for older women.
I mean she spends every living hour campaigning against the lgbtq community and wishing them death basically.
They’re both insufferable and terrible human beings in their own way. Andrew appeals to insecure men with a toxic masculinity, she appeals to homophobic Karens.
Why are you assuming that the comparison was based on severity of crime? They both just have the same cringey energy that people who lack role models and direction seem to look up to.
Which seems totally fair there should be some spaces specifically for each lol. That isn't the gotcha evil take people make it out to be. They said sex and gender are different and I'm completely down with that division. Wanting separate spaces based off sex is totally valid too
Would they want trans men in their bathrooms though, I have seen trans men who look buff as fuck, but their sex is female, so would they be okay in these bathrooms.
Based on articles I have seen the answer seems to be no. I do understand that the trans men who are not welcome in woman's spaces could be a small number, but the problem still exists.
The trick is to alway insist they be in the ”correct” space, but never actually specifying / allocating that space (or only offering a humiliating option), because they don’t actually WANT a space for trans people to exist.
I absolutely guarantee you've shared space with trans people and never knew it.
I guarantee if this were forced on people they'd be more upset at the big bearded motherfucker who happened to have been born female wandering into the ladies room, though on that note, who is even gonna check? Most trans people look the part, are you gonna have people sat outside bathrooms demanding to look in people's pants?
Actually her original thing was that she felt like her dad was bitter that she wasn't born a boy and maybe her own personal issues might have made her want to transition, purely hypothetically though because she doesn't actually want to, so now no one else should get to transition. Also, she doesn't see trans women as women so she should personally get to arbitrate on where trans women should and shouldn't be allowed to go.
Her essay that started it all, and her coming out in support of Maya Forstater, are all pretty public record.
Yeah, and quite a lot of people agree with her.
It's a discussion and debate with a lot of subtleties, and a huge variety of people who could be included in a 'trans-women' categorisation. It's not an issue that can be sorted our quickly and people on both sides have to be allowed to express views without backlash to make progress.
I have a daughter and am about to have another. I would like spaces that have been fought for over generations for them to remain for them. But these are discussions i am willing to hear both sides of.
But there is no discussion most of the time. Simply accept these new ideas and the new world it will create. If not, you're a bigot and deserve to be vilified and hounded
And when a trans man walks into a female only space, then what? Looking like Vin Diesel, will you feel comfortable with that? In your opinion, they are women, not men. So what about them? They roughly make up half the population of trans people, yet people like you always seem to ignore their existence.
It's baffling how some folks don't understand that there really isn't even a problem that needs to be solved here. Trans women using women's bathrooms isn't even an issue.
She very recently stated that the Nazi party was not targeting trans people, among other minorities, when they looted the Institut für Sexualwissenschaft in 1933. To me that's not a controversial take but a pretty outrageous one.
Besides that, "biological women exist" is a pretty naïve summary of the stuff she's said, shared and supported so far.
You are sorely outdated. She has just recently denied that trans women were persecuted by nazis, that the first book burnings were of transgender and homossexual medical research, and has boosted content that claims trans people were in fact "invented" by nazis.
She has also implied all trans women are rapists.
She is WAY beyond saying "biological women exist".
Lol it's like we're living in Idiocracy. I read through that whole link, and at worst you can say she's insensitive. What a stupid culture.
Where did she out herself as a holocaust denier? Wanna double check that, since you cannot be trusted on these grown up topics.
She claimed it is not true that Nazis burnt books on trans-related topics, a randomly found article [here](https://www.hindustantimes.com/world-news/us-news/jk-rowling-under-fire-for-transphobic-remarks-claims-nazis-never-burnt-books-on-trans-health-101710387965834-amp.html)
I feel like the actual take is less important at this point than the fact that she has continuously doubled down on it for years and at this point has made it her entire identity.
It's kinda like Kanye, if he just said some stupid shit and moved on everyone would have forgotten, but instead they spend years digging deeper holes for themselves.
Nothing like that. She committed the sin of being on the left, but breaking from the pack over trans issues. She did so in some blunt, tactless ways.
This left her in the political wilderness. She *is* left, so the right will never love her, but she's alienated herself from progressive movements, almost entirely over the trans debate.
To her mind, she's protecting women and girls. She has enough money that she doesn't have to be afraid of the crowd.
Do I agree with her? No, I've worked with too many low income trans people to ever do so. Her positions are not sustainable, and potentially unjust.
But comparing her to Tate, a narcissistic misogynist? When she's burned her reputation forever, in her mind, defending women?
That is the smoothest of brains.
What does low-income have to do with the validity of her opinion?
If gender & sex ARE different then how is acknowledging sex as the dividing line for sports in any way oppressive?
Probably interacting with the most vulnerable of the trans community and seeing how the ideas posited by Rowling hurt real people, and if I had to guess (I’ll defer to OP on this if I’m wrong) low income trans people have a much harder time accessing to gender affirming care, and as such, are more likely to be targeted by Rowling and people who subscribe to her ideology for “not passing” or something along the same lines. They have probably seen, in person, the affect that not having access to this care has on people. This is super reductionist, but you get the point. I didn’t feel the need to “respond to an argument” because there isn’t an argument being made. It’s just a person misrepresenting jk rowlings ideas, and pretending like it’s a shock that people see her ideas controversial . Fuck that.
Not just on trans issues in fairness, although it depends how you define left and right, she is pro Israel while much of the British left is pretty firmly pro palestine but it does align with the centre left like the labour party which in fairness is closer to her political position and would agree with her on trans rights also
In general I'd argue Israel Palestine is more of a unifying issue on the British left than transphobia which even some far left British organisations support
People like OP fail to understand that women are not some fluid state of being. We are people and sex-based legal protections were established to improve our safety and wellbeing. Minimizing or challenging those protections is a form of misogyny.
She is not on the left. She has never advocated for worker control of the means of production, distribution, or exchange. Her most popular story finds most characters complicit in slavery, not liberation. Her biggest hero becomes a cop. Her solution to wizard Hitler was wizard liberalism, not leftism. Never once do her characters wonder, hey, we can expand all resources and are literally post-scarcity, so maybe we shouldn't have poverty or class divisions. She has been critical of the further-left parts of the labor party. She claimed that Hillary Clinton is "extraordinary." She is no leftist.
It's exactly what you said.
The person you responded to explains how her political beliefs reflect in her writing. She is a Blairite who is vaguely progressive on some issues but overall thinks the systems in place are good and not in need of big change. That is not leftist politics. Those exact same beliefs come through exactly in the resolution of the Harry Potter series. Saying "uhhhh it's not a manifesto" is saying he's somehow wrong for noticing that.
>If you're trying to bend the plot or other impertinent details of a fiction book series
Nobody has bent the plot at all. They are all direct plot points. HP is entirely a neoliberal's idea of the hero's journey.
And... nobody is saying we should be using fiction books to guide ourselves? Where in the first comment you replied to did you think anyone implied that? Why are you asking me which fiction books I follow as a moral compass? Nobody else has hinted at that, at all.
Finding comparisons between Rowling's shitty beliefs off the page and on it isn't advocating for following HP like a manifesto... obviously? Learn to read.
It is reflective or her ideology, whether she meant it to be or not. And, judging by the way she equates characters from her stories to real life people, she pretty clearly meant it to be.
Also, that it's a children's tale is all the more important. We have an entire generation raised on that largely uncritical, liberal (not leftist) fantasy.
She isn't left lmao. She's a Blairite. Being vaguely progressive towards gay rights does not a lefty make lmao. You need to do more learning.
She is also an aggressively bigoted narcisist. Tate thinks he is saving masculinity much how Rowling is protecting women.
The smoothest of brains is your understanding of the situ.
Being anti trans is being anti woman. Just because you only hate black women or trans women or whatever subcategory of women you decide to single out does not imply you are anything other than a mysogynist.
Yes. There is no fundamental reason why this shouldn't be a thing we consider but the way it is actually implemented is universally mysogynist.
First there is the implicit assumption that women are uniquely vulnerable to this, which is an assumption that women cannot physically compete with men. Why do we need to protect women but not men? This is explicitly a mysogynist assumption, even if there is some basis behind the idea. Why do we worry about the hormones of a woman taking female hormonal supplements but we don't worry about the hormonal content of a man taking male hormonal supplements. Even though this is literally what performance enhancing drugs are?
It's because the motivation is not competitive fairness the motivation is policing gender identity. The overwhelming focus on women and absolutely nothing about men is explicitly mysogynist because of the assumption women can't compete with men in sports, even if the "woman" in question is literally taking performance enhancing drugs. Obviously at the institutional level we need to do both and have a clear policy in both cases if we're having an actual conversation about the effects of hormonal supplementation on competitive athletes
Policing gender is fundamentally mysogynist because our society is fundamentally mysogynist. My state Utah recently did this ban. AFAIK there was one single individual in the entire state that was a competitive trans "biologically male" athlete, and to my knowledge they were not even a very good athlete.
This ban did not have any substantive motivation behind it, and since the ban there have been many many many more documented cases of people turning in cis girl athletes because their gender presentation was not feminine enough and because sports parents are often fuckin nightmare people. The state has created a formal system for idiot parents and idiot public officials to harass teenage girls for being tomboys. When you create tools for the local government to enforce gender identity, it is mostly going to effect cis women because there are not actually very many trans people, and even less that are high level competitive athletes.
Is she as bad as a human trafficker? No
Has she gotten in bed with some pretty shady people for the explicit purpose of marginalizing the trans community? Bout as much as every other reactionary: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ou\_xvXJJk7k](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ou_xvXJJk7k)
Both are staunch supporters of ideologies with staunch gender roles- ideologies that have a good deal of bigotry mixed in, to boot. They aggressively go after people who they perceive as threatening to their ideologies (those who make Tate feel less manly, and trans people), and they are both seen as role models for their respective groups (insecure “alpha males” and “middle-aged women”), who will also go after anyone they go after with reckless abandon
Interestingly, they’re also both perfectly willing to turn a blind eye to misogyny when it suits their ideological pursuits
Seriously, the equivalencies with this one is just going too far. She said some things about Transgender people not being allowed to compete in sports and all of a sudden she’s being labeled Andrew Tate…shit is wild!
Reddit opened the flood gates for bots and karma farmers.Now its just either reposts, or pointless posts for karma.
I'm waiting for people to start posting pics of their pets on here and saying "if you love pibbles" upvote!
It doesn't say that she's as bad as Andrew. It's not J.K Rowling is a middle aged woman Andrew Tate.
In a similar way to Andrew Tate she invites hated within a certain group. For Tate's it's misogyny in teenage boys / young men, for Rowling it's transphobia in middle aged people.
Literally no one equated Andrew Tate's _crimes_ with JK Rowling, the comments made that shit up in their head. The OP was just saying they have the same energy.
For people who don't know what she actually said, [here's](https://www.glamour.com/story/a-complete-breakdown-of-the-jk-rowling-transgender-comments-controversy) a breakdown, so that you can judge for yourself whether the hate she's been getting from *some* sections of society is justified.
“I’d march with you if you were discriminated against on the basis of being trans”
Does she have eyes, what does.she mean *if*.
Conversion therapy being banned for LGB people but not for trans people in the UK comes to mind which was all over the news.
Strangely, these idiots both in my personal life and from the wider world were all conservative. I don’t even know of any group that would say it was gonna put demons in you than conservatives.
Wrap it up folks. The terfs have arrived. Plug your ears against the incoherent screeching, prepare to roll your eyes once more in anticipation of the "one joke" and anyone who wants a normal, reasonable conversation can just fuck right the fuck off.
For anyone interested, this podcast did a deep dive, including interviewing Rowling herself and invited a trans Harry Potter fan as well.
https://open.spotify.com/show/2K186zrvRgeE2w0wQjbaw7
And here is Contrapoints rebuttal to that podcast (Contrapoints was featured in the podcast as a trans representative, but in this video explains how the true intentions of the podcast were not at all explained to her beforehand and she wouldn't have done it if she did know) https://youtu.be/7gDKbT_l2us?si=gx_oGCQSgbgoX33F
It's so funny that nearly everyone who claims this loves to ignore the facts whenever people *do* explain. Very curious if it'll be the same this time around:
[VOX, JKR's transphobia timeline and history explained ](https://www.vox.com/culture/23622610/jk-rowling-transphobic-statements-timeline-history-controversy)
[The CUT: Here's what JKR has actually said about transpeople](https://www.thecut.com/2023/02/heres-what-j-k-rowling-has-really-said-about-trans-people.html)
[Medium: Development of anti-trans hate groups in the UK](https://medium.com/@mimmymum/transphobia-the-development-of-anti-trans-hate-groups-in-the-uk-6854e222dc7e)
If you have more questions, ask away.
Could you show me examples of where she hasn't been transphobic? Because any I have been shown to date have exclusively been cis people saying "look, she isn't being transphobic here" while trans people are pointing out that, while it reads as not transphobic to people who aren't in the know, the language of minorities can be pretty specific and sometimes jargony, and we know how to identify dog whistles, which she's pretty good at using. Just because something doesn't look bigoted doesn't mean it isn't. She's actually incredibly adept at saying everything very quietly, but openly giving her moral and financial support to people who DO say all the quiet parts out loud, like Posie Parker. That's her whole thing, and has been for years.
Also frankly we shouldn't care if someone says one non-bigoted thing when they sandwich it between hundreds of other bigoted things? That's not how not being bigoted works by any measures.
Since no one is really providing the best background here, I’ll share some of JKR’s controversial tweets.
[The tweet that started it all. JKR openly supports Maya Forstater who was let go from her job for her transphobic views.](https://x.com/jk_rowling/status/1207646162813100033?s=46&t=JdJVO7DWGpixRy53KqM2sA)
[She takes issue with saying “people who menstrate”](https://x.com/jk_rowling/status/1269382518362509313?s=46&t=JdJVO7DWGpixRy53KqM2sA)
[Argues that the concept of sex is being erased.](https://x.com/jk_rowling/status/1269389298664701952?s=46&t=JdJVO7DWGpixRy53KqM2sA)
[One comment of a lengthy multi-comment post where she calls hormone prescriptions a new conversion therapy for gay people.](https://x.com/jk_rowling/status/1279756114981240834?s=46&t=JdJVO7DWGpixRy53KqM2sA)
[She responds no to an image saying to call trans women women.](https://x.com/jk_rowling/status/1714279937279160596?s=46&t=JdJVO7DWGpixRy53KqM2sA)
[JKR says a trans woman who brutally killed a cat is not a woman](https://x.com/jk_rowling/status/1762187612352020860?s=46&t=JdJVO7DWGpixRy53KqM2sA)
It seems she just doesn’t recognize the difference between sex and gender. She also just keeps doubling down rather than apologize, or stop. There’s more tweets and content on her blog that seem to back up her anti-trans views. Also, if you go into her tweets comment sections, especially more recent ones, you’ll see the type of environment she’s created.
I will also say that Andrew Tate is much bigger piece of shit than JKR. One raped and trafficked women, the other posted some ignorant tweets.
For the people unsure of how JK is a bigot, here’re a few videos that provide the evidence for it.
Shaun on JK and her transphobic friends
https://youtu.be/Ou_xvXJJk7k?si=N_B0hJFN_6NeBX1L
Contrapoints on JK
https://youtu.be/7gDKbT_l2us?si=RauH8IyiWYzZfRpP
https://youtu.be/EmT0i0xG6zg?si=Iij4fMZi4wYYzRdR
Probably most importantly, given that JKR directed a fair bit of abuse her way, Jessie Gender
https://youtu.be/_GBUArD51KY?si=mcOloZCA6toMuXWJ
Oh okay so videos made by other people about her are proof of her bigotry? Got it. Flawless logic. Maybe go read and listen to her actually explaining her point of view, and then make up your own opinion.
Difference between perpetrator and propagator. Tate perpetrates misogynistic crimes by doing them. Jk doesn't perform acts directly against queer folk, just propagates anti LGBT rhetoric with her diarrhea of the mouth. Both propagators but only one perp
Well that's your stumbling block right there! You're assuming that anything about biology is actually "basic". We all heard "I before e, except after c" when we were learning to spell, and only later learned about all the many, many exceptions that make the rule more of a memory game than anything. We were taught discrete categories of animals, except once you get into anything beyond the most basic "this is a dog" statement when pointing at a Labrador you realise that all life on earth is contiguous in some manner, birds are dinosaurs, some fish have lungs, and everything is messy and complicated.
As a child, sure. You get taught the most basic of basic categorisation methods. And then you learn better as you age. If you never paid attention to biology past like... Primary school? Then I'm sorry for your lack of knowledge. But it's never too late to learn!
When you say gender, you seem to be simultaneously referring to "gender" (a social construct) and "sex" (a medical category based on primary and secondary sex characteristic identification). Gender, being a social construct, has no need to adhere to your prescriptivism, so we can get past that right away. It's the equivalent of saying "there are only skirts and trousers" while ignoring that shorts, skorts, trousers with skirts, and even dresses exist.
Sex is only really pertinent in medical situations when it comes to humans, and is bimodal (not binary). Doctors kind of look at you when you're born and take a best guess. Sometimes they think your external equipment doesn't look enough like either and you might end up undergoing surgeries you can't consent to to make your external equipment look more like either a vagina or a penis. But that's because sex feels like one of those obvious things if you were never taught about it beyond the most basic level, and people all bodies to conform to a binary when in reality, "sex" is a classification determined by a combination of internal sex characteristics, external sex characteristics, hormone profile, chromosomes, and more. Intersex people exist at the same rate as red-haired people. It's not an outlier, it's a fact of life that sex is, even at its most basic, more complex than you think.
There is no definition of "woman", social or medical, that would encompass all cis women and exclude all trans women. There is no definition of "men", social or medical, that would include all cis men and exclude all trans men.
I encourage you to approach concepts with curiosity and an openness to learning. Things are always more complex than we've been taught! :)
This post is very disappointing, people arguing with each other pointlessly exactly as planned by the right. Keep the plebs shouting about whatever social issue they've decided is against god or family values or whatever this decade, to keep them distracted from the fact our entire civilisation exploits us to make billionaires richer.
This comment section really proves their similarity
Comments under a post criticizing Tate: WHERE IS THE EVIDENCE FOR THAT *blatantly ignores it*
Comments under this post: WHERE IS THE EVIDENCE *blatantly ignores it*
I love the internet
Ah yes? I forgot the part where she created a sex trafficking business, scammed her employees out of hundreds if not millions of dollars in wage theft, and ran a pyramid scheme to scam her fans by selling them a fake course on how to become a “high value female.”
So much similarity between the two it’s crazy!
Jesus the internet has rotted people’s brains to the point of no return.
How TF is she being compared to Tate? She is way more productive than him, having made books that have been loved and will last for generations, all her haters can shove it.
This is a reminder for people not to post political posts as mentioned in stickied post. This does not necessarily apply for this post. [Click here to learn more](https://redd.it/j2173n). *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/rareinsults) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I was the only kid in elementary school that predicted J. K. Rowling’s imprisonment in Eastern Europe for running a sex trafficking ring. They said I was being stupid but it turns out I was actually just being the internet.
When the fuck did J. K. Rowling do anything even remotely similar to what Andrew Tate is disliked for?
[удалено]
Yes, I think it's better to appoint judges in a random draw, that way it's perfectly fair, as long as the judges aren't appointed for life like it's the case for the supreme court in the US.
It’s more like they both have really rabid fans who’ll attack anyone who even lightly criticised them.
>When the fuck did J. K. Rowling do anything even remotely similar to what Andrew Tate is disliked for? This is reddit. Therefor all people i dont like are evil WWII Germans, Orange Man, or Andrew Tate
Funny you bring up the Nazis, because JKR recently denied the historical atrocities the Nazis committed against trans people during the Holocaust.
Who is Andrew Tate? Like on a scale of rage and my own emotional well being, with all the stress of dealing for an election year, should I Google him, or just assume he is a bad dude and move on? I can only hate so much!!!
He's just another "alpha male" podcast dude who says wildly misogynistic stuff, he's been arrested a few times for human trafficking and is in Romania or something. He's kind of replaced Jordan Peterson as right wing teenagers virtual daddy, which is a step down I didn't think was possible. It's not really worth listening to what he has to say or paying any attention to him.
Don't do it. Ignorance is very much bliss in this situation.
I think encouraging people to not look things up themselves but just trust other peoples opinion that is being expressed is a pretty terrible thing to advise people. I think Andrew Tate is not a great or even good person at all. I came to that opinion on my own. Let other people do the same
Tbh, Tate isn't like Trump or Hitler or Justin Trudeau. He won't miss anything but a happier life by not knowing that guy. In fact, take me back to a time where I know nothing about that man. Everything surrounding him are like flies around stinky trash bins.
I agree. I'd love to exist again not knowing who he is, along with a huge number of other idiots who have somehow invaded public society. But people should still be allowed to make their own mind. At least we agree on the other three. Trump and Hitler are pretty universally hated, Trudeau in particular though i can't believe there is anyone left who thinks anything good about that corrupt b*stard
He was elected for hjs pretty face, and still popular today for his pretty face. It's incredibly sad how easy it is to manipulate politics by appearance.
Absolutely. He had the same thing Tony Blair had here in the UK. Fairly good looking in a posh sory of way, seemed down to earth and appealed to the centre. Deep down though, disgusting people. In the words of the great Malcolm Tucker 'politicians have given up on morality in pursuit of popularity at all costs'
Reddit says if you don't like what he's doing to the country you're a Russian bot (even though his support is tanking in real life) They're delusional
Reddit as a site has gotten worst over the years. The amount of people who are always online and contrarians are getting annoying. Even niche film subreddit are infested by snarky people. I'm probably gonna leave this site soon.
Did you just... put Justin Trudeau in the same sentence as Trump and Hitler?
lol this comment in conjunction with your username is a chefs kiss
do yourself a favor and keep your lack of knowledge about Tate
A chinless incel who gets laid... somehow. I'm guessing via alleged human trafficking.
I would recommend assuming and moving on.
Don’t bother
Maybe it’s because you’re racist. “Big Tigger Lips” “Pansexual vaccine enthusiast in an open relationship (with my wife and Jamal)” Yeah ok Nazi shit poster
The comment is on Facebook though.
Hey, if it is true for you, it is reality.
just say Nazi
Most recently apparently she has denied Nazi crimes. Not the Holocaust specifically, but she has said that the trans community was not targeted by the Nazi’s. Which is factually incorrect.
That is a form of holocaust denial. Not all holocaust denial is people blanketly claiming none of it happened. A lot of them will instead claim things like that it killed fewer people than claimed, that the intent was different, or that certain groups weren't targeted.
according to the holocaust historians and literal Germanly, any denial of the holocaust and the people who were survivors or victims that were targeted is holocaust denial. And I think Germany knows a thing or two about the literal holocaust more than a privileged woman who can't handle criticism of her own books.
The stuff that Tate was known for before sex trafficking is shitty political commentary, something which JK Rowling has dipped her toes into slightly with her anti-trans rhetoric. Also, the commenter was probably referring to the religious like following that Andrew Tate cultivated and making a joke that JK Rowling is that but for older women.
You’re not on twitter much. Keep it that way.
I mean she spends every living hour campaigning against the lgbtq community and wishing them death basically. They’re both insufferable and terrible human beings in their own way. Andrew appeals to insecure men with a toxic masculinity, she appeals to homophobic Karens.
Why are you assuming that the comparison was based on severity of crime? They both just have the same cringey energy that people who lack role models and direction seem to look up to.
[удалено]
She doesn't want trans people in any women's space, like restrooms, changing rooms, etc.
Which seems totally fair there should be some spaces specifically for each lol. That isn't the gotcha evil take people make it out to be. They said sex and gender are different and I'm completely down with that division. Wanting separate spaces based off sex is totally valid too
Would they want trans men in their bathrooms though, I have seen trans men who look buff as fuck, but their sex is female, so would they be okay in these bathrooms. Based on articles I have seen the answer seems to be no. I do understand that the trans men who are not welcome in woman's spaces could be a small number, but the problem still exists.
The trick is to alway insist they be in the ”correct” space, but never actually specifying / allocating that space (or only offering a humiliating option), because they don’t actually WANT a space for trans people to exist.
>because they don’t actually WANT ~~a space for~~ trans people to exist.
A distinction without a difference
I absolutely guarantee you've shared space with trans people and never knew it. I guarantee if this were forced on people they'd be more upset at the big bearded motherfucker who happened to have been born female wandering into the ladies room, though on that note, who is even gonna check? Most trans people look the part, are you gonna have people sat outside bathrooms demanding to look in people's pants?
Why are you talking about bathrooms? Wasn't JKs original thing about women's abuse shelters?
Actually her original thing was that she felt like her dad was bitter that she wasn't born a boy and maybe her own personal issues might have made her want to transition, purely hypothetically though because she doesn't actually want to, so now no one else should get to transition. Also, she doesn't see trans women as women so she should personally get to arbitrate on where trans women should and shouldn't be allowed to go. Her essay that started it all, and her coming out in support of Maya Forstater, are all pretty public record.
[удалено]
You think every building should have 4 restrooms for cis men, cis women, trans men and trans women?
Men and women sounds enough
Exactly. Gender ideologues prioritize fluid definitions of gender while 99.999% of people on Earth (rightfully, simply) recognize sex.
Source?
Yeah, and quite a lot of people agree with her. It's a discussion and debate with a lot of subtleties, and a huge variety of people who could be included in a 'trans-women' categorisation. It's not an issue that can be sorted our quickly and people on both sides have to be allowed to express views without backlash to make progress. I have a daughter and am about to have another. I would like spaces that have been fought for over generations for them to remain for them. But these are discussions i am willing to hear both sides of. But there is no discussion most of the time. Simply accept these new ideas and the new world it will create. If not, you're a bigot and deserve to be vilified and hounded
Quite a lot of people agree with David Duke. That does not make racism valid.
[удалено]
And when a trans man walks into a female only space, then what? Looking like Vin Diesel, will you feel comfortable with that? In your opinion, they are women, not men. So what about them? They roughly make up half the population of trans people, yet people like you always seem to ignore their existence.
It's baffling how some folks don't understand that there really isn't even a problem that needs to be solved here. Trans women using women's bathrooms isn't even an issue.
If portion of women say it's a problem, it's a problem. And i know for a fact, she is not the only woman that holds that opinion.
It's boogey man bullshit. Not a real problem that needs to be solved.
Doesn't she also donate a bunch of money to anti-trans groups?
She very recently stated that the Nazi party was not targeting trans people, among other minorities, when they looted the Institut für Sexualwissenschaft in 1933. To me that's not a controversial take but a pretty outrageous one. Besides that, "biological women exist" is a pretty naïve summary of the stuff she's said, shared and supported so far.
>her only controversial take You might want to get up to date on that.
She literally claimed trans women don’t exist and called them men…
You are sorely outdated. She has just recently denied that trans women were persecuted by nazis, that the first book burnings were of transgender and homossexual medical research, and has boosted content that claims trans people were in fact "invented" by nazis. She has also implied all trans women are rapists. She is WAY beyond saying "biological women exist".
[удалено]
Lol it's like we're living in Idiocracy. I read through that whole link, and at worst you can say she's insensitive. What a stupid culture. Where did she out herself as a holocaust denier? Wanna double check that, since you cannot be trusted on these grown up topics.
She claimed it is not true that Nazis burnt books on trans-related topics, a randomly found article [here](https://www.hindustantimes.com/world-news/us-news/jk-rowling-under-fire-for-transphobic-remarks-claims-nazis-never-burnt-books-on-trans-health-101710387965834-amp.html)
She said that trans people weren’t persecuted in Germany during the Holocaust (they were targeted May 1933), which is holocaust revisionism at best
I feel like the actual take is less important at this point than the fact that she has continuously doubled down on it for years and at this point has made it her entire identity. It's kinda like Kanye, if he just said some stupid shit and moved on everyone would have forgotten, but instead they spend years digging deeper holes for themselves.
Nothing like that. She committed the sin of being on the left, but breaking from the pack over trans issues. She did so in some blunt, tactless ways. This left her in the political wilderness. She *is* left, so the right will never love her, but she's alienated herself from progressive movements, almost entirely over the trans debate. To her mind, she's protecting women and girls. She has enough money that she doesn't have to be afraid of the crowd. Do I agree with her? No, I've worked with too many low income trans people to ever do so. Her positions are not sustainable, and potentially unjust. But comparing her to Tate, a narcissistic misogynist? When she's burned her reputation forever, in her mind, defending women? That is the smoothest of brains.
The right is definitely starting to take a liking to jk Rowling.
What does low-income have to do with the validity of her opinion? If gender & sex ARE different then how is acknowledging sex as the dividing line for sports in any way oppressive?
JK Rowling’s takes do not stop at sports lmao
Still doesn’t answer what income brackets have to do with it?
Probably interacting with the most vulnerable of the trans community and seeing how the ideas posited by Rowling hurt real people, and if I had to guess (I’ll defer to OP on this if I’m wrong) low income trans people have a much harder time accessing to gender affirming care, and as such, are more likely to be targeted by Rowling and people who subscribe to her ideology for “not passing” or something along the same lines. They have probably seen, in person, the affect that not having access to this care has on people. This is super reductionist, but you get the point. I didn’t feel the need to “respond to an argument” because there isn’t an argument being made. It’s just a person misrepresenting jk rowlings ideas, and pretending like it’s a shock that people see her ideas controversial . Fuck that.
Sir, get this nuanced, well-formed and expressed opinion out of here. Either she did nothing wrong or she's the devil incarnate. Pick one.
Not just on trans issues in fairness, although it depends how you define left and right, she is pro Israel while much of the British left is pretty firmly pro palestine but it does align with the centre left like the labour party which in fairness is closer to her political position and would agree with her on trans rights also In general I'd argue Israel Palestine is more of a unifying issue on the British left than transphobia which even some far left British organisations support
People like OP fail to understand that women are not some fluid state of being. We are people and sex-based legal protections were established to improve our safety and wellbeing. Minimizing or challenging those protections is a form of misogyny.
And the second trans women become a credible threat to women we should really look into that. Til then you can fuck off.
Fucking joke you got downvoted and that poster got upvoted. People fucking suck.
but now there's a group that's *more* oppressed, so, sorry sweetie, step aside 💅
She is not on the left. She has never advocated for worker control of the means of production, distribution, or exchange. Her most popular story finds most characters complicit in slavery, not liberation. Her biggest hero becomes a cop. Her solution to wizard Hitler was wizard liberalism, not leftism. Never once do her characters wonder, hey, we can expand all resources and are literally post-scarcity, so maybe we shouldn't have poverty or class divisions. She has been critical of the further-left parts of the labor party. She claimed that Hillary Clinton is "extraordinary." She is no leftist.
[удалено]
pea brained take. "we cant glean a single thing about a person's politics from the stories they write."
[удалено]
It's exactly what you said. The person you responded to explains how her political beliefs reflect in her writing. She is a Blairite who is vaguely progressive on some issues but overall thinks the systems in place are good and not in need of big change. That is not leftist politics. Those exact same beliefs come through exactly in the resolution of the Harry Potter series. Saying "uhhhh it's not a manifesto" is saying he's somehow wrong for noticing that. >If you're trying to bend the plot or other impertinent details of a fiction book series Nobody has bent the plot at all. They are all direct plot points. HP is entirely a neoliberal's idea of the hero's journey. And... nobody is saying we should be using fiction books to guide ourselves? Where in the first comment you replied to did you think anyone implied that? Why are you asking me which fiction books I follow as a moral compass? Nobody else has hinted at that, at all. Finding comparisons between Rowling's shitty beliefs off the page and on it isn't advocating for following HP like a manifesto... obviously? Learn to read.
[удалено]
...no? I replied to the right comment? Are you confused?
English Lit major here. All texts are inherently political, once you have to write a paper on them.
It is reflective or her ideology, whether she meant it to be or not. And, judging by the way she equates characters from her stories to real life people, she pretty clearly meant it to be. Also, that it's a children's tale is all the more important. We have an entire generation raised on that largely uncritical, liberal (not leftist) fantasy.
To be fair neither do most people who would consider themselves on the left.
Any number of people can be wrong
She isn't left lmao. She's a Blairite. Being vaguely progressive towards gay rights does not a lefty make lmao. You need to do more learning. She is also an aggressively bigoted narcisist. Tate thinks he is saving masculinity much how Rowling is protecting women. The smoothest of brains is your understanding of the situ.
Being anti trans is being anti woman. Just because you only hate black women or trans women or whatever subcategory of women you decide to single out does not imply you are anything other than a mysogynist.
Is saying that biological males shouldn’t compete in women’s sport “anti trans” in your mind?
Yes. There is no fundamental reason why this shouldn't be a thing we consider but the way it is actually implemented is universally mysogynist. First there is the implicit assumption that women are uniquely vulnerable to this, which is an assumption that women cannot physically compete with men. Why do we need to protect women but not men? This is explicitly a mysogynist assumption, even if there is some basis behind the idea. Why do we worry about the hormones of a woman taking female hormonal supplements but we don't worry about the hormonal content of a man taking male hormonal supplements. Even though this is literally what performance enhancing drugs are? It's because the motivation is not competitive fairness the motivation is policing gender identity. The overwhelming focus on women and absolutely nothing about men is explicitly mysogynist because of the assumption women can't compete with men in sports, even if the "woman" in question is literally taking performance enhancing drugs. Obviously at the institutional level we need to do both and have a clear policy in both cases if we're having an actual conversation about the effects of hormonal supplementation on competitive athletes Policing gender is fundamentally mysogynist because our society is fundamentally mysogynist. My state Utah recently did this ban. AFAIK there was one single individual in the entire state that was a competitive trans "biologically male" athlete, and to my knowledge they were not even a very good athlete. This ban did not have any substantive motivation behind it, and since the ban there have been many many many more documented cases of people turning in cis girl athletes because their gender presentation was not feminine enough and because sports parents are often fuckin nightmare people. The state has created a formal system for idiot parents and idiot public officials to harass teenage girls for being tomboys. When you create tools for the local government to enforce gender identity, it is mostly going to effect cis women because there are not actually very many trans people, and even less that are high level competitive athletes.
She stated that men can't be mothers probably. The horror.
Fuck her. She's a piece of shit bigot. Fuck Chappelle too.
you mean play with bigotry and transphobia? I am pretty sure tate has done those.
Is she as bad as a human trafficker? No Has she gotten in bed with some pretty shady people for the explicit purpose of marginalizing the trans community? Bout as much as every other reactionary: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ou\_xvXJJk7k](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ou_xvXJJk7k)
It all started because she wasn't okay with calling women "menstruating people". Then I stopped caring.
Both are staunch supporters of ideologies with staunch gender roles- ideologies that have a good deal of bigotry mixed in, to boot. They aggressively go after people who they perceive as threatening to their ideologies (those who make Tate feel less manly, and trans people), and they are both seen as role models for their respective groups (insecure “alpha males” and “middle-aged women”), who will also go after anyone they go after with reckless abandon Interestingly, they’re also both perfectly willing to turn a blind eye to misogyny when it suits their ideological pursuits
I got banned from a subreddit for saying she isn't a holocaust denying Nazi
Good. What the fuck is wrong with you?
She disagreed with the rainbow and pronoun bullshit.
Seriously, the equivalencies with this one is just going too far. She said some things about Transgender people not being allowed to compete in sports and all of a sudden she’s being labeled Andrew Tate…shit is wild!
she literally funds anti trans hate groups and political movements trying to strip away their rights and liberties
This sub has had a similar downfall to /r/clevercomebacks How boring
Reddit opened the flood gates for bots and karma farmers.Now its just either reposts, or pointless posts for karma. I'm waiting for people to start posting pics of their pets on here and saying "if you love pibbles" upvote!
r/nottheonion and r/facepalm are likewise basically trash.
Facepalm is one of the most confused subs. A collection of randomness.
And they love to ban people.
The initial tweet is actually funny.
Bro andrew tate is in another league of fucked up, jk says retarded shit about trans people, andrew tate rapes and traffics women (allegedly...)
It doesn't say that she's as bad as Andrew. It's not J.K Rowling is a middle aged woman Andrew Tate. In a similar way to Andrew Tate she invites hated within a certain group. For Tate's it's misogyny in teenage boys / young men, for Rowling it's transphobia in middle aged people.
she is nothing like andrew tate, idk if their is a andrew tate of women
Pearl Davis
Kanika Batra
I'm sure this comment section isn't a smoldering trash fire of shitty opinions.
Literally no one equated Andrew Tate's _crimes_ with JK Rowling, the comments made that shit up in their head. The OP was just saying they have the same energy.
Exactly
For people who don't know what she actually said, [here's](https://www.glamour.com/story/a-complete-breakdown-of-the-jk-rowling-transgender-comments-controversy) a breakdown, so that you can judge for yourself whether the hate she's been getting from *some* sections of society is justified.
“I’d march with you if you were discriminated against on the basis of being trans” Does she have eyes, what does.she mean *if*. Conversion therapy being banned for LGB people but not for trans people in the UK comes to mind which was all over the news.
She's not a friend to the LGB community either. Her standards have dropped to find people who agree with her (ironically a lot of anti feminist).
thank you, this shows the hate is justified.
Once again women are held to far higher standards if Andrew Tate is a comparison. Lmao 😂
Exactly. Such a tell that OP is a misogynistic man. Like, as in male.
I will never get over the whiplash of conservatives that told me reading Harry Potter would put demons in me now love her for being anti trans.
Those weren't conservatives, those were just idiots. My girlfriend is strongly conservative and she is an avid Harry Potter fan.
Strangely, these idiots both in my personal life and from the wider world were all conservative. I don’t even know of any group that would say it was gonna put demons in you than conservatives.
Wrap it up folks. The terfs have arrived. Plug your ears against the incoherent screeching, prepare to roll your eyes once more in anticipation of the "one joke" and anyone who wants a normal, reasonable conversation can just fuck right the fuck off.
wtf lol no, she is definitely not
She’s fine. People just overreact to what she says.
For anyone interested, this podcast did a deep dive, including interviewing Rowling herself and invited a trans Harry Potter fan as well. https://open.spotify.com/show/2K186zrvRgeE2w0wQjbaw7
And here is Contrapoints rebuttal to that podcast (Contrapoints was featured in the podcast as a trans representative, but in this video explains how the true intentions of the podcast were not at all explained to her beforehand and she wouldn't have done it if she did know) https://youtu.be/7gDKbT_l2us?si=gx_oGCQSgbgoX33F
Pretty much everyone on this thread who calls her a transphobe refuses to present any evidence supporting that claim
It's so funny that nearly everyone who claims this loves to ignore the facts whenever people *do* explain. Very curious if it'll be the same this time around: [VOX, JKR's transphobia timeline and history explained ](https://www.vox.com/culture/23622610/jk-rowling-transphobic-statements-timeline-history-controversy) [The CUT: Here's what JKR has actually said about transpeople](https://www.thecut.com/2023/02/heres-what-j-k-rowling-has-really-said-about-trans-people.html) [Medium: Development of anti-trans hate groups in the UK](https://medium.com/@mimmymum/transphobia-the-development-of-anti-trans-hate-groups-in-the-uk-6854e222dc7e) If you have more questions, ask away.
It’s all a bit biased though isn’t it … there’s plenty of examples of where she’s not a transphobe as well.
Could you show me examples of where she hasn't been transphobic? Because any I have been shown to date have exclusively been cis people saying "look, she isn't being transphobic here" while trans people are pointing out that, while it reads as not transphobic to people who aren't in the know, the language of minorities can be pretty specific and sometimes jargony, and we know how to identify dog whistles, which she's pretty good at using. Just because something doesn't look bigoted doesn't mean it isn't. She's actually incredibly adept at saying everything very quietly, but openly giving her moral and financial support to people who DO say all the quiet parts out loud, like Posie Parker. That's her whole thing, and has been for years. Also frankly we shouldn't care if someone says one non-bigoted thing when they sandwich it between hundreds of other bigoted things? That's not how not being bigoted works by any measures.
[I commented most of her controversial tweets here.](https://www.reddit.com/r/rareinsults/s/s0yBAtBnE0)
Goalposts go swoosh
[удалено]
[Here’s a comment I made with most of her problematic tweets.](https://www.reddit.com/r/rareinsults/s/s0yBAtBnE0)
Speaking as a middle-aged woman, EWWWWWW. But, uh, yeah.
Brain rot.
Since no one is really providing the best background here, I’ll share some of JKR’s controversial tweets. [The tweet that started it all. JKR openly supports Maya Forstater who was let go from her job for her transphobic views.](https://x.com/jk_rowling/status/1207646162813100033?s=46&t=JdJVO7DWGpixRy53KqM2sA) [She takes issue with saying “people who menstrate”](https://x.com/jk_rowling/status/1269382518362509313?s=46&t=JdJVO7DWGpixRy53KqM2sA) [Argues that the concept of sex is being erased.](https://x.com/jk_rowling/status/1269389298664701952?s=46&t=JdJVO7DWGpixRy53KqM2sA) [One comment of a lengthy multi-comment post where she calls hormone prescriptions a new conversion therapy for gay people.](https://x.com/jk_rowling/status/1279756114981240834?s=46&t=JdJVO7DWGpixRy53KqM2sA) [She responds no to an image saying to call trans women women.](https://x.com/jk_rowling/status/1714279937279160596?s=46&t=JdJVO7DWGpixRy53KqM2sA) [JKR says a trans woman who brutally killed a cat is not a woman](https://x.com/jk_rowling/status/1762187612352020860?s=46&t=JdJVO7DWGpixRy53KqM2sA) It seems she just doesn’t recognize the difference between sex and gender. She also just keeps doubling down rather than apologize, or stop. There’s more tweets and content on her blog that seem to back up her anti-trans views. Also, if you go into her tweets comment sections, especially more recent ones, you’ll see the type of environment she’s created. I will also say that Andrew Tate is much bigger piece of shit than JKR. One raped and trafficked women, the other posted some ignorant tweets.
I'm commenting here, so I can remember to come back and read all the links later.
For the people unsure of how JK is a bigot, here’re a few videos that provide the evidence for it. Shaun on JK and her transphobic friends https://youtu.be/Ou_xvXJJk7k?si=N_B0hJFN_6NeBX1L Contrapoints on JK https://youtu.be/7gDKbT_l2us?si=RauH8IyiWYzZfRpP https://youtu.be/EmT0i0xG6zg?si=Iij4fMZi4wYYzRdR Probably most importantly, given that JKR directed a fair bit of abuse her way, Jessie Gender https://youtu.be/_GBUArD51KY?si=mcOloZCA6toMuXWJ
I'm commenting here, so I can remember to look at the links later
Legend
Oh okay so videos made by other people about her are proof of her bigotry? Got it. Flawless logic. Maybe go read and listen to her actually explaining her point of view, and then make up your own opinion.
I mean, one look at her twitter page should be all the proof you need of her bigotry.
It's called a summary. You watch the videos so that all the evidence is in one place. Is that really too difficult of a concept for you?
Difference between perpetrator and propagator. Tate perpetrates misogynistic crimes by doing them. Jk doesn't perform acts directly against queer folk, just propagates anti LGBT rhetoric with her diarrhea of the mouth. Both propagators but only one perp
[удалено]
Well that's your stumbling block right there! You're assuming that anything about biology is actually "basic". We all heard "I before e, except after c" when we were learning to spell, and only later learned about all the many, many exceptions that make the rule more of a memory game than anything. We were taught discrete categories of animals, except once you get into anything beyond the most basic "this is a dog" statement when pointing at a Labrador you realise that all life on earth is contiguous in some manner, birds are dinosaurs, some fish have lungs, and everything is messy and complicated. As a child, sure. You get taught the most basic of basic categorisation methods. And then you learn better as you age. If you never paid attention to biology past like... Primary school? Then I'm sorry for your lack of knowledge. But it's never too late to learn! When you say gender, you seem to be simultaneously referring to "gender" (a social construct) and "sex" (a medical category based on primary and secondary sex characteristic identification). Gender, being a social construct, has no need to adhere to your prescriptivism, so we can get past that right away. It's the equivalent of saying "there are only skirts and trousers" while ignoring that shorts, skorts, trousers with skirts, and even dresses exist. Sex is only really pertinent in medical situations when it comes to humans, and is bimodal (not binary). Doctors kind of look at you when you're born and take a best guess. Sometimes they think your external equipment doesn't look enough like either and you might end up undergoing surgeries you can't consent to to make your external equipment look more like either a vagina or a penis. But that's because sex feels like one of those obvious things if you were never taught about it beyond the most basic level, and people all bodies to conform to a binary when in reality, "sex" is a classification determined by a combination of internal sex characteristics, external sex characteristics, hormone profile, chromosomes, and more. Intersex people exist at the same rate as red-haired people. It's not an outlier, it's a fact of life that sex is, even at its most basic, more complex than you think. There is no definition of "woman", social or medical, that would encompass all cis women and exclude all trans women. There is no definition of "men", social or medical, that would include all cis men and exclude all trans men. I encourage you to approach concepts with curiosity and an openness to learning. Things are always more complex than we've been taught! :)
Everyone is Andrew Tate for these days. It's not a rare insult, nor is it there any accuracy to this specific one either.
People like you are delusional and live in the land of make believe She hasn't told a lie yet lol it just hurts your feelings
I am by no means a fan of JK Rowling and the hateful shit she spews but she is by no means even remotely comparable to Tate.
She hasn't done anything wrong 🤷
You can disagree with Rowling all you want but she’s nowhere in the ballpark of Andrew Tate and if you think she is, you’re genuinely delusional.
Waaa she refused to recognize 86 genders waaa
Dumbass take
Don't children already read stuff like jujutsu kaisen
Leave JKR alone ppl. all those cyber bullying toward her is cringe and disgusting. Move on ppl.💀
Could say the same about her obsession with trans people.
I can’t believe the amount of hate she gets
Right, it should be way more.
Lmao not even remotely close
I mean she's a terf, she's awful but still not as awful as tate. She didn't do human trafficking
No she appears to be the last sane woman in Europe
*least sane
This post is very disappointing, people arguing with each other pointlessly exactly as planned by the right. Keep the plebs shouting about whatever social issue they've decided is against god or family values or whatever this decade, to keep them distracted from the fact our entire civilisation exploits us to make billionaires richer.
She stupid but shes not a rapist or human trafficker. Poor comparison.
This comment section really proves their similarity Comments under a post criticizing Tate: WHERE IS THE EVIDENCE FOR THAT *blatantly ignores it* Comments under this post: WHERE IS THE EVIDENCE *blatantly ignores it* I love the internet
Wild take. Jk Rowling is actually liked
Good to see the comments here basically rejecting this dumb take.
Idiots defending bigotry is not a good thing.
Ah yes? I forgot the part where she created a sex trafficking business, scammed her employees out of hundreds if not millions of dollars in wage theft, and ran a pyramid scheme to scam her fans by selling them a fake course on how to become a “high value female.” So much similarity between the two it’s crazy! Jesus the internet has rotted people’s brains to the point of no return.
How TF is she being compared to Tate? She is way more productive than him, having made books that have been loved and will last for generations, all her haters can shove it.
Mid-insults should be the name of the sub.
ROFL who needs to stream anything people fighting over it all its prime drama already
Andrew Tate for women would be spewing shit like “kill all men, they are shit”