Rowling is of course another person who should've just sat there and ate her food. Of course, her completely asinine anti-trans attitudes are self-owning...as all bigots do. When you loudly spread hatred, you're not only hurting real people, but you're taking money out of your own pockets. We've seen this already with big corporations. It's really sad. But hey I guess she found a righteous way to launder her own bigotry.
I recall reading the first Harry Potter and discovering that her writing wasn't particularly good. Like, the actual sentences and paragraphs and chapters. And yes, it gets better, but in a sort of John Grisham does fantasy sort of way. I didn't begrudge kids enjoying reading, but it always seemed a bit much that she was some paragon of a fantasy author. Yes I read and enjoyed them, but personally, I prefer novels with a bit more nuance.
I also didn't think to much about the traditional gender and family roles and norms when I first read the books, but after it was pointed out, it's hard to unsee. The Harry Potter novels have some insightful elements, but they're quite conservative at their core, and no great deal of introspection. They're fun books, but I suspect they were further elevated by social media and a new era of fandom -- by the social element as much as the author's work.
I care about the living, too. It's why I don't partake in products made by repulsive people until after they're dead and can not benefit from it. Who needs Woody Allen or Roman Polanski? There's plenty of other art out there. I'm sure plenty of THOSE creators have unsettling elements about themselves too, but I just don't know it. Want to buy a Harry Potter book? Buy it used, Rowling gets nothing.
An imperfect system? Yes. But it's how I've decided to sort things and it has made my life simpler. No hand wringing. Just keeping awful people who are generally already wealthy from getting a dollar from me.
She is entitled to her personal views on gender, of course, as we all are, but her all consuming vendetta in service of them is both remarkable as well as baffling in terms of what she has been willing to sacrifice to promote it. This one issue seems extremely personal to her, as she doesn't appear to indulge in the across the board bigotry of a true xenophobe-annihilating trans people seems to be her part and parcel. I was never a huge Harry Potter devotee so I don't feel the competing angst as many do, and I am also not inclined to judge or "cancel" an artist solely on their bigotries. But the fact that she lives and persists doggedly in this bigoted effort hits differently (Dahl might have been an anti-semite but I don't remember learning he ever took sustained political action on behalf of that belief, for example) and makes me wonder if her self-immolation was not calculated, part of the intended consequence of her behavior. I mean, what did she *think* was going to happen?
Well put. And I wonder the same thing - why did she do this and what did she think was going to happen? When it was clear that her words and actions regarding trans folk has alienated many of her former fans, she had a choice - to rethink her position and modify her stance, or to double down. She chose to double down, as is her right. Because of that, and her actions, it tarnishes her legacy (it's a good thing that she doesn't care about her legacy! LOL), more than Dahl's antisemitism tarnishes his legacy, and for the very reason you state - he didn't take political action, as Rowling has done, and still does.
So many of us privately hold views others (even members of our own “tribe”) would find distasteful or wrongheaded. It’s what you choose to do with those feelings makes or breaks you IMO. JK Rowling can believe whatever she wants and no one knows or cares, but it’s her work to oppress people that cements her as a bigot.
Incorrect. To hold beliefs based on false information is not something that's ok. It's a guarantee of harm to others. You're not entitled to any opinion on my gender other than one based on true information. That only leaves the right view and the incorrect view. She is not entitled to speak false information and neither are you.
JK could have said nothing and she would have been the most beloved children's author of all time, instead she chose violence. Also, I loved Martha as companion, she was one of the best!
Rowling is of course another person who should've just sat there and ate her food. Of course, her completely asinine anti-trans attitudes are self-owning...as all bigots do. When you loudly spread hatred, you're not only hurting real people, but you're taking money out of your own pockets. We've seen this already with big corporations. It's really sad. But hey I guess she found a righteous way to launder her own bigotry.
I recall reading the first Harry Potter and discovering that her writing wasn't particularly good. Like, the actual sentences and paragraphs and chapters. And yes, it gets better, but in a sort of John Grisham does fantasy sort of way. I didn't begrudge kids enjoying reading, but it always seemed a bit much that she was some paragon of a fantasy author. Yes I read and enjoyed them, but personally, I prefer novels with a bit more nuance.
I also didn't think to much about the traditional gender and family roles and norms when I first read the books, but after it was pointed out, it's hard to unsee. The Harry Potter novels have some insightful elements, but they're quite conservative at their core, and no great deal of introspection. They're fun books, but I suspect they were further elevated by social media and a new era of fandom -- by the social element as much as the author's work.
I care about the living, too. It's why I don't partake in products made by repulsive people until after they're dead and can not benefit from it. Who needs Woody Allen or Roman Polanski? There's plenty of other art out there. I'm sure plenty of THOSE creators have unsettling elements about themselves too, but I just don't know it. Want to buy a Harry Potter book? Buy it used, Rowling gets nothing.
An imperfect system? Yes. But it's how I've decided to sort things and it has made my life simpler. No hand wringing. Just keeping awful people who are generally already wealthy from getting a dollar from me.
She is entitled to her personal views on gender, of course, as we all are, but her all consuming vendetta in service of them is both remarkable as well as baffling in terms of what she has been willing to sacrifice to promote it. This one issue seems extremely personal to her, as she doesn't appear to indulge in the across the board bigotry of a true xenophobe-annihilating trans people seems to be her part and parcel. I was never a huge Harry Potter devotee so I don't feel the competing angst as many do, and I am also not inclined to judge or "cancel" an artist solely on their bigotries. But the fact that she lives and persists doggedly in this bigoted effort hits differently (Dahl might have been an anti-semite but I don't remember learning he ever took sustained political action on behalf of that belief, for example) and makes me wonder if her self-immolation was not calculated, part of the intended consequence of her behavior. I mean, what did she *think* was going to happen?
Well put. And I wonder the same thing - why did she do this and what did she think was going to happen? When it was clear that her words and actions regarding trans folk has alienated many of her former fans, she had a choice - to rethink her position and modify her stance, or to double down. She chose to double down, as is her right. Because of that, and her actions, it tarnishes her legacy (it's a good thing that she doesn't care about her legacy! LOL), more than Dahl's antisemitism tarnishes his legacy, and for the very reason you state - he didn't take political action, as Rowling has done, and still does.
So many of us privately hold views others (even members of our own “tribe”) would find distasteful or wrongheaded. It’s what you choose to do with those feelings makes or breaks you IMO. JK Rowling can believe whatever she wants and no one knows or cares, but it’s her work to oppress people that cements her as a bigot.
Incorrect. To hold beliefs based on false information is not something that's ok. It's a guarantee of harm to others. You're not entitled to any opinion on my gender other than one based on true information. That only leaves the right view and the incorrect view. She is not entitled to speak false information and neither are you.
Ok hon.
I believe the saying your thoughts don't matter, your actions do, which is what I live and judge others by.
Since that is not your creed, we have nothing to say to each other. Thus, you are summarily muted.
JK could have said nothing and she would have been the most beloved children's author of all time, instead she chose violence. Also, I loved Martha as companion, she was one of the best!