Culture J.K Rowling Megathread

All Articles and Discussion Regarding The English Author J.K. Rowling belong here. If you're looking to discuss the Harry Potter series itself, this thread is for you. If you know about any potential cow material in the Harry Potter Fandom, go here. If you're here to bitch about transsexuals' in general, we already have threads for that here, here, and here.

Backstory of the Author



J.K. Rowling is one of the most well known authors in the world today. She was living as a single mother on welfare in England before her first published novel, Harry Potter and the Sorcerers Stone skyrocketed her to international fame and acclaim. The following six novels, movie and various video game franchises, spin off books, and merchandise, made her the wealthiest author in history. As her books gained international attention many criticized and even protested her works. With feminists claiming her novels conform heavily with gender stereotypes about men and women, and are racist, religious organizations stating that the books contain actual dangerous spells children use to hurt each other, and even a literal book burning back on February 4th of this year because the books are 'demonic'.

These examples and many others over the past two decades exemplify just how divisive even the most innocuous things can be, and how people with irrational thinking, extreme political views and a platform to spread them can cause a worldwide discussion. This is just her first seven novels however. Many people have criticized J.K. Rowling herself for her political views, which are essentially left wing, though of a decidedly less extreme stripe than those coming up. Keep that in mind.

J.K. Rowling's political views have been consistent throughout her life. She believes in social healthcare, welfare, women's rights, gay rights, ect. Her views are garden variety left-wing from the early 2000's. While she has garnered criticisms for these views a number of times, like when she donated a million British Pounds to the Labour Party, which gained some criticism from British Conservatives who felt her books were decidedly Conservative in nature. She has also spoken out against American President Donald J Trump on a number of occasions, earning her the ire of many American Conservatives, and a variety of YouTube grifters such as Paul Joseph Watson. In addition to her political views, Rowling made a number of statements to Harry Potter fans on social media, angering hardcore fans by saying that she imagined characters being different races, and one character being gay when no allusion in the books ever existed. Her pandering to the hyper left-wing, intersectional inhabitants of Twitter would lead to one of the largest and most insane public freak outs ever seen on the platform. Before this meltdown, she was a darling in left-wing circles, and quoted constanly, much like her books themselves.

In response to a woman saying that biological sex is real, and being subsequently fired for it, J.K. Rowling tweeted the following

Tweet | Article about it

This one Tweet was enough to ignite a firestorm. Transsexuals' and their 'allies' all across social media dog-piled Rowling spectacularly, and unlike every other celebrity that's been faced with this witch trial style burning at the stake for 'Transphobia' she refused to bend the knee, and argued further. This, predictably, only fanned the flames.

Excerpt from the article showing various Twitter reactions

One said: “I believe this case is a vitally important landmark. We must treat this in the same way we have treated sexism, racism, homophobia.

“Nobody is suggesting she isn’t allowed her opinion but it’s dangerous language that harms people. She should be held accountable for it.”

Freddy McConnell, who became a voice for the trans community after making his film “Seahorse”, about being a dad who gave birth, said: “It’s a dog whistle, Joanne.”
A parent said: “My daughter, who is trans, is a big fan of yours. It breaks my heart to see you post something indicating that discrimination against her is perfectly fine behaviour for an employee.

“The world’s most credible medical orgs affirm trans people. Please catch up.”

Another person said: I grew up as a trans child reading your books as an escape. I would often pick out names from characters to give to myself, before I ever felt comfortable in who I was.

After the various Twitter exchanges J.K. Rowling went quiet for a while, taking a break from the mental illness inducing website Twitter (Something she says she does occasionally, as social media in general is bad for your mental health). All the while various Harry Potter fan sites figuratively exploded, many users arguing over her statements. During her break she wrote a 3,600 word essay on her website (Children's Portal | Adults Portal) that further explains her position. Again, she refused to apologize, or change her view, which would further incense the lunatics she angered online, even cast members of the Harry Potter Films denounced her, and because of this she didn't attend or involve herself in the filming of the HBOMax documentary about the film series(This article is very salty).

Here's the full essay, spoilered for length.

Spoiler: Full Essay

This isn’t an easy piece to write, for reasons that will shortly become clear, but I know it’s time to explain myself on an issue surrounded by toxicity. I write this without any desire to add to that toxicity.

For people who don’t know: last December I tweeted my support for Maya Forstater, a tax specialist who’d lost her job for what were deemed ‘transphobic’ tweets. She took her case to an employment tribunal, asking the judge to rule on whether a philosophical belief that sex is determined by biology is protected in law. Judge Tayler ruled that it wasn’t.

My interest in trans issues pre-dated Maya’s case by almost two years, during which I followed the debate around the concept of gender identity closely. I’ve met trans people, and read sundry books, blogs and articles by trans people, gender specialists, intersex people, psychologists, safeguarding experts, social workers and doctors, and followed the discourse online and in traditional media. On one level, my interest in this issue has been professional, because I’m writing a crime series, set in the present day, and my fictional female detective is of an age to be interested in, and affected by, these issues herself, but on another, it’s intensely personal, as I’m about to explain.

All the time I’ve been researching and learning, accusations and threats from trans activists have been bubbling in my Twitter timeline. This was initially triggered by a ‘like’. When I started taking an interest in gender identity and transgender matters, I began screenshotting comments that interested me, as a way of reminding myself what I might want to research later. On one occasion, I absent-mindedly ‘liked’ instead of screenshotting. That single ‘like’ was deemed evidence of wrongthink, and a persistent low level of harassment began.

Months later, I compounded my accidental ‘like’ crime by following Magdalen Berns on Twitter. Magdalen was an immensely brave young feminist and lesbian who was dying of an aggressive brain tumour. I followed her because I wanted to contact her directly, which I succeeded in doing. However, as Magdalen was a great believer in the importance of biological sex, and didn’t believe lesbians should be called bigots for not dating trans women with penises, dots were joined in the heads of twitter trans activists, and the level of social media abuse increased.

I mention all this only to explain that I knew perfectly well what was going to happen when I supported Maya. I must have been on my fourth or fifth cancellation by then. I expected the threats of violence, to be told I was literally killing trans people with my hate, to be called cunt and bitch and, of course, for my books to be burned, although one particularly abusive man told me he’d composted them.

What I didn’t expect in the aftermath of my cancellation was the avalanche of emails and letters that came showering down upon me, the overwhelming majority of which were positive, grateful and supportive. They came from a cross-section of kind, empathetic and intelligent people, some of them working in fields dealing with gender dysphoria and trans people, who’re all deeply concerned about the way a socio-political concept is influencing politics, medical practice and safeguarding. They’re worried about the dangers to young people, gay people and about the erosion of women’s and girl’s rights. Above all, they’re worried about a climate of fear that serves nobody – least of all trans youth – well.

I’d stepped back from Twitter for many months both before and after tweeting support for Maya, because I knew it was doing nothing good for my mental health. I only returned because I wanted to share a free children’s book during the pandemic. Immediately, activists who clearly believe themselves to be good, kind and progressive people swarmed back into my timeline, assuming a right to police my speech, accuse me of hatred, call me misogynistic slurs and, above all – as every woman involved in this debate will know – TERF.

If you didn’t already know – and why should you? – ‘TERF’ is an acronym coined by trans activists, which stands for Trans-Exclusionary Radical Feminist. In practice, a huge and diverse cross-section of women are currently being called TERFs and the vast majority have never been radical feminists. Examples of so-called TERFs range from the mother of a gay child who was afraid their child wanted to transition to escape homophobic bullying, to a hitherto totally unfeminist older lady who’s vowed never to visit Marks & Spencer again because they’re allowing any man who says they identify as a woman into the women’s changing rooms. Ironically, radical feminists aren’t even trans-exclusionary – they include trans men in their feminism, because they were born women.

But accusations of TERFery have been sufficient to intimidate many people, institutions and organisations I once admired, who’re cowering before the tactics of the playground. ‘They’ll call us transphobic!’ ‘They’ll say I hate trans people!’ What next, they’ll say you’ve got fleas? Speaking as a biological woman, a lot of people in positions of power really need to grow a pair (which is doubtless literally possible, according to the kind of people who argue that clownfish prove humans aren’t a dimorphic species).

So why am I doing this? Why speak up? Why not quietly do my research and keep my head down?

Well, I’ve got five reasons for being worried about the new trans activism, and deciding I need to speak up.

Firstly, I have a charitable trust that focuses on alleviating social deprivation in Scotland, with a particular emphasis on women and children. Among other things, my trust supports projects for female prisoners and for survivors of domestic and sexual abuse. I also fund medical research into MS, a disease that behaves very differently in men and women. It’s been clear to me for a while that the new trans activism is having (or is likely to have, if all its demands are met) a significant impact on many of the causes I support, because it’s pushing to erode the legal definition of sex and replace it with gender.

The second reason is that I’m an ex-teacher and the founder of a children’s charity, which gives me an interest in both education and safeguarding. Like many others, I have deep concerns about the effect the trans rights movement is having on both.

The third is that, as a much-banned author, I’m interested in freedom of speech and have publicly defended it, even unto Donald Trump.

The fourth is where things start to get truly personal. I’m concerned about the huge explosion in young women wishing to transition and also about the increasing numbers who seem to be detransitioning (returning to their original sex), because they regret taking steps that have, in some cases, altered their bodies irrevocably, and taken away their fertility. Some say they decided to transition after realising they were same-sex attracted, and that transitioning was partly driven by homophobia, either in society or in their families.

Most people probably aren’t aware – I certainly wasn’t, until I started researching this issue properly – that ten years ago, the majority of people wanting to transition to the opposite sex were male. That ratio has now reversed. The UK has experienced a 4400% increase in girls being referred for transitioning treatment. Autistic girls are hugely overrepresented in their numbers.

The same phenomenon has been seen in the US. In 2018, American physician and researcher Lisa Littman set out to explore it. In an interview, she said:

‘Parents online were describing a very unusual pattern of transgender-identification where multiple friends and even entire friend groups became transgender-identified at the same time. I would have been remiss had I not considered social contagion and peer influences as potential factors.’

Littman mentioned Tumblr, Reddit, Instagram and YouTube as contributing factors to Rapid Onset Gender Dysphoria, where she believes that in the realm of transgender identification ‘youth have created particularly insular echo chambers.’

Her paper caused a furore. She was accused of bias and of spreading misinformation about transgender people, subjected to a tsunami of abuse and a concerted campaign to discredit both her and her work. The journal took the paper offline and re-reviewed it before republishing it. However, her career took a similar hit to that suffered by Maya Forstater. Lisa Littman had dared challenge one of the central tenets of trans activism, which is that a person’s gender identity is innate, like sexual orientation. Nobody, the activists insisted, could ever be persuaded into being trans.

The argument of many current trans activists is that if you don’t let a gender dysphoric teenager transition, they will kill themselves. In an article explaining why he resigned from the Tavistock (an NHS gender clinic in England) psychiatrist Marcus Evans stated that claims that children will kill themselves if not permitted to transition do not ‘align substantially with any robust data or studies in this area. Nor do they align with the cases I have encountered over decades as a psychotherapist.’

The writings of young trans men reveal a group of notably sensitive and clever people. The more of their accounts of gender dysphoria I’ve read, with their insightful descriptions of anxiety, dissociation, eating disorders, self-harm and self-hatred, the more I’ve wondered whether, if I’d been born 30 years later, I too might have tried to transition. The allure of escaping womanhood would have been huge. I struggled with severe OCD as a teenager. If I’d found community and sympathy online that I couldn’t find in my immediate environment, I believe I could have been persuaded to turn myself into the son my father had openly said he’d have preferred.

When I read about the theory of gender identity, I remember how mentally sexless I felt in youth. I remember Colette’s description of herself as a ‘mental hermaphrodite’ and Simone de Beauvoir’s words: ‘It is perfectly natural for the future woman to feel indignant at the limitations posed upon her by her sex. The real question is not why she should reject them: the problem is rather to understand why she accepts them.’

As I didn’t have a realistic possibility of becoming a man back in the 1980s, it had to be books and music that got me through both my mental health issues and the sexualised scrutiny and judgement that sets so many girls to war against their bodies in their teens. Fortunately for me, I found my own sense of otherness, and my ambivalence about being a woman, reflected in the work of female writers and musicians who reassured me that, in spite of everything a sexist world tries to throw at the female-bodied, it’s fine not to feel pink, frilly and compliant inside your own head; it’s OK to feel confused, dark, both sexual and non-sexual, unsure of what or who you are.

I want to be very clear here: I know transition will be a solution for some gender dysphoric people, although I’m also aware through extensive research that studies have consistently shown that between 60-90% of gender dysphoric teens will grow out of their dysphoria. Again and again I’ve been told to ‘just meet some trans people.’ I have: in addition to a few younger people, who were all adorable, I happen to know a self-described transsexual woman who’s older than I am and wonderful. Although she’s open about her past as a gay man, I’ve always found it hard to think of her as anything other than a woman, and I believe (and certainly hope) she’s completely happy to have transitioned. Being older, though, she went through a long and rigorous process of evaluation, psychotherapy and staged transformation. The current explosion of trans activism is urging a removal of almost all the robust systems through which candidates for sex reassignment were once required to pass. A man who intends to have no surgery and take no hormones may now secure himself a Gender Recognition Certificate and be a woman in the sight of the law. Many people aren’t aware of this.

We’re living through the most misogynistic period I’ve experienced. Back in the 80s, I imagined that my future daughters, should I have any, would have it far better than I ever did, but between the backlash against feminism and a porn-saturated online culture, I believe things have got significantly worse for girls. Never have I seen women denigrated and dehumanised to the extent they are now. From the leader of the free world’s long history of sexual assault accusations and his proud boast of ‘grabbing them by the pussy’, to the incel (‘involuntarily celibate’) movement that rages against women who won’t give them sex, to the trans activists who declare that TERFs need punching and re-educating, men across the political spectrum seem to agree: women are asking for trouble. Everywhere, women are being told to shut up and sit down, or else.

I’ve read all the arguments about femaleness not residing in the sexed body, and the assertions that biological women don’t have common experiences, and I find them, too, deeply misogynistic and regressive. It’s also clear that one of the objectives of denying the importance of sex is to erode what some seem to see as the cruelly segregationist idea of women having their own biological realities or – just as threatening – unifying realities that make them a cohesive political class. The hundreds of emails I’ve received in the last few days prove this erosion concerns many others just as much. It isn’t enough for women to be trans allies. Women must accept and admit that there is no material difference between trans women and themselves.

But, as many women have said before me, ‘woman’ is not a costume. ‘Woman’ is not an idea in a man’s head. ‘Woman’ is not a pink brain, a liking for Jimmy Choos or any of the other sexist ideas now somehow touted as progressive. Moreover, the ‘inclusive’ language that calls female people ‘menstruators’ and ‘people with vulvas’ strikes many women as dehumanising and demeaning. I understand why trans activists consider this language to be appropriate and kind, but for those of us who’ve had degrading slurs spat at us by violent men, it’s not neutral, it’s hostile and alienating.

Which brings me to the fifth reason I’m deeply concerned about the consequences of the current trans activism.

I’ve been in the public eye now for over twenty years and have never talked publicly about being a domestic abuse and sexual assault survivor. This isn’t because I’m ashamed those things happened to me, but because they’re traumatic to revisit and remember. I also feel protective of my daughter from my first marriage. I didn’t want to claim sole ownership of a story that belongs to her, too. However, a short while ago, I asked her how she’d feel if I were publicly honest about that part of my life, and she encouraged me to go ahead.

I’m mentioning these things now not in an attempt to garner sympathy, but out of solidarity with the huge numbers of women who have histories like mine, who’ve been slurred as bigots for having concerns around single-sex spaces.

I managed to escape my first violent marriage with some difficulty, but I’m now married to a truly good and principled man, safe and secure in ways I never in a million years expected to be. However, the scars left by violence and sexual assault don’t disappear, no matter how loved you are, and no matter how much money you’ve made. My perennial jumpiness is a family joke – and even I know it’s funny – but I pray my daughters never have the same reasons I do for hating sudden loud noises, or finding people behind me when I haven’t heard them approaching.

If you could come inside my head and understand what I feel when I read about a trans woman dying at the hands of a violent man, you’d find solidarity and kinship. I have a visceral sense of the terror in which those trans women will have spent their last seconds on earth, because I too have known moments of blind fear when I realised that the only thing keeping me alive was the shaky self-restraint of my attacker.

I believe the majority of trans-identified people not only pose zero threat to others, but are vulnerable for all the reasons I’ve outlined. Trans people need and deserve protection. Like women, they’re most likely to be killed by sexual partners. Trans women who work in the sex industry, particularly trans women of colour, are at particular risk. Like every other domestic abuse and sexual assault survivor I know, I feel nothing but empathy and solidarity with trans women who’ve been abused by men.

So I want trans women to be safe. At the same time, I do not want to make natal girls and women less safe. When you throw open the doors of bathrooms and changing rooms to any man who believes or feels he’s a woman – and, as I’ve said, gender confirmation certificates may now be granted without any need for surgery or hormones – then you open the door to any and all men who wish to come inside. That is the simple truth.

On Saturday morning, I read that the Scottish government is proceeding with its controversial gender recognition plans, which will in effect mean that all a man needs to ‘become a woman’ is to say he’s one. To use a very contemporary word, I was ‘triggered’. Ground down by the relentless attacks from trans activists on social media, when I was only there to give children feedback about pictures they’d drawn for my book under lockdown, I spent much of Saturday in a very dark place inside my head, as memories of a serious sexual assault I suffered in my twenties recurred on a loop. That assault happened at a time and in a space where I was vulnerable, and a man capitalised on an opportunity. I couldn’t shut out those memories and I was finding it hard to contain my anger and disappointment about the way I believe my government is playing fast and loose with womens and girls’ safety.

Late on Saturday evening, scrolling through children’s pictures before I went to bed, I forgot the first rule of Twitter – never, ever expect a nuanced conversation – and reacted to what I felt was degrading language about women. I spoke up about the importance of sex and have been paying the price ever since. I was transphobic, I was a cunt, a bitch, a TERF, I deserved cancelling, punching and death. You are Voldemort said one person, clearly feeling this was the only language I’d understand.

It would be so much easier to tweet the approved hashtags – because of course trans rights are human rights and of course trans lives matter – scoop up the woke cookies and bask in a virtue-signalling afterglow. There’s joy, relief and safety in conformity. As Simone de Beauvoir also wrote, “… without a doubt it is more comfortable to endure blind bondage than to work for one’s liberation; the dead, too, are better suited to the earth than the living.”

Huge numbers of women are justifiably terrified by the trans activists; I know this because so many have got in touch with me to tell their stories. They’re afraid of doxxing, of losing their jobs or their livelihoods, and of violence.

But endlessly unpleasant as its constant targeting of me has been, I refuse to bow down to a movement that I believe is doing demonstrable harm in seeking to erode ‘woman’ as a political and biological class and offering cover to predators like few before it. I stand alongside the brave women and men, gay, straight and trans, who’re standing up for freedom of speech and thought, and for the rights and safety of some of the most vulnerable in our society: young gay kids, fragile teenagers, and women who’re reliant on and wish to retain their single sex spaces. Polls show those women are in the vast majority, and exclude only those privileged or lucky enough never to have come up against male violence or sexual assault, and who’ve never troubled to educate themselves on how prevalent it is.

The one thing that gives me hope is that the women who can protest and organise, are doing so, and they have some truly decent men and trans people alongside them. Political parties seeking to appease the loudest voices in this debate are ignoring women’s concerns at their peril. In the UK, women are reaching out to each other across party lines, concerned about the erosion of their hard-won rights and widespread intimidation. None of the gender critical women I’ve talked to hates trans people; on the contrary. Many of them became interested in this issue in the first place out of concern for trans youth, and they’re hugely sympathetic towards trans adults who simply want to live their lives, but who’re facing a backlash for a brand of activism they don’t endorse. The supreme irony is that the attempt to silence women with the word ‘TERF’ may have pushed more young women towards radical feminism than the movement’s seen in decades.

The last thing I want to say is this. I haven’t written this essay in the hope that anybody will get out a violin for me, not even a teeny-weeny one. I’m extraordinarily fortunate; I’m a survivor, certainly not a victim. I’ve only mentioned my past because, like every other human being on this planet, I have a complex backstory, which shapes my fears, my interests and my opinions. I never forget that inner complexity when I’m creating a fictional character and I certainly never forget it when it comes to trans people.

All I’m asking – all I want – is for similar empathy, similar understanding, to be extended to the many millions of women whose sole crime is wanting their concerns to be heard without receiving threats and abuse.

The following Tweet sums up J.K. Rowling's opinions of trans people.


Tweet

Anyone who isn't insane can see that her views are milquetoast at worst. Her criticism on transsexuality legislation and gender in general are very tame compared to even some of the most accepting people who browse the Farms, 4Chan, 8Chan, etc. Her blog garnered a mass of more criticism, including hundreds of articles from online publications that claim she's a hateful bigoted TERF (Trans Exclusionary Radical Feminist), attacking her further for 'doubling down' on her bigotry, and a variety of similar screeching diatribes. These articles are written constantly, with some published within days of this thread being written.

Even with all this negative publicity however, J.K. Rowling has received a plethora of support from women across the Western world. One even got fired from her job due to her saying that 'J.K. Rowling is my woman of the year'. Not just women support her either. The actor of fan favorite character from the Harry Potter series Hagrid, Robbie Coltrane, wrote in defense of Rowling. The following quote is from an article by Insider.

"I don't think what she said was offensive really," Coltrane said during an interview with the Radio Times that was seen by Pink News. "I don't know why, but there's a whole Twitter generation of people who hang around waiting to be offended. They wouldn't have won the war, would they?"

He added: "That's me talking like a grumpy old man, but you just think: 'Oh, get over yourself. Wise up, stand up straight, and carry on.'"

Coltrane then continued to say he did not want to speak on the issue any further "because of all the hate mail and all that s--- which I don't need at my time of life."

Rowling's blog post even won the Russel Prize for Best Writing from the BBC. This, shockingly, caused immense online backlash and further articles were written about it. Rowling's next book, about a serial killer pretending to be a woman to get close to victims, incited more backlash. Over the last two years J.K. Rowling has had trans activists show up to her house and dox her (Much like Dear Feeder, actually), received a plethora of death threats, and even had people telling her they hoped her house would be bombed.



Tweet

As shown above, Rowling's refusal to bow to the mob has made her a much hated figure in transsexual and adjacent circles, even though she is widely supported by women across the world who find trans activists and their aggressive, misogynistic actions terrifying. With her stance on the issue unchanging, it brought her into contact with one of the best known pedophile, and horse fucker, with a Kiwi Farms thread.


Vaush Thread (Plz don't shit it up with anymore Rowling talk, that's what this thread is for)

Being the enlightened son of Silicon Valley tech employees, Vaush has been championing the rise of Socialism for years, in addition to lowering the age of consent and wanting to fuck horses. Various screenshots, and audio and video clips show Vaush holding these views, and the thread has archives of them for those curious. The Tweet that got him involved with Rowling is below.



This Tweet did not go well for Vaush, as soon after Rowling responded, and clips of his support for child pornography and fucking horses have been widely circulating across Twitter and other social media sites.


Tweet

The sudden mass attention has been bad for Vaush, whose disturbing takes on children have led to notable publications exposing it to a much wider, normal audience rather than the sycophant's who constantly defend him. One article from the Post Millennial even states in it's title that he's a 'Suspected Pedophile'. Predictably, grifters from the right wing sphere of Twitter hopped in and sent more clips to these publications. Ian Miles Cheong sent clips of Vaush to the publication and it was featured in the article itself.

Despite him being a freak, Vaush is correct about Rowling in his first Tweet. All she had to do to avoid this was bend the knee to the trans mob. She could have just gone on as is with no issues for her personally. She's immensely wealthy, is re-married and her children are doing very well in their respective fields. She could have just said nothing and avoided this shitshow from the start, but she didn't, and the meltdowns and tantrums have been a near constant for going on three years now. Rowling is, however, heavily invested both financially and personally with children's charities in the UK, and it seem that she genuinely sees the problems arising from the cascade of gender affirming nonsense that has absolutely plagued public life in the last half decade. She stated her views, and unlike so many other people she refused to back down. Perhaps it's only because she's in a position of immense financial privilege, and unlike many others whose lives have been utterly destroyed by this same mob she is immune from their attempts at de-platforming and public stigmatization. Regardless of what her wealth affords her to do, many are glad she's taken the stance she has.

If you have any material that concerns J.K. Rowling herself post it for discussion. This includes news articles, YouTube videos and vids from YT alternative sites like Odysee, livestreams, social media posts, etc. If the last couple years are anything to go by there won't be a drought in content anytime soon.

J.K. Rowling Socials and General Information
Her Official Website
Twitter
Facebook
Wikipedia

Thank you so very much @Pyre for the new OP

 

[Troonologist PhD]

@CatParty I "love" how the journo completely neglected to mention that Vaush is a CP and horse cock enthusiast with multiple instances of sexual abuse and harassment under his belt. Even CNN has thrown this nonce under the bus.

 

[Absolutego]

I sometimes wonder if that level 10 schizo conspiracy that all women in Hollywood are trans women (sometimes also the theory being all HW men are trans men) to sexually confuse the masses has any sort of truth to it. You have to be mentally retarded to believe that conspiracy fully but I don't doubt there might be some instances of that being true. Jennifer Aniston for example has ways been artificially overhyped and somehow still is today yet she has one of the ugliest man looking faces I've ever seen on a woman.

Let's be real, the only reason Aniston was ever hyped as some pinnacle of attractiveness is due to her penchant for not wearing a bra when filming Friends.

 

[Mountain Gorilla]

They're saying Emma Watson took a dig at JK here when she said "I'm here for ALL witches"

View attachment 3071334

https://metro.co.uk/2022/03/14/bafta-2022-harry-potters-emma-watson-throws-shade-at-jk-rowling-16270462/

Emma Watson is a washed-up normie has-been.

 

[Mega Man II Intro - GB]

Watson probably hates Rowling for protecting the kids on the HP set. She imagines that she could've been a big star if only she'd taken Weinstein dick at 13 instead of 18.

 

[Pentex]

Fury as Twitter rejects complaint over trans activist's video

Twitter has been slammed after it failed to uphold a complaint about a 'death threat' against author J.K. Rowling featured in a music video by a trans activist.

www.dailymail.co.uk

https://archive.ph/oDDwx

 

[All Cops Are Based]

Not just a fetish btw

 

[CatParty]

https://www.popsugar.co.uk/entertainment/fantastic-beasts-3-review-48780435

"Fantastic Beasts 3" Lets Dumbledore Be Gay, But It Can't Cover Up J.K. Rowling's Transphobia​

The new movie "Fantastic Beasts: The Secrets of Dumbledore" takes the step that its 2018 predecessor, "The Crimes of Grindelwald," didn't. In the very first scene, Albus Dumbledore (Jude Law) tells Gellert Grindelwald (Mads Mikkelsen) that he used to be in love with him. The moment is a long time coming. At the end of the seventh "Harry Potter" book, "The Deathly Hallows," Dumbledore reveals to Harry that he and Grindelwald — the dark wizard he defeated in 1945, cementing his own legacy as one of the greatest wizards of all time — were childhood friends, with deadly consequences. Shortly after the book's release, J.K. Rowling was asked why no character in the books is gay. She responded that actually someone is — Dumbledore, and that he was in love with Grindelwald.

In "The Secrets of Dumbledore," the powerful wizard is explicit that he was in love with Grindelwald, the first canonical acknowledgement of their relationship. One after another, these moment kept falling flat. First off, Grindelwald doesn't act like this information is particularly interesting, important, or moving. Their former romantic relationship doesn't inform how they relate to each other, outside of a magic blood bond they created that keeps them from hurting each other physically. But second, and most importantly, Dumbledore's gayness feels like cover for Rowling's hateful views about trans people.

Let's back up. In 2020, Rowling published a series of transphobic tweets and followed them up with a lengthy blog post. She was roundly criticized by transgender people and their allies, including "Harry Potter" star Daniel Radcliffe and "Fantastic Beasts" star Eddie Redmayne. Rowling never apologised, instead deciding to double down. Transgender people are a constant topic on her Twitter account, often cloaked in concern for the false idea that kids are being forced to transition. She spent the weekend of April 1 — two weeks before "The Secrets of Dumbledore" hits theatres — sending over a dozen tweets on the topic. Rowling isn't embarrassed by her beliefs — she's said that she believes most people support her, including LGBTQ+ people.

It's hard to interpret the sudden and half-hearted inclusion of Dumbledore's sexuality as anything but a diversion from Rowling's hateful views.

​

Rowling has tweeted a number of times that actually she is speaking out for the many lesbian and gay people who feel that gay rights organisations that are pro-trans are actually anti-woman. There's of course no proof that this is a large group of people, and gay and lesbian people who are transphobic don't prove that being transphobic is correct. And of course lots of transgender people are also members of other parts of the LGBTQ+ community, but Rowling doesn't seem to be concerned about them.

So back to the movie, which Rowling co-wrote with Steve Kloves, who also served as a screenwriter for most of the original Harry Potter films. It's hard to interpret the sudden and half-hearted inclusion of Dumbledore's sexuality as anything but a diversion from Rowling's hateful views. This way, Rowling can point to the movie and "prove" how much she supports gay people. Dumbledore is gay! She's such an ally! It's an attempt to divide the LGBTQ+ community.

The film itself displays the same lack of empathy for its characters and world that Rowling's anti-trans views embody in real life. In the previous film, viewers learned that Grindelwald predicted World War II, and he thinks wizards should rule over Muggles to try to stop it. If all the wizards and witches in the world know that WWII is coming, why aren't they trying to stop it? The new movie takes place largely in Germany in the 1930s and clearly borrows the aesthetics of Nazi Germany in its presentation of Grindelwald, but none of the wizards — who again, know what's coming — take any steps to try to prevent the Holocaust or save any Muggles. We never even see any Muggles in the Germany scenes. Why set something at that historical moment without at all addressing what's going on?

There's another scene where Newt Scamander (Redmayne) heads to a secret German wizard prison to try to rescue his brother Theseus (Callum Turner). Again, it's 1930 and we're talking about secret German prisons without addressing any of the actual historical context. Of course, it's an illegal magical prison where the incarcerated people are tied upside down around a giant pit. Inside the pit is a horrifying magical creature that chooses someone to eat at random. Using his magizoologist knowledge, Newt saves his brother and gets out of there. But what about all the other people who are still trapped in the secret, illegal prison who are going to definitely be eaten by this giant monster? The movie wants you to completely forget about them.

It's not the only thing "The Secrets of Dumbledore" is asking you to forget. It wants you to forget that your ticket money is going into the pocket of a woman who has no problems spreading transphobia, who takes the fact that you bought that ticket at all as support of her behaviour and views. And then the box office totals will be used to justify more movies, and spin-off series, and reunion specials, all of it growing her influence and legacy. No amount of gay characters could fix the hate that now lives at the centre of the Harry Potter universe.

 

[CatParty]

https://www.pinknews.co.uk/2022/04/11/jk-rowling-lunch-get-the-l-out-anti-trans-rosie-duffield/

JK Rowling enjoys boozy lunch with anti-trans lobby while thousands march for trans equality​

JK Rowling enjoyed a boozy lunch with a host of anti-trans activists, including members of the lobby group Get the L Out, while thousands protested for trans equality.

On Sunday (10 April) thousands of trans people and their allies gathered outside Downing Street to demand that Boris Johnson include trans people in a UK conversion therapy ban.

While a comprehensive ban had been promised for years, in recent weeks the government scrapped the planned legislation entirely, before reinstating it but keeping it perfectly legal for trans people to be subjected to conversion therapy.


Although Rowling once promised her trans followers that she would “march with you if you were discriminated against on the basis of being trans”, she was nowhere to be seen on the day of the protests.

In fact, she was enjoying a boozy lunch with a veritable who’s who of the UK’s so-called gender critical movement.

Rowling was photographed clutching a rainbow vape pen and wearing a “head girl” badge, and tweeted the next day: “There was a lunch and I’m not saying I’ve only just sobered up enough to type this tweet but at the same time, I’m not not saying that… It was me getting them drunk, to be honest.


“I do remember being authoritatively told I’m only 66 per cent straight. Watch this space for further developments.”




Get the L Out describes gender-affirming healthcare as “a form of misogynist medical abuse against lesbians” which “promotes the medical transition of lesbians and pushes harmful drugs and unnecessary medical practices on lesbians’ healthy bodies”.


The group also believes: “The LGBT community is coercing lesbians to accept penises as female organs and heterosexual intercourse as a lesbian sexual practice.

“We oppose this manipulative ideology and denounce it as a form of rape culture aimed at lesbians, as well as a form of conversion therapy.”

Other guests at the lunch party included elected politicians Joanna Cherry, an SNP MP who backed exempting “criticism of matters relating to transgender identity” from Scottish hate crime law, and Labour MP Rosie Duffield, who has made false claims that trans children in the UK are “cutting body parts off and rendering themselves completely infertile”.


Duffield tweeted that the lunch was her “best Sunday off in ages”.

So-called gender critical journalists Suzanne Moore and Julie Bindel also made an appearance, and were joined by Maya Forstater, who argued that her “gender critical” beliefs are protected under the UK’s Equality Act, and is claiming at employment tribunal that she lost her employment because of these beliefs.

Further guests included LGB Alliance co-founder Allison Bailey, who is currently suing Stonewall to “stop them policing free speech”, Helen Joyce, author of the book Trans: When Ideology Meets Reality in which she argues that trans people fighting for rights and equality are like a “new state religion” with “blasphemy laws”, and former Sussex University professor Kathleen Stock, who believes that trans women should be barred from “places where females undress or sleep”.


Comedian Aiden Comerford wrote on Twitter: “It feels exactly right that thousands of people were protesting against trans conversion on the streets while the GC movement were having a small, posh get together with JK Rowling.”

“That says a lot about what is happening here.”

PinkNews has contacted JK Rowling for comment.

 

[Sinner's Sandwich]

https://www.pinknews.co.uk/2022/04/11/jk-rowling-lunch-get-the-l-out-anti-trans-rosie-duffield/

JK Rowling enjoys boozy lunch with anti-trans lobby while thousands march for trans equality​

JK Rowling enjoyed a boozy lunch with a host of anti-trans activists, including members of the lobby group Get the L Out, while thousands protested for trans equality.

On Sunday (10 April) thousands of trans people and their allies gathered outside Downing Street to demand that Boris Johnson include trans people in a UK conversion therapy ban.

While a comprehensive ban had been promised for years, in recent weeks the government scrapped the planned legislation entirely, before reinstating it but keeping it perfectly legal for trans people to be subjected to conversion therapy.


Although Rowling once promised her trans followers that she would “march with you if you were discriminated against on the basis of being trans”, she was nowhere to be seen on the day of the protests.

In fact, she was enjoying a boozy lunch with a veritable who’s who of the UK’s so-called gender critical movement.

Rowling was photographed clutching a rainbow vape pen and wearing a “head girl” badge, and tweeted the next day: “There was a lunch and I’m not saying I’ve only just sobered up enough to type this tweet but at the same time, I’m not not saying that… It was me getting them drunk, to be honest.


“I do remember being authoritatively told I’m only 66 per cent straight. Watch this space for further developments.”

View attachment 3171389


Get the L Out describes gender-affirming healthcare as “a form of misogynist medical abuse against lesbians” which “promotes the medical transition of lesbians and pushes harmful drugs and unnecessary medical practices on lesbians’ healthy bodies”.


The group also believes: “The LGBT community is coercing lesbians to accept penises as female organs and heterosexual intercourse as a lesbian sexual practice.

“We oppose this manipulative ideology and denounce it as a form of rape culture aimed at lesbians, as well as a form of conversion therapy.”

Other guests at the lunch party included elected politicians Joanna Cherry, an SNP MP who backed exempting “criticism of matters relating to transgender identity” from Scottish hate crime law, and Labour MP Rosie Duffield, who has made false claims that trans children in the UK are “cutting body parts off and rendering themselves completely infertile”.


Duffield tweeted that the lunch was her “best Sunday off in ages”.

So-called gender critical journalists Suzanne Moore and Julie Bindel also made an appearance, and were joined by Maya Forstater, who argued that her “gender critical” beliefs are protected under the UK’s Equality Act, and is claiming at employment tribunal that she lost her employment because of these beliefs.

Further guests included LGB Alliance co-founder Allison Bailey, who is currently suing Stonewall to “stop them policing free speech”, Helen Joyce, author of the book Trans: When Ideology Meets Reality in which she argues that trans people fighting for rights and equality are like a “new state religion” with “blasphemy laws”, and former Sussex University professor Kathleen Stock, who believes that trans women should be barred from “places where females undress or sleep”.


Comedian Aiden Comerford wrote on Twitter: “It feels exactly right that thousands of people were protesting against trans conversion on the streets while the GC movement were having a small, posh get together with JK Rowling.”

“That says a lot about what is happening here.”

PinkNews has contacted JK Rowling for comment.

That's our JK. Killing troons by having lunch with terven.

When troons go to bed they look under it to see if JKR lurks there.

 

[CatParty]

That's our JK. Killing troons by having lunch with terven.

When troons go to bed they look under it to see if JKR lurks there.

I seen the tweets out there and the ones they put in the original article and just the seething anger at jk for eating lunch is hilarious

 

[draggs]

The seething at her refusal to accept her struggle sessioning and ruination is great

B-b-b-but we called her a transphobe, and she doubled down! This is against the rules isn't it Headmaster Token Gay Dumbledore?!

 

[CatParty]

https://thecritic.co.uk/why-are-tras-body-shaming-j-k-rowling/

Why are TRAs body-shaming J.K. Rowling?​

In the discourse about “TERFs”, vicious misogyny is never far from the surface


Over the weekend a group of prominent feminist women, from a variety of walks of life, gathered together at an unknown location. Pictures of the gathering have surfaced on Twitter overnight. One of those women was J K Rowling. She sits amongst Julie, Suzanne, Kathleen and others. For these photos, she is just Joanne. Fellow warrior, sister and feminist “witch”, advocating for women’s rights according to their sex and the law.

These women are very well aware that simply gathering in this way is a political act which will cause trans activists to seek to punish them for their audacity, for daring to show openly their love for other women. Predictably the backlash from trans activists to these photos was swift and it was vicious. Deep misogyny dripped through the internet like poison.

In the photos posted JK Rowling, in a flowery tea dress with a low-cut neck, looks stunning — elegant and graceful. She wears her 56 years happily, with pride. The tweets focused on her body and her looks, however. One user @effingfaded wrote, “This is what hate does to your titties #JKRowling”.

The twisted message here is that political viewpoints expressed about the female experience of life, will in return destroy a woman’s body. The dark implication suggests that “wrongthink” about gender identity will make you less attractive to men. Your body will turn against you if you do not accept the dictates of trans-identified men about what a woman is or who the term “woman” should include. If like Rowling you think a woman is an adult human female then your body may wither, age and sag. It will betray you.

Women viewing these photos can see nothing at all wrong with J K Rowling’s breasts. We see the smile on her face first. We do not view women in the same way that men view women. We know what a female body feels like and moves like because we share the experience of living in one. A man does not, however he chooses to identify.

Trans activists don’t seem to like the reality of female bodies

These trans activists don’t seem to like the reality of female bodies in all their beautiful variety and are quick to pounce on a body that does not conform to a porn-dictated stereotype. Their tweets reveal a fear of the female body which is not surgically altered or surgically constructed from a male body. Any perceived imperfection is judged as personal failure. A woman must be held rigorously to account if her body ages, or suffers illness or the rigours of pregnancy. Even if it moves naturally during an encounter with friends it can be found repulsive. If it is found wanting in the lustful eyes of men then she should be ready to accept their judgement and subsequent ostracism from sanctioned groups of aesthetically pleasing women, which includes male people.

She must also be measured against men who are performing a version of “woman” more effectively than women. The user @pinkomalenko joined in to comment, “These are the cis white women that think trans women are jealous of their appearance and want to look like them” followed by a series of laughing emojis.

In this tweet women are seen to be in direct competition with men who identify as women to prove who is the more perfectly female. Inaccurately and ludicrously it is J K Rowling and the other women in the photos who are found wanting. The tweet conveniently ignores women of colour and the racism of that is glaring. Women viewing these photos did not see them like this. Women do not look at them in the same way as men do. We enjoyed it with our hearts. We smiled.

The difference between a trans-identified man looking at a woman’s body and a woman viewing the same, is that only the woman has the shared experience of living inside a female body. We know that our breasts move and that if we lean forward, they often go with us as Rowling’s did. If we turn too quickly, they may forget to follow us and linger, joining us a second later, clapping. Or that in bed, when we are lying on our backs, they may seek the mattress like spreading cake dough in the oven. More so as we age or give birth to children.

No porn-obsessed man will understand, however he identifies

We women know that time will lead them further south and we learn to embrace that, if we can, despite the misogynist society women are raised in, which teaches women to be ashamed or fearful of ageing. When women talk with each other of our bodies and the perils, pitfalls but mostly the joys of them, the laughter is often raucous and untamed. Periods and menopause, orgasms and body hair. This free and easy camaraderie around our shared female experience is something no porn-obsessed man will hear or understand, however he identifies, because women do this in spaces away from men. This secret world of women terrifies these men.

The relentlessly facile trans activist India Willoughby went further and tweeted about one of the photos featuring a well-known and well-loved lesbian woman named Liane: “Here’s JK Rowling meeting fellow members of the GC movement today. Not being funny, but how come I’d be banned because my presence would ‘traumatise’ women — but not the woman on the right?”

Lianne is head of security for Filia and posed for an iconic photograph outside the Woman’s Place UK conference in January 2020. She is an effortlessly cool woman who many of us would love to sit at a table with. India Willoughby obviously fails to see that a trans-identified man performing a female stereotype in lipstick and heels, will never lead women to place a male body above a butch lesbian woman’s, in some strange hierarchy of Willoughby’s imagining. The inherent lesbophobia of the comment is striking and shocking but we know that this hatred and envy of women lies at the heart of the trans activist movement.

I have been through a caesarean section, menopause and a radical hysterectomy. I love my female body because despite everything done to it and by it, it still carries me through the world. It is a miraculous body. It has survived so much. When my female oncologist viewed my scar post cancer operation I pointed proudly at it and said, “Look at this! How good is this?”

She replied, “Yes. That is fine work I have to admit. I have skills.” Then we laughed because we are both women. There is a shared experience and care. If I were to show that scar openly on Twitter, the shaming from trans identified men would be immediate, I suspect. The realities of life as a female are too ugly to comprehend. A body that has suffered is a body that has failed. It is broken.

When women show each other our bodies we do it with pride, love and humour. I am grateful to the woman who gave birth to me, the women who healed me after abuse, and the woman who saved me from death. Being alive in this body, imperfect though it may be, is a gift that women gave me. No trans-identified man on the internet will teach me to hate this body or that of any other woman.

Women are beautiful.

 

[Positron]

Watson probably hates Rowling for protecting the kids on the HP set. She imagines that she could've been a big star if only she'd taken Weinstein dick at 13 instead of 18.

You mean she hasn't?

 

[XYZpdq]

"You will never be a real wizard. You have no wand, you have no owls..."

 

[Bob Loblaw Law Blog]

that popsugar article is stupid. Although Rowling revealing DD was gay after the fact was equally stupid after the final book was released. Even worse are the people who claim they knew it all the time and the books hinted at it all along

 

[XYZpdq]

that popsugar article is stupid. Although Rowling revealing DD was gay after the fact was equally stupid after the final book was released. Even worse are the people who claim they knew it all the time and the books hinted at it all along

iirc Gay Dumbledore goes back to Harry Potter And The Third Movie or so, there was a minor hubub about how during scripting phase JK exercised her veto option for the first time on a one-off line about Dumbledore talking about an exgf

 

[Troonologist PhD]

that popsugar article is stupid. Although Rowling revealing DD was gay after the fact was equally stupid after the final book was released. Even worse are the people who claim they knew it all the time and the books hinted at it all along

Rowling only revealed it in response to a fan question rather than just mentioning it out of the blue.

iirc Gay Dumbledore goes back to Harry Potter And The Third Movie or so, there was a minor hubub about how during scripting phase JK exercised her veto option for the first time on a one-off line about Dumbledore talking about an exgf

That was for the fourth, because one of the subplots is a school dance. I'm pretty sure some journo made that shit up because I've never seen Rowling or one of the movie people themselves comment on it, and journos lie constantly.

 

[draggs]

"You will never be a real wizard. You have no wand, you have no owls..."

The goblins will never hold your gold

 

[Exceptionally Exceptional]

Yeah, cis women are totally just seething that they don't look like this.

Absolutely devestated, I'm sure.

 

[Tasty Tatty]

The actual gay scene btw, it's very blink and miss. If you didn't know Dumbledore was gay (and if you're someone who only reads the books and doesn't follow media interviews), you're probably gonna miss it.

The kids were watching, I was doing something else, I will probably watch it later with more attention in case I missed any other reference, but it goes like this:

Spoiler

Dumbledore and Grindelwald meet to talk about the upcoming events and their past. D says he had to leave because "I was in love with you." G says that's not the real reason and then he leaves.

That's it.

Nobody should get offended or mad at this, all the opposite, we should laugh at the cheap attempt of pandering.