Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

JK Rowling on Billy Bragg and other progressive male class warriors

109 replies

AstonsStolenData · 28/04/2024 16:19

JKR uses Billy Bragg's quote: “My problem with people like Rowling, like Julie Bindel, is really who they are lined up with” to address the misogyny of many brogressive men:

Over the last few years, a huge number of PMCWs have become men’s rights activists in all but name, and it’s been profoundly depressing, if not entirely unexpected, to see how enjoyable they’ve found it. Even while attacking women for finding themselves on the same side as right-wingers, the PMCWs stampeded to join the team that was threatening women with rape and violence, harassing women’s conferences, attempting to block access to gender critical events and physically assaulting female demonstrators.

It's a powerful essay.

https://twitter.com/jk_rowling/status/1784586797525184794

https://twitter.com/jk_rowling/status/1784586797525184794

OP posts:
New posts on this thread. Refresh page
WomenCantBeBulliedOutOfResistance · 01/05/2024 08:35

"criticized as anti-trans.A few days later, Radcliffe issued a personal statement through the Trevor Project. “I realize that certain press outlets will probably want to paint this as in-fighting between J. K. Rowling and myself me, but that is really not what this is about, nor is it what’s important right now,” he began, before moving on to say: “Transgender women are women. Any statement to the contrary erases the identity and dignity of transgender people and goes against all advice given by professional health care associations who have far more expertise on this subject matter than either Jo or I me.”

Daniel clearly isn't an expert on the correct use of pronouns. Or anything else for that matter.

theDudesmummy · 01/05/2024 08:19

Inconsequential bleating from Radcliffe.

DramaLlamaBangBang · 01/05/2024 08:08

miri1985 · 01/05/2024 00:21

Wasn't sure this warranted its own thread but Daniel Radcliffe has given an interview

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2024/06/daniel-radcliffe-merrily-we-roll-along-jk-rowling/678219/

https://archive.ph/A6lvN

"Then, in June 2020, J. K. Rowling wrote a series of tweets that set off a media hullabaloo. She began by sarcastically commenting on an article that used the term people who menstruate, before doubling down in ways that many criticized as anti-trans.
A few days later, Radcliffe issued a personal statement through the Trevor Project. “I realize that certain press outlets will probably want to paint this as in-fighting between J. K. Rowling and myself, but that is really not what this is about, nor is it what’s important right now,” he began, before moving on to say: “Transgender women are women. Any statement to the contrary erases the identity and dignity of transgender people and goes against all advice given by professional health care associations who have far more expertise on this subject matter than either Jo or I.”
He expressed hope that readers’ experiences with the Harry Potter books needn’t be tarnished by this, and argued that what people may have found within those books—for instance, “if they taught you that strength is found in diversity, and that dogmatic ideas of pureness lead to the oppression of vulnerable groups”—remains between readers and the books, “and it is sacred.”
“I’d worked with the Trevor Project for 12 years and it would have seemed like, I don’t know, immense cowardice to me to not say something,” Radcliffe says when I raise this subject. “I wanted to try and help people that had been negatively affected by the comments,” he tells me. “And to say that if those are Jo’s views, then they are not the views of everybody associated with the Potter franchise.”
Since those June 2020 tweets, Rowling has proclaimed, again and again, her belief in the importance of biological sex, and that the trans-rights movement seeks to undermine women as a protected class. Radcliffe says he had no direct contact with Rowling throughout any of this. “It makes me really sad, ultimately,” he says, “because I do look at the person that I met, the times that we met, and the books that she wrote, and the world that she created, and all of that is to me so deeply empathic.”
During the blowback, he was often thrown in together with his Harry Potter co-stars Emma Watson and Rupert Grint, who both also expressed their support for the trans community in response to Rowling’s comments. In the British press particularly, he says, “There’s a version of ‘Are these three kids ungrateful brats?’ that people have always wanted to write, and they were finally able to. So, good for them, I guess.” Never mind that he found the premise simply wrongheaded. “Jo, obviously Harry Potter would not have happened without her, so nothing in my life would have probably happened the way it is without that person. But that doesn’t mean that you owe the things you truly believe to someone else for your entire life.”
Radcliffe offered these carefully weighted reflections in the early months of this year, before Rowling (who declined to comment for this article) newly personalized their disagreements. In the second week of April, Rowling wrote a series of posts on X in response to the publication of a British-government-funded report that notes, as just one of a wide-ranging series of findings, that “for the majority of young people, a medical pathway may not be the best way” to help young people “presenting with gender incongruence or distress”; Rowling touted this as vindication of her views. When one of her supporters replied on X that they were “just waiting for Dan and Emma to give you a very public apology,” further suggesting that Radcliffe and Watson would be safe in the knowledge that Rowling would forgive them, she leaped in: “Not safe, I’m afraid,” she wrote, and characterized them as “celebs who cosied up to a movement intent on eroding women’s hard-won rights.”
In response, Radcliffe told me: “I will continue to support the rights of all LGBTQ people, and have no further comment than that.”"

So he was more than happy to flap his uninformed gums when he thought his ' fans' would support him, but he couldn't offer a ' no comment on something I know nothing about' at the time? He preferred to patronisingly apologise to the ' trans community' on behalf of Rowling and keep his trap shut while she was receiving daily death threats and being doxxed by his fans. Well done Daniel.

UtopiaPlanitia · 01/05/2024 01:05

So basically Radcliffe is happy for us to know that he hasn’t taken on board or engaged with any of the intelligent and serious things that JKR has written on this subject. Oh and the UK press criticising him for this behaviour are just haterrz…🤷‍♀️🙄

Edited to add:

I think he’s a sanctimonious wee twerp.

miri1985 · 01/05/2024 00:21

Wasn't sure this warranted its own thread but Daniel Radcliffe has given an interview

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2024/06/daniel-radcliffe-merrily-we-roll-along-jk-rowling/678219/

https://archive.ph/A6lvN

"Then, in June 2020, J. K. Rowling wrote a series of tweets that set off a media hullabaloo. She began by sarcastically commenting on an article that used the term people who menstruate, before doubling down in ways that many criticized as anti-trans.
A few days later, Radcliffe issued a personal statement through the Trevor Project. “I realize that certain press outlets will probably want to paint this as in-fighting between J. K. Rowling and myself, but that is really not what this is about, nor is it what’s important right now,” he began, before moving on to say: “Transgender women are women. Any statement to the contrary erases the identity and dignity of transgender people and goes against all advice given by professional health care associations who have far more expertise on this subject matter than either Jo or I.”
He expressed hope that readers’ experiences with the Harry Potter books needn’t be tarnished by this, and argued that what people may have found within those books—for instance, “if they taught you that strength is found in diversity, and that dogmatic ideas of pureness lead to the oppression of vulnerable groups”—remains between readers and the books, “and it is sacred.”
“I’d worked with the Trevor Project for 12 years and it would have seemed like, I don’t know, immense cowardice to me to not say something,” Radcliffe says when I raise this subject. “I wanted to try and help people that had been negatively affected by the comments,” he tells me. “And to say that if those are Jo’s views, then they are not the views of everybody associated with the Potter franchise.”
Since those June 2020 tweets, Rowling has proclaimed, again and again, her belief in the importance of biological sex, and that the trans-rights movement seeks to undermine women as a protected class. Radcliffe says he had no direct contact with Rowling throughout any of this. “It makes me really sad, ultimately,” he says, “because I do look at the person that I met, the times that we met, and the books that she wrote, and the world that she created, and all of that is to me so deeply empathic.”
During the blowback, he was often thrown in together with his Harry Potter co-stars Emma Watson and Rupert Grint, who both also expressed their support for the trans community in response to Rowling’s comments. In the British press particularly, he says, “There’s a version of ‘Are these three kids ungrateful brats?’ that people have always wanted to write, and they were finally able to. So, good for them, I guess.” Never mind that he found the premise simply wrongheaded. “Jo, obviously Harry Potter would not have happened without her, so nothing in my life would have probably happened the way it is without that person. But that doesn’t mean that you owe the things you truly believe to someone else for your entire life.”
Radcliffe offered these carefully weighted reflections in the early months of this year, before Rowling (who declined to comment for this article) newly personalized their disagreements. In the second week of April, Rowling wrote a series of posts on X in response to the publication of a British-government-funded report that notes, as just one of a wide-ranging series of findings, that “for the majority of young people, a medical pathway may not be the best way” to help young people “presenting with gender incongruence or distress”; Rowling touted this as vindication of her views. When one of her supporters replied on X that they were “just waiting for Dan and Emma to give you a very public apology,” further suggesting that Radcliffe and Watson would be safe in the knowledge that Rowling would forgive them, she leaped in: “Not safe, I’m afraid,” she wrote, and characterized them as “celebs who cosied up to a movement intent on eroding women’s hard-won rights.”
In response, Radcliffe told me: “I will continue to support the rights of all LGBTQ people, and have no further comment than that.”"

How Daniel Radcliffe Outran Harry Potter

He was the world’s most famous child star. Then he had to figure out what came next.

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2024/06/daniel-radcliffe-merrily-we-roll-along-jk-rowling/678219

UtopiaPlanitia · 30/04/2024 21:31

DramaLlamaBangBang · 30/04/2024 20:26

Some guy is looking at jail time for sending malicious communications to Rosie Duffield, so they must have been pretty horrible, yet she was abandoned by her colleagues.

And Starmer is still telling fibs that he’s been in touch with Rosie on a regular basis. He could stop a lot of the hassle she gets by standing up (privately or publicly) and telling MP and SPADs to quit it. But that would take a spine, so…..🤷‍♀️

DramaLlamaBangBang · 30/04/2024 20:26

EdithStourton · 30/04/2024 10:06

And no, the analogy was offensive because it was uncalled for and irrelevant.
LOL.
Party allows Rosie Duffield to get metaphorically beaten up ('You bloody had it coming!').
Party wants to bring in self-ID and when women say, um, this could be dangerous, we're met with howls of 'BIGOT! NO DEBATE!' ('Shut up, you stupid cow! You think you're gonna get hurt? I don't fuckin' care!')

I used the analogy because I thought it was spot on.

FYI, I grew up in a home where my father used coercive control and occasionally physical violence (usually towards me not my mother, but that let him get at her). I know whereof I speak.

Some guy is looking at jail time for sending malicious communications to Rosie Duffield, so they must have been pretty horrible, yet she was abandoned by her colleagues.

Abhannmor · 30/04/2024 17:24

Quite agree @SidewaysOtter. But everyone is at it. Wes Streeting was part of an online group trying to drive feminists out of the Labour Party. He wants to privatise the NHS and is ' Starmer's anointed successor who looks like his son only made out of margarine ' Alexei Sayle. Not much of a class warrior then.

Although Alexei would say that - he is besties with that horrid anti semite Corbyn. But hang on , Alexei is Jewish. What a tangled web we weave.....

SidewaysOtter · 30/04/2024 16:07

ISaySteadyOn · 30/04/2024 07:13

I think @MoltenLasagne has it. As a young woman I bought completely into the simplistic dichotomy of Left=Good, Right=Bad.

When the Left does something like reduce women to a feeling in a male head and shows you their true beliefs about women while patronisingly informing you that you are a bigot by refusing to accept your place as costume, it comes as a shock. This is the good side!

And then you think about it a little more and talk to different people and discover that people who are on the right are not all card carrying, finger tapping, Mr Burnsesque villains. That also comes as a shock. This is the bad side!

This is what happened to me. I am now trying to unravel my bundle of beliefs and see which are mine and which I ended up carrying because I wanted to be a Good Person. From what I have read on here, I don't think I am the only one.

I completely agree on the left=good, right=bad thing.

I'd say I'm centre-ish left-ish. I believe in a state that looks after its weaker and more vulnerable members, and gives them a good standard of living with autonomy over their lives and the additional support they need. A state that gives people a hand up when they need it, e.g. proper support in finding a job with reasonable expectations and compassion in not unreasonably sanctioning someone who missed an appointment because the buses weren't running.

I also believe that good quality healthcare, childcare, housing and education should be available to all, either free at the point of use (healthcare and education) or at a level that is affordable to everyone (childcare and state housing).

I believe that those who can afford to pay more taxes should do so.

But I also believe that with the rights come responsibilities and that means not seeing "being on benefits" as a lifestyle choice (yes, I know it's a minority but I absolutely have known people who've done this), anti-social behaviour not being tolerated via harsher penalties etc. etc.

I also believe women's rights are important and should be protected.

To some this makes me a soft old lefty, to others I'm a right winger.

But what I have to ask is...why does it matter? It only matters if you're going to categorise the "wrong" choice as bad.

Floisme · 30/04/2024 15:05

borntobequiet · 30/04/2024 11:18

And no, the analogy was offensive because it was uncalled for and irrelevant.

The analogy is near-perfect.

I think it's near perfect too, right down to when his friends start saying, 'If things were that bad, why didn't you leave before? Take some responsibility.'

AstonsStolenData · 30/04/2024 14:46

NefertitiV · 30/04/2024 07:20

@AstonsStolenData

How does me wanting the left to listen to poor, disabled women of color and take our concerns seriously indicate that I'm right wing?

You just wrote "If a party makes it clear that they don't value/won't listen to and take seriously the voices of poor, disabled women of color and doesn't care about their concerns or safety, nor the safety of their children, just how progressive are they? I don't think valuing their voices makes me right wing." I'd wonder what or who led you to this extreme view, and by extension, what party you think would listen. If - after 14 years - you believe that's the Tories, then yes, you're right-wing.

Please be specific about why you think that the right is more concerned and aligned with poor ppl, disabled ppl, POC, women, or children than the left and how that is progressive.

This brings in a number of other issues not aligned to the original question. I don't think the right is more aligned with those issues, anyway - they've just hopped onto a handy bandwagon with some of them given an election is looming.

What extreme view is that?
You're the one claiming that feminism is leaning to the right. I disagree and am asking you why do you think that.

OP posts:
Britinme · 30/04/2024 12:51

Posted too soon... in the situation of a bad political decision I'd say that aligning yourself clearly with the welfare of women and girls, a historically oppressed group, as a sex-based class is of the left rather than the right, and it's a shame so many on the left have chosen to prioritise the capitalist-individualist wishes of men, along with the misogyny and homophobia included in that.

EdithStourton · 30/04/2024 12:48

NefertitiV · 30/04/2024 11:42

@EdithStourton

And would you like to explain why you found my abusive husband analogy 'offensive'? I'm genuinely interested.

Additionally, I feel it is disingenuous to imply that women cannot ever take responsibility - or blamed - for anything, simply because they're women. When you applied the abusive husband analogy to my words, I found that offensive as women can take responsibility for their social and political actions.

Yes, of course we can. I did not imply otherwise. I just made the point that in this instance, the blame isn't ours.

Women feel that the Left (and the centre) has abandoned them. It's not that we have changed our views. We've been forced out by political parties who have suddenly adopted an ideology which is deeply harmful to women.

I think women are to be applauded for not taking this shit.

You can find my analogy as offensive as you like. I still stand by it.

Edited for flow and to correct a typo.

Britinme · 30/04/2024 12:46

In the situation of an abusive marriage, I would say that leaving and reporting the situation widely is the pinnacle of taking responsibility for your own safety and that of your children.

NefertitiV · 30/04/2024 11:42

@EdithStourton

And would you like to explain why you found my abusive husband analogy 'offensive'? I'm genuinely interested.

Additionally, I feel it is disingenuous to imply that women cannot ever take responsibility - or blamed - for anything, simply because they're women. When you applied the abusive husband analogy to my words, I found that offensive as women can take responsibility for their social and political actions.

borntobequiet · 30/04/2024 11:18

And no, the analogy was offensive because it was uncalled for and irrelevant.

The analogy is near-perfect.

Snowypeaks · 30/04/2024 10:42
  • about EdithStourton's analogy.
Snowypeaks · 30/04/2024 10:32

NefertitiV · 30/04/2024 09:56

@Snowypeaks

Misogyny does not have a party affiliation, either. EdithStourton's abusive relationship analogy is probably "offensive" to you because it hits home. But it is a fact that this indivdualistic, capitalist, misogynistic men's rights movement has been embraced by the "progressive" left, and is fuelled by a rich seam of misogyny in the left.

It's interesting you think that. Do you think misogyny exists in the right as well?

And no, the analogy was offensive because it was uncalled for and irrelevant.

Of course there's misogyny on the right of politics. And I stand by what I said.

EdithStourton · 30/04/2024 10:06

And no, the analogy was offensive because it was uncalled for and irrelevant.
LOL.
Party allows Rosie Duffield to get metaphorically beaten up ('You bloody had it coming!').
Party wants to bring in self-ID and when women say, um, this could be dangerous, we're met with howls of 'BIGOT! NO DEBATE!' ('Shut up, you stupid cow! You think you're gonna get hurt? I don't fuckin' care!')

I used the analogy because I thought it was spot on.

FYI, I grew up in a home where my father used coercive control and occasionally physical violence (usually towards me not my mother, but that let him get at her). I know whereof I speak.

NefertitiV · 30/04/2024 09:56

@Snowypeaks

Misogyny does not have a party affiliation, either. EdithStourton's abusive relationship analogy is probably "offensive" to you because it hits home. But it is a fact that this indivdualistic, capitalist, misogynistic men's rights movement has been embraced by the "progressive" left, and is fuelled by a rich seam of misogyny in the left.

It's interesting you think that. Do you think misogyny exists in the right as well?

And no, the analogy was offensive because it was uncalled for and irrelevant.

EdithStourton · 30/04/2024 09:55

NefertitiV · 30/04/2024 07:29

@EdithStourton

I'd love to know, @NefertitiV, just how you learned to engage in such an arse-about-face, bad faith manner.

I'd say it's you that's engaging in bad faith here. I simply echoed your own words back at you and you didn't like it. Not only that, you pulled out an 'abusive husband' analogy, and that's offensive.

No, you didn't.
I said,
"And then when we read an article in the Mail, or have admiration for some of the policies or speeches of certain right-wing politicians, we get shouted at for giving succour to the right."

You decided I meant:
So you agree, then, that feminism is leaning to the right now? But apparently this is the fault of the left? When do feminists - women - take responsibility for their own actions?

Those two statements do not mean the same thing. It is perfectly possible to agree with, or even admire, aspects of a political platform, without also agreeing with some of the fundamental tenets of that political viewpoint. If you can't see that, you are totally mired in tribal thinking.

I can think that Victoria Atkins (I think that's her name) played an absolute blinder in the HofC the other day without turning into a Tory.

I also note that you have ignored my point that the Left have done this to themselves: they have driven thoughtful women away, but women somehow, in your world, have to 'take responsibility' for this. I'm baffled.

And would you like to explain why you found my abusive husband analogy 'offensive'? I'm genuinely interested.

Shetlands · 30/04/2024 09:51

KnitFastDieWarm · 28/04/2024 17:28

I grew up around a lot of very left-wing men. The attitude is very much ‘calm down love, we’re planning the revolution here, now make us a cup of tea’. Any reference to feminism that isn’t primarily centred on marxist-feminist concepts (and thus ‘relevant’ to their interests) is seen as hysterical fuss-making by a bunch of harridans who are distracting from the real class warfare issue.

I completely agree with you!

This happened to the Dagenham women when they tried to campaign for equal pay. The male union leaders wouldn't support them to start with.

It also happened to Harriet Harman when she was campaigning for women's rights. She was often told by men to prioritise other things instead.

DramaLlamaBangBang · 30/04/2024 09:09

NefertitiV · 30/04/2024 07:24

@DramaLlamaBangBang

There is a difference between the hard Left andcthe centre left. Part of the problem is the attitude that everyone who doesn't agree with you is 'Right wing'. The Left and Right are spectrums. It's just the same as the Trumpists calling everyone communists or Rishi Sunak being called a socialist by some in his party. Its ridiculous.

Absolutely there are spectrums. However, I think a good deal of feminism has stepped over the centre into the right. Again, there's nothing wrong with that, but the consistent denial is odd.

See, I don't see how that's the case? It's interesting how enthusiastically the Progressive Left have abandoned feminism and turned it into a dirty word, now the men dont have to pretend yo becfeminists anymore, the sigh of relief almost audible. How is protecting the rights of vulnerable women and children ' of the right?' If anything, it's a concern for the most vulnerable that is ' socialist'. Not wealthy celebrities saying TWAW when they know full well that the chances of their daughters ending up in a domestic abuse shelter, or on a Single sex ward with an intact male or be in prison with a male rapist or be working in a beauty salon and being forced to do a 'bikini wax' on a fully intact male for fear of losing their minimum wage job, or be hounded out of their careers and be unable to pay their mortgage is so vanishingly small as to not affect them in any way. They will all walk away whistling ' nothing to do with me' when this turns out to not be as popular as it once seemed. How is taking away the rights of half the population 'of the Left?

Abhannmor · 30/04/2024 08:55

If these useless poseurs were really Class Warriors we wouldn't be in this shit would we?

Lifestyle politics replaced class because we lost that struggle in the 80s. A shiny bauble to distract us from our complete failure to ' improve the material conditions of the working class '. Actually I was an early adopter. Mea culpa.

Floisme · 30/04/2024 08:55

Many a time I've compared me and Labour to a sour relationship. For the last few years it's been like we've broken up but I'm still haunting him on FaceBook and clutching at a late birthday card as a sign he still loves me. More recently it's been more like when he asks for a reconciliation and you realise that you just possibly don't care any more.