The false equivalency drives me mad...

Yes, and we’re all still confused. What shady things has JCR done?

What, by quoting the post? Ok. Is this not you….

Well three are named - two convicted, one not.

in reference to Jimmy Saville?

Who are you quoting here?

In response to a post helpfully letting you know that this wasn’t a thread about not liking JKR, but rather questioning equating her with a convicted sex offender you replied.

Well three are named - two convicted, one not. The one not was sainted in life and used his power and money to protect himself from facing justice for his secret vile actions.

So, rather than acknowledging what the thread was about you decided to remind everyone that Savile wasn’t convicted. Some people have seen that as ‘coming into bat’ for him. Not unreasonable. I don’t think I’ve seen anyone jump in so quickly to remind people JS wasn’t convicted of anything.

Let’s accept that wasn’t your intention though. Why raise the fact he wasn’t convicted and go on to suggest why in the context of this thread?

Some people have no capacity for moral reasoning. JKR Rowling is a rare, and outstanding, example of moral goodness in public life: not only setting up and wholly funding a rape crisis centre for women, but standing up for women’s rights, and continuing to do so, despite the onslaught of death threats. We know these people are violent: her decision to speak out against them is an act of extraordinary bravery.

I’m going to disagree with you saying she’s not brave. Yes it isn’t a cult, she isn’t our leader ya de ya de yaya. I do think it takes immense bravery (insulation of having plenty of money aside) to stick her head above the parapet of the immense onslaught of “accepted” opinion - particularly when this started and there were very few other voices openly saying the things she did. Sure, her wealth (built entirely off the back of her own talent and success) protects her from the threat of having her livelihood destroyed, but lets not play down all the death and rape threats, the hideous hate mail she must receive, and the general toll it must take to receive so much criticism, however uninformed.

Maybe you can give us an example?

She doesn’t have a ‘woman’s refuge’. Where are you getting your incorrect information from?

Which bit of what she says don’t you agree with?

So you are implying that when JKR is dead we will discover that she secretly raped little boys and covered it up using her wealth? I rather think that that is libel should you actually write it down.
I can' think of anything bad she has done (though I don't agree with her reported idea that using she/her pronouns to her nice transwoman friend is a good idea).
Go away, alcove.

alcove doesn't need evidence. Whole cloth weaver.

I see no clarification on the ‘shady things’ alcove …

I would be tempted, OP, to say to your college that if he thinks being a predatory pedophile is the same as funding a RCC for women and wanting to protect women only spaces, he should be looking for monsters much closer to home.

Most monsters are known/related to their victims, good advice.

Wow. And that's your concept of equivalence to serial sexual abuse of children?

Next you'll be mentioning that she once bought chocolates after 8 pm.

She did WHAT??!! The sheer monstrosity! And I bet it was a Cadburys Dairy Milk!!

People have a free choice as to whether they agree with the views that JK Rowling expresses. Savile's and Harris's victims had no choice at all.

Hope that clears things up.

She ate an After 8 at 7.55 🫢

Oh my life!! The Depravity!! How dare she?!

Rowling should never be compared to a paedophile. Ever.

Her record of hiring and defending a proved domestic abuser, though, stands for itself.

Oh and the malicious attacks on trans, asexual and non-binary people. Can't forget how she validated offline violence with her nasty opinions.

She's nothing like Harris. But in a league of her own, with how she's traumatised minority children who thought her books were a safe space, who trusted her.

Could mention all the terrible things she's said, but it would take all day - notably her repeating utter lies about the number of trans children receiving gender-affirming surgery (it's overwhelmingly cis boys) and objecting to individual trans women having jobs, posting their photos and watching the harassment. Objecting to inclusive medical.language which saves lives, bolstering horrific conspiracy theories and making everyone who's harmed a trans kid in school feel validated...yeah, it's a long list.

She's never apologised for hiring Depp. What a feminist.

She never apologised to Lin yu-ting for calling her a man who likes hitting women. Absolutely abject behaviour.

She's nothing like Harris. But the harm she's done is real.

Still flinging it and hoping some of it sticks, TPA?

#letthemspeak

It smacks of someone who is utterly immersed in their own psychological drama to a very unhealthy degree. Being eaten up with hatred and toxicity and unable to think clearly. Everything distorted, magnified and out of proportion.

Whatever about the changing details of TPAs story, they bear the hallmarks of someone who has affirmed someone close to them and now cannot psychologically cope with any suggestion that this was not the right decision.

What an utter mess all of this is.

@Toastess, it's totally understandable that you feel you can't be forthright about your opinions at work

FWIW, I think what you said was perfect. You did express dissent. And you said something mild and of good sense, which highlighted how ott his own comment was. You may well have emboldened your other colleagues to express their doubts or dissent in the future

I can see your grounds for viewing JK Rowling as a person of bad character.

But would it be wise for a reader, even a young one, to measure the safety of a book on the basis of its author’s morals? The author of ‘Alice in Wonderland’ had some very unsavoury feelings about little girls: should girls be advised not to read it? Should Jewish children warned against reading anything by Roald Dahl? He was, without question, a rabid antisemite. Shakespeare gave a sympathetic platform to some pretty unacceptable views on marriage. Should we cancel him?

I don’t want to challenge your assessment of JKR as a person. But by teaching children that a book is only safe to read if the author had the same ethics as the reader, we do them a disservice. They should be confident enough in their own views not to experience complete moral collapse on contact with a person who does not share them.