Women's feelings are not the point and a woman's voice is a shitty one - feminism according to Marie Claire

[FFSFFSFFS]

"I’m also a ciswoman, which means my feelings are not the point right now. As significant as the franchise has been for me, if I am actually going to be the ally I fancy myself to be, that means I have to consider the damage Rowling (and potentially the entire series) has done to trans, nonbinary, and gender nonconforming people. Being a white ciswoman gives me a voice—like a magical power, but a shitty one, because it's a power others are denied."

www.marieclaire.com/culture/a32871234/harry-potter-jk-rowling-anti-trans-comments/

I think these young self proclaimed feminists are in for an almighty shock when they get a bit older and realise just exactly how women's voices are responded to.

Sigh.

I would venture that most of the screeching is being done by people who have not read anything JK has said.

It doesn’t matter what she said - they’ve been told what to think, what to believe and what to say. And they are toeing the line.

I think she has confused "feelings" with "rights" there.

unherd.com/thepost/the-british-imitation-of-america-goes-well-beyond-race/

I think this is an interesting article about the jarring quality of US-style trans activism being transplanted into the UK. It might already have been posted somewhere.

Just said to my 12 year old Lesbian Autistic daughter "are you offended there's no mixed race lesbian Autistic girls in Harry Potter?" And she said "That's not what the story is about. If I want to I can write that character instead of moaning someone else didn't." I'd rather listen to her rather than Marie Claire 😂

Lol, since when do white cis women get voices? Literally nobody listens to us.

On the lack of gay representation in HP, I feel like part of what's going on here is young people having no idea of how little gay representation in general there was in books for kids back then. Sure, maybe Rowling could have been a pioneer, but it's equally possibly that her publishers would just have made her edit it out. Things have changed, and that's a good thing, but if you're looking for modern sensibilities on gay issues then even books from as little as 20 years ago are almost inevitably going to disappoint.

Also, she compared JK Rowling to Michael Jackson?! Presumable because she thinks that being concerned about the possible erosion of women's rights is akin to being a paedophile rapist?

Feminism 2020 everyone - how fucking progressive!

Going to write to Marie Claire and complain. Especially about the Jackson comparison. That's bordering slander surely?

Please do not repeat the c** term. It is hugely offensive and aims to eradicate womanhood. It is their word, dreamt up to their end. We should not be legitimising it, nor lending credence to the deeply offensive and oppressive basis upon which it rests.

I am a woman.

Also Noma Dumezweni supported the openess of the essay that JK wrote so what Marie Claire reporter idiot is saying is inaccurate.

My area of Scotland is about 95% white according to the latest census. If I wrote a novel it would largely have white characters because that's my experience. Authors writing about characters from other races have been pilloried for "cultural appropriation". They can't win. If a Japanese author writes a book I don't expect a splattering of characters from other races to give balance. People can write their books how they want. This is all bizarre. We should all be trying to achieve our potential and helping others to do the same.

Harry Potter is such a stereotypical white English person name.

I’m also a ciswoman, which means my feelings are not the point right now.

Translation: women, you need to remember that men's feelings always come first, especially those who are telling you they know what it means to be a woman. We've won our battle after all! Women have privilege and full equality now, just because I say so!

Oh, and also relegate yourself within your own sex by calling yourself Cis. Because trans women are women, but biological women are something lesser.

Also Noma Dumezweni supported the openess of the essay that JK wrote so what Marie Claire reporter idiot is saying is inaccurate.

I think she was effectively 'shamed' into recanting.

@EmperorCovidula

Lol, since when do white cis women get voices? Literally nobody listens to us.

We’re not cis women. We’re women. There’s no need for a nonsense prefix, even if you’re trying to make a point.

ciswoman

This is a very interesting usage. You know how TRAs always make a big deal about the space between "trans" and "women"? Their logic is that when you put the space in it makes it clear that "trans" is an adjective and therefore "trans women" are women just like "tall women" are women. Or whatever. My first thought on seeing this was: uh-oh, she'll be cancelled for forgetting the space! Not putting in the space literally kills trans people!

But of course her usage here is "ciswoman" not "transwoman." She won't get cancelled for it. Is this the new acceptable usage in woke circles? Trans is an adjective modifying "woman" , but "ciswoman" is a compound word? Are we actually moving towards the "women and ciswomen" linguistic categories that some of you have been predicting for a while?

Okay, so you’d stand with the women who said ‘women don’t really need the vote’.

She'd be one of the women holding the suffragettes' petticoats down to protect their modesty when they were being force fed.

I can't express how angry this makes me. I couldn't even finish reading the article.

'My feelings are not the point right now'... and yet she feels compelled to put them into print. She feels the need to attack other women. She feels the need to dismiss their concerns and experiences.

I've noticed this with the current BLM situation - white, American women gushing on social about their own awakenings, how they need to listen...

If you're shutting up to listen, then shut the fuck up and listen. To everyone. To actually hear and learn what is really going on. Otherwise, it's just about you.

It's really extraordinary isn't it - that she swallows the line that a white woman's voice s "shitty" because they are the only people who can speak as white women.

I think one of the link's she missing is that black women's voice are also pretty marginalised. She is not making space for black women's voices here.

I can't believe that we've reached the point that a young woman who "identifies" as a feminist women thinks that women's feelings about fear of sexual violence don't matter and women speaking up about sexual violence is shitty. Jesus wept.

@KaronAVyrus

I know this is beside the point but I always felt the Harry Potter Films would have been massively improved if they had cast different child actors: Daniel Radcliffe and Emma Watson were wooden then and still wooden now.

I mentioned once on MN that my daughter went to school with a boy who was originally given the role of Harry Potter. Then at the last moment, Daniel R. was given the part. I've read here that his mum is a casting agent and that might have something to do with it. We all know the film world is very much about who you know. At any rate, the other boy seems to have been cast because of his acting talent. How disappointing for him! One of my daughter's friends used to go out with him.

I've noticed this with the current BLM situation - white, American women gushing on social about their own awakenings, how they need to listen...

If you're shutting up to listen, then shut the fuck up and listen. To everyone. To actually hear and learn what is really going on. Otherwise, it's just about you.

Yes! This.

Are we actually moving towards the "women and ciswomen" linguistic categories that some of you have been predicting for a while?

Yes, I think that's next on the agenda.

I found this to be quite a shocking article. It was full of inaccuracies. She likens JK Rowling to Michael Jackson?

The Harry Potter books are still hugely popular because kids love stories about magic etc. They do not belong to those who were children when they were written. The films will probably be remade in the future and the original actors won't be remembered then. The author will, however.

I think the writer of the article needs to take a look outside her own bubble, something she should be doing as a journalist.

I think we're rapidly reaching the point where a number of females, probably led by the fragrant Watson, will use the c** word to describe themselves as a virtue signal and genuflection to their service of equality. Because they're too bloody thick to think things through.