Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Jk trans character and Robert Galbraith

151 replies

TheTamingOfTheresa · 15/09/2020 15:42

I’ve been speaking out in support of JK on social media but there’s an avalanche of criticism of her latest Trans murderer character plus her using the name Robert Galbraith which apparently was the name of some historical anti gay figure. What do people think is the best way to counter this?

OP posts:
JaneAustenWouldHateThis · 16/09/2020 11:04

If that gets deleted you can PM me because I've copied it.

MillyMollyFarmer · 16/09/2020 11:07

It's clear that's not the usual stance, that it's not just self ID for a lot of posters.

Correct. A lot of women don’t want any male in their spaces because... it’s not their space. Women saying no to males isn’t hateful. Saying it is, is misogyny.

I say clearly I don’t want males in female spaces or sports. Not sure what the issue with that is.

Illdealwithitinaminute · 16/09/2020 11:08

I don't even think the character is a transvestite.

They are spoken about as having once disguised themselves in a wig and woman's coat to commit a crime many years earlier. They don't seem to have done it again.

That's not being a transvestite in a more permanent, part of someone's personality type of a way. They certainly aren't trans!

The80sweregreat · 16/09/2020 11:11

No, JK doesn't need the money or the publicity : the books are great and have a robust 'fan fiction ' following. I love the characters and the plots and just hearing her 'voice' through her writing.
I was just concerned for her as I know she'll receive hate mail and all kinds of horrible nasties about this book from people who won't even read it!

DannyGlickWindowTapping · 16/09/2020 11:20

So where is the outrage for John Simpson? He wore a burka in Afghanistan, to evade the Taliban, I think? This is a real-life person, still around, who admits he used women's clothing as a disguise! The horror! Hmm.

JaneAustenWouldHateThis · 16/09/2020 12:19

@RuffleCrow

Yy *@janeaustenwouldhatethis* ! The woke of beard can often be observed frustratedly trying to jab at, click and scroll on paperbacks on the tube. Wink

My solicitors!

Jabb, Click and Scroll.

ErrolTheDragon · 16/09/2020 12:21

@DannyGlickWindowTapping

So where is the outrage for John Simpson? He wore a burka in Afghanistan, to evade the Taliban, I think? This is a real-life person, still around, who admits he used women's clothing as a disguise! The horror! Hmm.
There are many reasons for adopting disguises of various types - some are legitimate/ethical. Some aren't.
DannyGlickWindowTapping · 16/09/2020 12:25

Sorry - I know - I was being facetious. I realised that it didn't read as I wanted after I'd pressed the button.

ErrolTheDragon · 16/09/2020 12:30

Sure - it just highlights what the problem is. There's nothing inherently wrong or suspect about men wearing 'women's' clothes.

gardenbird48 · 16/09/2020 12:38

It is a bit provocative of her to have such a character when she has already received so much hate on twitter etc about her views and her lengthy essay on the subject
Firstly, I think ‘provocative‘ is a stretch in this case - one paragraph in a 900 page book describing a man disguising himself in a woman’s hat and coat - not the main device for the story.
Secondly that does come across a bit like ‘well, it’s your fault that I had to heap
abuse on you’ if you hadn’t have written that/looked at me like that/breathed wrong etc.

banivani · 16/09/2020 13:00

It seems to me that she's nicked the idea from PD James (Devices and Desires). Now that's a slanderous accusation that might actually hurt. ;)

I just wrote an email to a news outlet (not in the UK) to complain about their coverage, but I specified that I was unhappy that they claimed there was no research into men abusing women if they had access to women's spaces.

CodenameVillanelle · 16/09/2020 13:08

@The80sweregreat

It is a bit provocative of her to have such a character when she has already received so much hate on twitter etc about her views and her lengthy essay on the subject. I thought this before I received my copy! I haven't read the whole book yet but there a few references and as some of the action is based in the mid 70s the views about this are different to today's much more tolerant society. I'm a big fan of these books and I admire her for speaking out but I heard about the backlash I did have a moment when I thought ' oh dear , what has she done? ' Maybe steering clear of any controversial subjects may have helped her , but clearly she hasn't , even if it's not as it's being portrayed and not that central to the plot. If that makes any sense! I'm a big fan though so it won't stop me reading her work. If people are upset just avoid the books and her twitter feed. We all have different points of view in life and her are as valid as anyone else's are.
How long do you think it takes to write a book? She's been researching and writing for years. Not just since December last year!! She became exposed to trans activism through researching this book. Should she have trashed several years' work in case she upset people??
The80sweregreat · 16/09/2020 13:13

I'm a fan of hers and I'm reading it now. It's just fiction ! My first thought was ' oh dear' as I know that she has received so much hate for her own views lately. That was all.
The ones that will write horrible things about her haven't even read the book. I'm not suggesting she should have changed anything , but I was more worried about her safety and how she will feel reading such horrible things about herself and her own views. It seems that people are out to get her and that is worrying and not very nice frankly. Twitter is evil.

midgebabe · 16/09/2020 13:18

It's this attitude of "we must be careful not to stigmatise xxx group" that led to the Rotherham sex scandal

OldCrone · 16/09/2020 13:19

@Illdealwithitinaminute

I don't even think the character is a transvestite.

They are spoken about as having once disguised themselves in a wig and woman's coat to commit a crime many years earlier. They don't seem to have done it again.

That's not being a transvestite in a more permanent, part of someone's personality type of a way. They certainly aren't trans!

So why the outrage? If the character's disguise is not because he is trans, or even a crossdresser, what are the TRAs getting so upset about? It's just a plot device about a person being in disguise when he committed a crime so that he was difficult to identify from the description given by the victim.
OldCrone · 16/09/2020 13:24

Maybe steering clear of any controversial subjects may have helped her

Is this something you think all authors should do all the time, or just ones who are getting abuse from permanently offended and abusive twitterers?

Should all fiction steer clear of 'difficult' subjects to protect us all from things we don't want to read?

The80sweregreat · 16/09/2020 13:28

I wish I hadn't written anything now ! If I was receiving hate mail via twitter or whatever I would be scared of a 'back lash. ' That's all i was saying , although I probably didn't word it that well. Just concerned for her own safety and well being. I was not criticizing her even if it comes across that way ! She should be able to write whatever she likes as a plot device.

Dreeple · 16/09/2020 13:31

It is a bit provocative of her to have such a character

Because she has recently been abused on Twitter, by weirdos?

That makes it provocative??

CharlieParley · 16/09/2020 13:54

there’s an avalanche of criticism of her latest Trans murderer character plus her using the name Robert Galbraith which apparently was the name of some historical anti gay figure. What do people think is the best way to counter this?

Her pen name is based on combining her political hero's Robert F Kennedy's first name with the surname of what she'd have liked to be called as a child - Ella Galbraith. In 2013.

ChickenonaMug linked to a Twitter thread by the journalist, who three years after JK Rowling picked the pen name Robert Galbraith wrote about the forgotten historical figure in question.

If you'd really like to inform yourself, here is a link to the fascinating article about Dr. Heath. I highly recommended it and thank you to ChickenonaMug for the Twitter thread.

So, the thing is that this man had been forgotten. His work forgotten to such an extent that the deep brain stimulation techniques he pioneered in the 1950s and 60s are now claimed to have been invented in 1987.

No one called him "Robert Galbraith Heath" btw. No one. He was first famous, then infamous, as Dr. Bob Heath. His middle name was not used.

And Dr. Heath was not an "anti gay figure" either, although attempts are being made to argue that he was. He worked in an era when homosexuality was still considered a mental illness. He was a doctor who treated patients with mental illnesses. He wrote a paper about using the stimulation of the pleasure area of the brain to "initiate heterosexual behaviour in a homosexual male". It was both more and less controversial than other gay conversion therapies of the day (less because it didn't involve shaming, guilt, pain or punishment and more because it involved experimental deep brain stimulation via electrodes implanted in the brain), but it wasn't a focus for his work. As evidenced by the fact that only 2 out of the 425 papers he wrote during his career focused on the subject. His former colleagues strenuously deny that he was homophobic and wanted to eradicate homosexuality - Dr. Heath was obsessed with the pleasure area of the brain and how to use it to influence behaviour, an interest which briefly intersected with the question of whether homosexuality is learned (and can therefore be unlearned) or not. Apparently at the request of the homosexual patient in question.

But none of that matters, really. The only thing that matters is that because this doctor's work was by the end extremely controversial, his whole work and the person were very purposefully swept under the rug. The journalist who wrote the article himself states the man had been completely forgotten until he published the piece in 2016. And he would know, because he had to work hard to research him.

CharlieParley · 16/09/2020 13:56

So JK Rowling could not have picked her pen name in reference to that doctor. Because she wouldn't have known about him.

JaneAustenWouldHateThis · 16/09/2020 14:36

I've just seen that ten minute itv clip.

Piers Morgan said that he "has a book coming out about all this stuff" which hopefully will be read by many and will throw lots and lots of lovely bright sunshine onto this insane topic.

The person in the bottom right corner didn't catch his name but the massive dr haddoc wannabe kept saying that JKR "for months" has been saying hurtful things about the trans community - well I do wish he'd been challenged on that; it is not true, but if left unchallenged some viewers could easily get the impression that it might be true. I think all these misogynists should be asked - please could you quote JKR saying something hurtful or disgusting (or whatever they allege).

Then the viewers would be able to decide for themselves that the author has in fact said NOTHING "controversial".

Purpledaisychain · 16/09/2020 15:27

@JaneAustenWouldHateThis

Do you think that being transgender is a walk in the park? Hmm

As I explained in a later post, JK Rowling has called out the transgender community in quite a few twitter posts. And I don't disagree with her in terms of keeping women's spaces private etc. But now, she has an albeit short passage where a murderer dresses up as a woman. I think it's this last part that feels like a bit of a dig. The way that it is being reported in the press isn't helping.

MillyMollyFarmer · 16/09/2020 15:30

JK Rowling has called out the transgender community in quite a few twitter posts.

See I don’t think she has. She’s called out the hate directed at women. She hasn’t actually specifically targeted the ‘transgender community’, which has a wide variety of people in it who think differently.

WeeBisom · 16/09/2020 15:42

I love how the trans activist community keeps telling on themselves. The murderer is a man who wears a woman’s coat. It is the trans activists who are jumping to the conclusion that this is a trans women. They are the ones who read “man in women’s clothing” as “trans women.” They are the ones making the transphobic assumption that any male in women’s clothing is automatically trans. It just goes to show they aren’t as secure in their beliefs as they say (which makes sense. This fear reaction does seem to stem from massive insecurity.)

KayakingOnDown · 16/09/2020 15:46

I see an independent book seller in Australia is no longer stocking JKR's books now because of her transphobia.

Story in the Independent.