I've just finished Troubled Blood and there is NO transphobia

[AviceCaro]

I've just finished it - it's very long and very very good - and definitely no transphobia! One brief mention of someone who might be the murderer might have worn a woman's coat to confuse his victims - it's one page out of 900! It's so not relevant to the plot.

It's such a good read, and really disappointing that it's getting so much negative attention.

The definition of transphobic is anything that doesn't completely capitulate to identity theory at all times so even the Equality Act 2010 is transphobic.

It should not matter that this ludicrous and completely debased word is used about anything or anyone as it's become a joke.

I'm happy to be transphobic, it's a sign of intellectual curiosity.

Do you know what, I feel so sorry for this woman. I read the original tweets that prompted this whole drama that she's transphobic. I struggled to see how they were speaking against the community. It was very specific to a situation she - and indeed I - have been in. It's not against trans people, but rather men who have wronged her, and the fear that it brings. It's understandable that abuse survivors wouldn't want to share a fitting room with a man - and changing to mixed genders means that would happen. Personally, I feel the same, because of what has happened to ME, NOT what any single trans person has done, but I won't allow myself to be in any state of undress around a man I do not know. So my choice is not to shout about it, but just not to use the dressing room if they're mixed gender. My problem, I sort it. Easy.

But the poor woman has been jumped on massively. I sometimes think certain people - or groups of people - are happier when they're being targeted. It seems so unreal that actually, people don't wish them harm, so they pick up on the tiniest thing and announce that this person or that person is 'transphobic'. It's bollocks quite frankly.

We're living in a world that has changed almost beyond recognition over the past few decades when it comes to labels, sexuality and the like. And on the whole I feel we have adapted well. But so long as groups look for persecution, they will find it.

I finished the book.

Zero transphobia. Those who claim it are lying.

There is a male serial killer who has more than one paraphilia.

That's it. The entire 'story' about transphobia has been fabricated.

So that’s it, it’s one word then that’s set off all the hate and death threats? Literally the word ‘woman’s’ is the triggering transphobic wrong speak? Because presumably the sentence ‘wearing a wig at the time and all padded out in a duffel coat’ wouldn’t have have figured on the speshul peeples radar. Sheesh, and to think, they walk among us.
(Eagerly awaits copy in post)

Not only are they lying - not a single one of them can quote anything JKR has written or said which is "transphobic".

Massive strawMEN!

Just finished it too.

The reason it is causing anger is it centres women, as previous posters have said. It talks about all the things women have been fighting, and fighting against, for centuries.

It makes a few men in the book look bad. So it must be burned.

I've read the book (finished it by torchlight last night in bed!)

The serial killer is described as wearing the wig and coat as a disguise in order to confuse/distract victims/witnesses when he abducts them. It's not even in relation to a paraphilia.

JK cannot do right in the mobs' eyes. If she had made no mention of cross dressing whatsoever, she would still have been accused of transphobia for leaving out a "trans character".

I have read it. There is zero transphobia or even trans characters. The daily Telegraph reviewer who said the moral of the story is don’t trust a man in a dress was being dishonest as men in dresses do not feature.

It is a very feminist book though and it looks at the ways men harm women and the life long impact being a victim of abuse has in your life. If you have ever been in that situation it is very relatable.

I do think that JKR came to her views on gender issues through researching the book as paraphilia is a theme. I did guess one of the plot points because this board has alerted me to those issues.

I assume the tantrums are about 'woman's coat' PLUS a a brief mention of a killer using a woman's knickers as part of a fetish. That is seriously it. Less than a para in a 900pg book!

The killer isn't trans, nor pretending to be. Nobody in the novel even thinks it. Trans issues or identities just don't come into it - not a plot or a subplot point.

The real anger is that JKR wrote a book that was unapologetic about female experience.

It's doing my head in that people get away with malicious lies about this book and JKR.

@Judashascomeintosomemoney

So that’s it, it’s one word then that’s set off all the hate and death threats? Literally the word ‘woman’s’ is the triggering transphobic wrong speak? Because presumably the sentence ‘wearing a wig at the time and all padded out in a duffel coat’ wouldn’t have have figured on the speshul peeples radar. Sheesh, and to think, they walk among us. (Eagerly awaits copy in post)

Looks like it! One word.

I've lost a lot of respect for some people i previously considered intelligent ranting and raging over a book - or even a short paragraph - they hadn't read, but taking a troll article (telegraph) and pink news as fact. Not only that but reaching to try and find other disproved reasons she might be sneaking transphobia into her books.

She's made a statement about what she thinks about the gender debate. Agree or disagree but at least quote her actual words. To suggest the inclusion of the word "woman's" in a fiction book is some coded message of her beliefs is bizarre.

Are authors no longer allowed to take fictional inspiration from actual cases? Should authors submit their plot and character outlines to the Witchfinder General department for approval?

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8744443/JK-Rowling-reveals-cross-dressing-villain-new-book-based-real-life-serial-killers.html

@TheFleegleHasLanded

Just finished it too.

The reason it is causing anger is it centres women, as previous posters have said. It talks about all the things women have been fighting, and fighting against, for centuries.

It makes a few men in the book look bad. So it must be burned.

See, this is interesting.

It was a male reviewer at The Telegraph who decided, on the basis of one line, that the entire moral of the story was about not trusting men in frocks. The whole thing represented by one throwaway comment about a man who was essentially, in disguise.

If the focus of the book is on women, and if, as Nick Cohen says, it's a feminist book, the Telegraph reviewer might have been made to feel rather uncomfortable. And then wilfully mischaracterised a book, which would inevitably bring abuse upon the author.

Nice.

Likewise, according to the state media video upthread, where they say that pink news have created negative articles about, or written about J. K. Rowling over 350 times.

Three. Hundred. And. Fifty.

The misogyny is so overwhelming, sometimes it's difficult to breathe.

And of course, yet again, the whole thing is backfiring.

People are talking everywhere about real life cross dressing serial killers. They are being informed, using evidence, that cross dressing is one the most prevalent paraphilias amongst sex offenders, etc.

And everyone is letting the public know that Stonewall include cross dressers, very publicly, under the term transgender.

My copy has just arrived, let’s hope it stays at the top of the best sellers for a long time.

@Datun

And of course, yet again, the whole thing is backfiring.

People are talking everywhere about real life cross dressing serial killers. They are being informed, using evidence, that cross dressing is one the most prevalent paraphilias amongst sex offenders, etc.

And everyone is letting the public know that Stonewall include cross dressers, very publicly, under the term transgender.

Datun

It's ironic, isn't it? Another epic own goal.

I hadn't realised that she had also talked about a man masturbating into women's underwear. I wonder why that hasn't been more widely targeted.

... the Telegraph reviewer might have been made to feel rather uncomfortable. And then wilfully mischaracterised a book..

Does anyone know if that little turd from the Telegraph has apologised?

I don’t know if he has apologised but he certainly wrote a long article yesterday about how he couldn’t possibly have foreseen the shitstorm and it really wasn’t his fault if you think about it.

@JaneAustenWouldHateThis

... the Telegraph reviewer might have been made to feel rather uncomfortable. And then wilfully mischaracterised a book..

Does anyone know if that little turd from the Telegraph has apologised?

He's written an article in the Telegraph, explaining, apparently. This is the headline:

"I dared to reveal a JK Rowling plot detail – then all hell broke loose"

www.google.com/amp/s/www.telegraph.co.uk/books/news/dared-reveal-jk-rowling-plot-detail-broke-loose/amp/

He is saying that it is part of that character's make up (as it were), and therefore a legitimate comment to make.

For someone who prides himself on what he calls making the implicit, explicit, you would've thought he would be able to predict the backlash.

He certainly knew, according to the article, all about the furore surrounding J. K. Rowling.

I can’t read the article but he knows what he was doing. If you have read the whole book to the end and know who the murderer is then you would see how ridiculous what he has said is.

The book does not feature a man in a dress.

Still a little turd then.

He has also implied on Twitter that murder victims are responsible for their own deaths. Now that is even more offensive than even the made up version of what people think JKR said.

mobile.twitter.com/JakeKerridge/status/1306147986741882880

Just finished it too and it's staggeringly good. 927 pages and I never wanted it to end.

People will read it (in their millions) and be stunned that some men tried to claim the back is about transwomen.

It's all about women. And how different men perceive women, and how that affects us. It covers various ways women have found to attempt to survive in a male-dominated world.

Of course if it was written by a man it would be taken far more seriously, but it's epic in the way it covers so many contemporary issues. Although he doesn't actual use the phrase 'Nordic Model' Strike's comments on prostitution and trafficking are incredibly insightful.

So glad that JKR has started writing the next one. I might apply for a job as reviewer at the Telegraph so I can get hold of an early copy. I'm thinking that a vacancy might become available there soon.

Yep! He basically doubled down and saidi. The book jkr was telling women
Not to trust men in dresses. Idiot!!

It also features some horrendous crimes committed by health care professionals (it is set in a doctors surgery) but he did not claim that the moral of the story is don’t trust the NHS.