The Cambridge Student newspaper published pro-Rowling article, removes it after backlash

[itsor]

www.tcs.cam.ac.uk/j-k-rowling-and-the-woke-misogyny/

www.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=10158404255870225&id=37143485224&anchor_composer=false - not yet gone but says it's being removed, read it at the first link if you feel so inclined

So this the future of journalism is it? What total contemptable little fascists they are.

It's been removed from the first link. Anyone save a copy?

@TweeBree I saved it to my Notes app so it's a copy and paste job I'm afraid but should be fairly readable:

Features
Comment
Culture
Lifestyle
Interviews
Arts
Telly
News & Investigation
Search

Comment
J.K. Rowling and the Woke Misogyny
Samuel Rubinstein 29 October 2020
Image Credits: Wikimedia Commons
My claim to fame, inasmuch as I have one, is that I am a moderator of a Facebook group with over 30,000 members. ‘I’m begging you, please read another book’ has quite a simple premise: just tag the group whenever you see an adult Harry Potter fan in the wild doing something that makes you cringe.

Not the young and innocent type of Harry Potter fan, of course – and if you post a screenshot of something completely innocuous, you should prepare yourself for a resounding chorus of ‘Let people enjoy things’. No, we spare our scorn and derision only for the most egregious sinners.

The objects of mockery are those poor souls who never quite escaped the depths of their Tumblr fandom, those who unhealthily construct their entire personalities around this crusty childhood obsession.

The objects of mockery are those poor souls who never quite escaped the depths of their Tumblr fandom, those who unhealthily construct their entire personalities around this crusty childhood obsession. You know the type; you’ve seen them before. Adults who ‘ship’ Hermione Granger and Draco Malfoy; write erotic fan-fiction involving Severus Snape, Peeves the poltergeist, and Molly Weasley; arrange the seating plans at their wedding on the basis of which house they think their friends would belong to; annually ‘mourn’ the deaths of Remus Lupin and Nymphadora Tonks (‘poor orphan Teddy!’); and devote their whole lives to the fictional world of J.K. Rowling’s imagination (I am very sorry to report that all of these examples are real). It is for these individuals that the group’s advice to ‘read another book’, to find another hobby, rings loudest.

To sight such a specimen has become a modestly popular online sport, which is why the group is about the same size as Caerphilly or Chichester. To be one of the group’s few moderators is a widely coveted privilege. As moderator I have power over who may and who may not enter the group; I have power over what gets posted; and every time someone uses an offensive word, Mark Zuckerberg’s algorithms ensure that I am notified immediately, so that I may deliberate on whether to show clemency to the offender, or exile them forever.

How did I ascend to such lofty heights? Like many dark and decrepit corners of social media, the group once had a severe antisemitism problem. I am not entirely sure how that problem began: somehow, no matter what was originally posted, the comment section would descend into a ‘discussion’ of Israel and Palestine, and somehow this ‘discussion’ would inevitably become overtly and unambiguously antisemitic.

The group’s founders unsurprisingly did not expect this problem to arise. The point, after all, was not to discuss Israel and Palestine, or to perpetuate antisemitic tropes and canards, but instead to expose the dangers of excessive Harry Potter fanaticism. So they sent out a call for a Jewish moderator to help address the issue. Curious about the inner workings of Facebook tag groups, eager to peek behind the curtain, I applied about two years ago and was accepted. I now spend a tragic portion of my life policing the online behaviour of strangers.

I like to think that I’ve done a fairly good job. In my jurisdiction of tackling antisemitism, the group has thankfully quietened down somewhat. But the fact that antisemitism was allowed to flourish in the group in the first place provided a fascinating insight into the pervasive nastiness of online communities. Jews are fortunately no longer the object of this nastiness, but the nastiness itself has not gone away, as the nasty members of the group have discovered a new target of hate, abuse, and bullying: women.

This misogyny, as befits a group dedicated to Harry Potter bashing, is largely directed towards one woman: J.K. Rowling. Even before her name denoted ‘trans-exclusionary radical feminism’, she was deemed by the mob to be ‘problematic’. To place Cho Chang in Ravenclaw is apparently to stereotype all Asians as clever: Kingsley Shacklebolt is a racist caricature; Hermione, her campaign to end the indentured servitude of house elves notwithstanding, typifies ‘white feminism’. Their own problems with antisemitism did not prevent them from accusing Rowling of being antisemitic herself (the goblins are Jews, apparently): she and her writing reflect every prejudice under the sun.

But the anger climaxed last month, when it was reported that her latest novel, Troubled Blood, was, in the words of a Pink News headline, ‘about a murderous cis-man who dresses as a woman to kill his victims’. It did not matter that the novel was about nothing of the sort (the feature described takes up only one of the book’s 927 pages), or that Pink News had come to this judgement on the basis of a trolling, woke-baiting review of the book in The Telegraph. The damage was done, and she became the object of intense abuse.

In ‘I’m begging you, please read another book’ I have seen numerous rape threats and death threats. Some are tedious and thoroughly unimaginative (‘kill the bitch’); some are at least a bit more creative (‘make her grave a gender-neutral bathroom’). Nor is this discourse confined to the online sphere. The former Everton goalkeeper, Neville Southall, described her ‘the wicked witch’, and earlier this year Lloyd Russell-Moyle, the Labour MP, was compelled to apologise after he accused Rowling of ‘using her own sexual assault as justification’ for her stance.

My purpose here is not to discuss J.K. Rowling’s views on biological sex and trans rights. Only a masochist would voluntarily wade into something so dangerous. But whatever you think about her position on this matter – even if you think it deserves to be utterly excoriated – there can be no doubt that much of the discourse surrounding it is rooted in deep-seated misogyny

Far from seeing themselves as misogynists, they think of themselves as noble crusaders, fighting the good fight on the left.

Yet her attackers pride themselves on their commitment to social justice. Far from seeing themselves as misogynists, they think of themselves as noble crusaders, fighting the good fight on the left. Just as the antisemites masked their prejudices behind the respectable veneer of a sincere concern for Palestinian liberty, so too do the woke misogynists claim that their attacks on Rowling are justified in the name of social justice. They might deceive themselves, but they shouldn’t deceive us.

RELATED
Comment Features
Priests, bigots and ignorance: the sinister world of conspiracy theories in the era of COVID-19
READ
Comment Features
Think Of Us: A British-Jew’s Plea Before the General Election
READ
Sign up to our Newsletter
Email...

NEWS & INVESTIGATION FEATURES COMMENT CULTURE LIFESTYLE INTERVIEWS ARTS TELLY LETTERS TO THE EDITOR ABOUT TEAM ADVERTISE
Privacy Policy Website Help © The Cambridge Student 2020

Once again, I feel like I'm going insane. So many friends of mine talking about how horrible and transphobic this article was and how the writer should face serious consequences for it and I just don't see it at all.

"Some are tedious and thoroughly unimaginative (‘kill the bitch’); some are at least a bit more creative (‘make her grave a gender-neutral bathroom’)"
What, do they think calling out these kinds of comments is worse than making the actual comments? I just don't get it

That's actually a really good piece of writing!

Someone saved the original at archive.is/ZRIxD

A shame if it’s pulled. A great piece of writing.

Beyond strange. He's calling out misogynistic abuse of a woman; he doesn't even say he agrees with her stance. So these "people who were offended" were offended by... what? The idea that it's not very nice to make death and rape threats?

Beyond strange. He's calling out misogynistic abuse of a woman; he doesn't even say he agrees with her stance. So these "people who were offended" were offended by... what? The idea that it's not very nice to make death and rape threats?

Bizarre indeed. These are some of the most privileged kids in the country, and supposedly an intellectual elite. We already know they have no shame in calling for a porter, Kevin Price, to lose his job because he would not say TWAW. Now it looks as if they’re not that strong on logic or independent thinking either.

If these are the bright stars of our future, we’re doomed.

Agree Mini it's an article about misogyny. It's pointing out that they were critical of JKR before her essay and that claims of 'transphobia' became another stick to beat her with.

If these are the bright stars of our future, we’re doomed.

It will be a small vocal subset. I don't think the majority of Cambridge students know anything at all about this story - too busy studying etc.

Great article! Thanks for sharing.

I enjoyed the article, a rather fascinating insight into weird Facebook groups and the even weirder Harry Potter adults.

It will be a small vocal subset. I don't think the majority of Cambridge students know anything at all about this story - too busy studying etc.

And yet the newspaper pulled it at the first complaint. Organisations, corporations, student newspapers and universities really need to work on their assertiveness and discover the power of the word NO.

I agree, that is a really good article.

The idea that a Jew with experience of policing anti-Semitism isn't allowed to criticise rape and death threats us just bizarre. I wonder whether the complainants actually read past the title.

Organisations, corporations, student newspapers and universities really need to work on their assertiveness and discover the power of the word NO.

They do. Part of that is actually to treat complaints seriously - to assess them against robust guidelines. Pulling a piece just because someone complains is lazy at best. They probably won't have much balancing feedback from people who appreciated the piece (whether they agreed with it all or not) - most readers don't comment if they find a piece acceptable; many would read and then never revisit so wouldn't even realise that it has been pulled.

The fact it's been pulled demonstrates something awful - that JKR (&by extension any woman labelled a t**f) is fair game for the most vile & violent words. That the position she has taken - even though it is the majority position according to polling - puts her beyond the pale, and actually beyond the normal protection against abuse.

A recent employment discrimination judge for someone who was sacked for stating similar things but from a Christian pov said that if the opinions were not protected beliefs, then this would amount to an open season on such people. Jkr's treatment is demonstrating this. Even if you don't say you agree with her, you are not even permitted to defend her against abuse. Your words of defence will be removed.

I wonder what the writer will do. I hope there won't be a grovelling apology and promise to do better.

It's interesting that universities are lagging behind changes in the current (albeit slight) slowing of the identity politics juggernaut at the moment. Another way in which they're making themselves increasingly irrelevant/anti-intellectual.

I'll try that post again:

It's interesting that universities are lagging behind in the slowing/turning (albeit slight) of the identity politics juggernaut at the moment. Another way in which they're making themselves increasingly irrelevant/anti-intellectual.

It's an excellent piece of writing.

Is Samuel Rubinstein the Sam Rubinstein on here?

If these are the bright stars of our future, we’re doomed

I think Samuel/ Sam Rubinstein better fits that category so hopefully we aren't.

So these "people who were offended" were offended by... what? The idea that it's not very nice to make death and rape threats?

That's what the open letter against people in the arts who signed the JK Rowling letter calling out misogyny were offended by, and it's what Mslexia magazine sacked author Amanda Craig for. The idea that it's not very nice to make rape and death threats.

So hardly surprising, if depressing.

Can we support him? Is he on Twitter?

I would suggest contacting the Proctors as they are responsible for ensuring free speech in the university - & also ensuring discipline is maintained, particularly amongst undergraduates: demanding the author be punished for writing this (particularly if they’ve made any contact with him directly) is a disciplinary matter.

You can also contact TCS ([email protected]) to show your support.

Thank you!

since you asked, I found him on Twitter: twitter.com/si_rubinstein/with_replies