Review of HP reunion in The Guardian…they just can’t help themselves

[OhDear2200]

www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2022/jan/01/harry-potter-20th-anniversary-return-to-hogwarts-review-perilously-close-to-emetic

I guess they at least note her absence. But can’t help say ‘widely considered as transphobic’. Just why? Why say anything.

It just all sounds rather ridiculous. Once upon a time they said they were friends with her, so they need to support her forever no matter what? They played in films that she created, so they need to support her forever no matter what, even if the things she has said goes against their own morals? They should just forget all their own morals, standards and opinions because the woman who created HP deserves support no matter what she says? Seems quite hypocritical to me.

No that’s not it. They should actually pay attention to what she’s saying, and if they disagree explain why, not blindly condemn her with slogans and platitudes catering to the baying mob. Not a single one of them has indicated why they think she’s wrong, just jumped on the bandwagon saying she is wrong without qualification for the sake of their own careers.

[quote DoYouSeaWhatISea]I do enjoy Lucy Mangans writing (and miss her Tory boy commentary), but I’m not convinced if she actually would be team JKR. I’d love it if she was, maybe I’m taking this article the wrong way.

www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2014/aug/09/lucy-mangan-terf-war[/quote]
I just had a skim read of that... It was seven years ago, and I suspect (from the Twitter birthday thread posted upthread with JKR and Julie Bindel) that her thinking has evolved since then. Even that article seems more "what is all this silly fuss about, can't we all get along?" than "TWAW, terfs must die".

To give an example, after Rowling’s tweet about Wimund, Radcliffe responded with “TWAW”. The objection, had he actually been paying attention, should have been “TMAM, and don’t like to be described as women, so I can see how those transmen might need to be included in a description about menstruation”.

But he didn’t. He said “TWAW”.

Vacuous, meaningless, contributing to the hate around her opinion, all so he can save his own skin in Twitter world.

Fuck him.

@NotBadConsidering I understand what you mean, but why do they owe anyone an explanation? There have been more "celebs" than I can count over the years who have "condemned" someone else and no in depth explanation has been given, and that's been fine. The first that comes to mind is people saying they weren't voting for Trump. We already know why they disagree with JKR, we just don't have a very long and in depth explanation, which I don't think anyone in the public is owed. For all we know, perhaps some of the cast members have spoken extensively to JKR about this in private, we have no idea, we can all only base our own opinions off of what is in the spotlight, which is controlled by them all including by JKR.

@NotBadConsidering I posted before your next post popped up. I get your anger at that, but we just really can't dictate whether his response/tweet was good enough as we are only going by our own standards. Maybe he thought that was absolutely good enough to get his stance across without entering into a debate and that's his incentive.

@NotBadConsidering Don't get me wrong, I fully respect your opinion and you're completely entitled to it. I just don't agree that they "owe" JKR anything more than the terms of their contract (if they had one), certainly not as they no longer appear to have one. She's someone they worked with and much as I wouldn't expect JKR to put her morals aside, I don't expect them to either and find it silly when people say the actors should give all the money back/never do anything more related to HP just because they don't agree with JKR about something that has nothing to do with the job they once did.

Well, it’s different because Trump is campaigning for votes and to run a country. But everyone who disagrees with her owes us an explanation, because like you say it’s condemnation. I don’t think anyone should be condemned as a bigot without explanation, and that includes Trump. The fact we have blind condemnation without explanation is why people like Trump get elected in the first place, because there’s only a side to choose, not a position to consider.

I think the public is owed an explanation from them because they’re asking people to go along with them, accept them for the position they’ve taken, and accept they’re right and she is wrong. Why? The only people who are happy they haven’t explained themselves are those who are happy to condemn her without having read what she said, because it’s clear information and discussion won’t allow the outcome they want: condemnation of JKR.

Even if they’ve had private conversations with her, they could still explain their objections. They could say nothing. Instead they have blindly condemned. They have seen what this means - the death and rape threats - and have done nothing to back up their position. To that end, they’re no different to those vile people; willing to condemn a woman for her opinion just “because”.

@NotBadConsidering I get what you're saying and I agree that no one should be deemed something blindly, of course. However even if an explanation was given by one of the cast members, or anyone who disagrees with JKR, it still wouldn't be good enough. I have seen it on mumsnet as well as twitter and other forums, someone does give a very insightful explanation of their opinion and it is still deemed "not good enough" by the majority of JKR supporters. That's kind of my point - we will all base our opinion of the explanation off our own standards and people will likely always "fail" at that if you disagree with their opinion in the first place (general you, not specifically you).

[quote Blackbird1234]@NotBadConsidering Don't get me wrong, I fully respect your opinion and you're completely entitled to it. I just don't agree that they "owe" JKR anything more than the terms of their contract (if they had one), certainly not as they no longer appear to have one. She's someone they worked with and much as I wouldn't expect JKR to put her morals aside, I don't expect them to either and find it silly when people say the actors should give all the money back/never do anything more related to HP just because they don't agree with JKR about something that has nothing to do with the job they once did.[/quote]
But it’s not a job they once did, it’s a job they’re still doing! With this special! They’re benefiting from that, likely financially and with exposure. If they had morals they would have refused to appear. By doing so they’re sending out the message that it’s their thing more than hers and she is the one who shouldn’t be associated with HP anymore.

They may not owe her anything contractually but it is not about what they owe her. Their actions were not even a disagreement with her stance, their actions were slander. They joined the mob presenting her as something she is not.

@NotBadConsidering I don't agree that JKR shouldn't be associated with HP anymore, it's her life work I don't believe that anyone should try and take that away from her. But it is also their own life's work. I admit to not know how involved JKR was with the entire HP movie franchise, and whilst I agree that it remains hers, it is also "theirs" and believe they have a right to continue being associated with it, regardless on their thoughts of the author.

@Lovelyricepudding I've seen many people on here and in other places on the internet essentially saying that they owe her, that they should give back all the money made, remove HP from their CVs and never speak about it again if they don't agree with her - that's what I disagree with. I also can't say whether or not their actions were slander, as maybe they didn't see it that way, I have no clue as I haven't spoken to them. I also haven't seen anything from them purposefully slandering her or joining a "mob", but perhaps I've missed something?

[quote Blackbird1234]@NotBadConsidering I get what you're saying and I agree that no one should be deemed something blindly, of course. However even if an explanation was given by one of the cast members, or anyone who disagrees with JKR, it still wouldn't be good enough. I have seen it on mumsnet as well as twitter and other forums, someone does give a very insightful explanation of their opinion and it is still deemed "not good enough" by the majority of JKR supporters. That's kind of my point - we will all base our opinion of the explanation off our own standards and people will likely always "fail" at that if you disagree with their opinion in the first place (general you, not specifically you).[/quote]
You don’t need to @ me, I’m on the thread.

You may be right that their opinion would be deemed good enough anyway, but at least it would be dismissed based on the argument put forward, not the empty platitude they have thrown out.

I haven’t seen a single person quote her words and explain how what she’s is transphobic anywhere at all, let alone on Mumsnet so I don’t think you’re telling the truth there. If you have an example I’d love to see it. It’s always

“she’s transphobic”

“Why?”

“Read what she wrote”

“I did. Why”

“Because”

So the idea that JKR supporters are just as bad at blind condemnation of those who oppose her as those who hate her are at condemning her supporters is just false.

@NotBadConsidering I'm on my phone so don't know how to quote, so I @ you so that others/you don't assume I'm responding to someone else, but would you like me to stop? No clue if it means you get an email or not, so if so, sorry.

And I have seen quite a few mostly fully formed arguments against JKR that includes things that people have deemed transphobic, I'm not sure why I would lie about that? It's been over the past few months in threads that arent only on the Feminism board, so whilst I can't quote them now as I don't have them to hand, I will do if I come across some this week. I didnt say that JKR supporters are "just as bad" - some are, same as some of the people who don't support JKR have taken things too far, there are "idiots" in both camps.

Yes stop the @

And I have seen quite a few mostly fully formed arguments against JKR that includes things that people have deemed transphobic, I'm not sure why I would lie about that?

But that is not the same as

someone does give a very insightful explanation of their opinion

People can fully form arguments about why she is transphobic quite easily because people are determined to see her as transphobic, but I haven’t seen a single one that is insightful, contains truths, quotes her words etc. I have seen paragraph after paragraph of people’s biased inferences and own formulations. That is not insightful. Usually it’s just lies.

These actors haven’t even done that. Just parroted slogans for Twitter likes.

If you can find an insightful explanation that quotes her directly, rather than a fully formed propaganda piece that ignores her actually words, I’m all ears.

I didnt say that JKR supporters are "just as bad" - some are, same as some of the people who don't support JKR have taken things too far, there are "idiots" in both camps.

You've seen people who support JKR's pro woman views sending rape and death threats to those who disagree? I find that very hard to believe.

The only argument I have seen that JKR is transphobic is a link to a YouTube video by someone called Contrapoint. The regular posters on this board have asked again and again for any poster who states as fact 'JKR is transphobic' to explain, by quoting someone she has said, what is transphobic. Not once have we had an answer.

I shall do, sorry for filling up your inbox!

What I have seen is insightful and truthful posts quoting her words that show transphobia, however, like you say and as my point is, people seem to have different opinions on what is transphobic and what isn't, what is contributing to transphobia and what isn't etc etc which is why in my opinion, a JKR supporter would still potentially turn their nose up at a very insightful explanation, as it doesn't match with their beliefs and what they deem to be transphobic.

Blackbird in what way do YOU think she is transonic. Please use primary evidence to back this up.

*transphobic

Response to WaitWhat - Yes, I have seen that. Not on Mumsnet, but I've seen that on twitter, Facebook, reddit, various other forums, tiktok etc.. like I said, there seem to be "extremists" in both camps who give the camps a bad name.

The more level headed posts I've seen have highlighted that whilst JKR may not have tweeted out/said in an article (etc) a blatantly transphobic sentence, there have been instances where what she HAS said had contributed to transphobic "agendas", or has had a transphobic undertone without actually coming out and saying it blatantly.

To LovelyRicePudding - I haven't said that I do find JKR transphobic?

Are, now we are coming to it. You think supporting women's right is transphobic and must not be allowed? That women must STFU?

Response to WaitWhat - Yes, I have seen that. Not on Mumsnet, but I've seen that on twitter, Facebook, reddit, various other forums, tiktok etc.. like I said, there seem to be "extremists" in both camps who give the camps a bad name.

I'm sorry but that's just nonsense.

What I have seen is insightful and truthful posts quoting her words that show transphobia

This isn’t true, because none of her words show transphobia. It’s not possible you’ve seen any posts like this, let alone insightful ones.

people seem to have different opinions on what is transphobic and what isn't, what is contributing to transphobia and what isn't etc etc

And people have asked posters to explain why they think it’s transphobic etc, and we have been given nothing. We don’t turn our noses up at insightful explanations, because we have never been given any explanation, let alone one that could subjectively or objectively be called insightful.

Until we get any explanation as to why she is transphobic or why what she’s said is transphobic, your assertion that her supporters will turn their noses up at such insightful opinions because they’re “just as bad” is moot.