The Witch Trials of JK Rowling

[CrossPurposes]

An in-depth intervietw with JK Rowling by Megan Phelps-Roper coming next week: twitter.com/meganphelps/status/1625465141046247425?s=20

Nothing strictly to do with JKR, but on the topic of witchcraft. I saw a poster advertising a 'Lightworkers' group ( reiki and so on, I guess? ). They specifically mentioned that 'witchcraft' and 'magic' is not allowed. That tickled me for some reason. It's either real, in which case great, you can use your magic witch powers for good. Or it's not real, in which case it's essentially a harmless if eccentric hobby. I don't care which (witch) and I truly mean no offence to people who have those beliefs. I just thought it was funny that people who believe in some kind of magic are telling other people that they are magicking wrong.

What a wonderful post. I think that if the outcome of the podcast is people turning a mirror on themselves and their actions, it has succeeded for both ‘sides’. It’s important we all remind ourselves constantly that we might be wrong. Probably are not but might be and that’s ok.

I thought this was just so smart and well played by JKR. She had to pick the right time, the right medium and the right journalist to get all this out here on the record, in full and in context. It was a fantastic series.

How anyone can listen to her speak, so thoughtful and considered, and equate it with hate is just beyond me now and I can't respect anyone who does so.

I did enjoy how she respectfully responded to points made by Contrapoints but ultimately had to laugh at the absurdity - can't remember what it was exactly but will have to listen back.

Did anyone see this from the Daily Beast?
"'The Witch Trials of J.K. Rowling' is too wedded to its subject’s perspective to meaningfully explore the dissonance between what Rowling says and what the words she’s using actually mean," writes Laura Bradley.
I genuinely don't understand how someone can write something like that. That's the dissonance I don't understand: the claim that what someone means is completely different to what they actually said.
And then being cross because the interviewer asks questions on what was actually said, instead of twisting her words and attacking her for a position she has repeatedly said she doesn't hold.
It's such extreme bad faith.

JK came across as sensitive, respectful, thoughtful and incredibly well-informed. It was so good to hear her voice. It’s very sad that she’s been so grotesquely misunderstood, and disappointing that the mainstream media has enabled all the pitchfork-waving against her. Hopefully this excellent podcast will help to make a difference.

I haven't listened to this yet but I want to listen to the whole series.

But I am pleased to read that MPR asked JKR whether she may enjoy the inter mob throwing stones aspect. (Or however she phrased it)

I try to keep myself in check with this as I recognise a propensity in myself to enjoy 'proving' I'm right and without this check I think there can become a gleeful righteousness in me and any group which has a 'cause' they believe in.

It's actually very hard to avoid this as it's a powerful emotion, and to some degree necessary to provoke action but it needs to be kept in check.

I'll be interested to hear how JKR responds as I think she is someone who treads this line very skillfully.

This is why I think it had to be a podcast or audio project, and had to be presented by someone neutral who could provide relevant context, and if people are missing that and going on to review it as some kind of vanity project that as you say is really bad faith.

A written feature would not be able to adequately capture the nuance and passion of JKR's arguments. The journo would be unable to keep their own biases out of it or be tarred as a fellow 'terf' who would give her an easy ride. So to be able to listen and genuinely capture her in her own words was vitally important. It's clear JKR could see this. Not something to be rushed out quickly for good PR or meet a deadline, but something that had merit, something important to say about wider society and was ready when the time was right.

That some people can't get over even the title just shows how hard of thinking they are.

No-one who isn't a raging TRA could listen to JKR and her voice on this podcast, and not instantly perceive her sincerity and the veracity of what she says.

You'd have to think that the woman who writes numerous children's books about the nuance of human nature, has given millions upon millions of pounds to charity and has her own children's charities, is actually the most Machiavellian monster in the world.

The only recourse they have, and it's patently a non-starter, is that she's either misguided, or every single thing she's ever said or written isn't what she really thinks.

Finally got to the end and thought I'd reproduce Megan Phelps-Roper's key questions for figuring out "if you're wrong":

1. Are you capable of entertaining real doubt about your beliefs or are you operating from a position of certainty?

1. Can you articulate the evidence that you would need to see in order to change your position or is your perspective unfalsifiable?
2. Can you articulate your opponent's perspective in a way they would recognise or are you strong-manning?
3. Are you attacking ideas or are you attacking the people who hold them?
4. Are you willing to cut off close relationships with people who disagree with you, particularly over relatively small points of contention?
5. Are you willing to use extraordinary means against people who disagree with you (forcing people out of their jobs or homes, violence or threats of violence, celebrating misfortune and tragedy)?

Deep and thoughtful series with a beautiful and thought provoking ending.

Rowling is convinced of her own righteousness and constantly presents herself as ‘reasonable’ but she fundamentally amplifies the dangers of allowing trans women to have basic ordinary rights and associates allowing trans women into female spaces with ‘opening the door to rapists’ and if she really cared, as she says she does, about actual trans women, she would make an effort to nuance her arguments, celebrate and support actual trans women, carefully distinguish her arguments from those of pure bigots, and dial down her rhetoric about ‘this movement’ being utterly evil… She really has contributed to a horrible toxic atmosphere of fear and prejudice against a vulnerable minority.
This is a critical analysis of the podcast and I would urge people to read it…
https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/2023/03/06/witch-trials-jk-rowling-podcast-hesse-column/

What basic ordinary rights do trans people not have?

If that’s a copy and pasted extract it sounds like horseshit

I recommend you watch a video called ‘What is a Woman, Wrong Answers Only’ on Odysee. It’s a short documentary made from found footage clips

I disagree. Trans people should have the rights as everyone else to live and work without intimidation. There rights are equal to women's rights as they should be. What they don't have a right to is to trump women's rights and invade our spaces and our activities for their own personal affirmation

Too late McSweeney, the rapists and abusers have ALREADY been let in.

Now it is transwomen’s turn to distance themselves from violent predators and campaign for 3. spaces.

Who are the transwomens allies?
Violent mobs, pushing surgery and dangerous drugs onto kids, harassing women who want to exercise their right to free speech, threatening and assaulting women and men, yelling crazy insults they don’t even know what means at people + online.
In short; their allies are complete nutters which I am expecting the Trans community to distance themselves from any minute now.

It is really not a good look to compel speech and to refuse debate with those who have a different point of view.
Which is the point of this podcast; the importance of keeping a good faith dialog going.

Women’s Rights only exist as a separate category to general Human Rights because women have female bodies.

And here’s a tweet that shows JK Rowling celebrating an actual real life TW.

The author of the review has not done their research.

Did you actually listen to all seven episodes of the Witch Trials podcast?

Seems unlikely!

Yes, it would be good if @McSweeney could provide some direct evidence of JKR doing the things that the review they posted claims - and based on their own listening to what JKR has said, not offering cut-and-pasted critiques from other people who may not have actually listened to her in good faith themselves, if at all.

Literally just watching the first Harry Potter film, where Hermione finds herself in the girls bathroom with a giant troll welding a truncheon. Luckily Harry and Ron are there to protect her.

Clear transphobia!

she fundamentally amplifies the dangers of allowing trans women to have basic ordinary rights

I see this comment often, but never an example.

Yes, I read the article ("so you don't have to") and it's the normal mishmash of unsupported assertions and impassioned impressions.

Surely ‘basic ordinary rights’ would be using the single sex facility designated for your sex?

Anything else would be ‘additional, extraordinary rights’?

You’ve failed to grasp a really simple distinction. Rowling isn’t saying that trans people are rapists, she is saying that rapists will take the opportunity to identify as trans if they can. I genuinely find it astonishing that people can read that as an attack on trans people when it’s clearly an attack on rapists. How difficult can it be, ffs?

All penis-havers are potential rapists, regardless of gender identity or gender expression.

Most penis-people are perfectly well behaved but none of them belong in a single sex facility designated for female people 🤷‍♀️

Some great responses below the line of the Washington Post review that was cited by McSweeney.