This thread is specifically for people who think JK Rowling is awful so..

[CurlewKate]

If you don't think she is please don’t post. Please can you tell me specifically what she has said or done that is so bad. I promise that I will listen and not argue. If you could include links that would be great. If your inclination is to assume that I’m posting in bad faith and any reasonably well informed person must be stupid or bigoted not to know, then please just let the thread die.

And this is a support service she runs for women and girls who have experienced sexual assault. She funds this out of her own money.

https://beirasplace.org.uk/

I don’t think she comes across like this at all.

She uses the fact that she’s insanely rich to enable to her speak the truth say things that others can’t because she’s immune from being cancelled or sacked!

Ah yes, Val McDermid, Nicola Sturgeon's bestest buddy who can't bring herself to stand up for other lesbians, if these lesbians don't believe in genderwoo, that Val?

Exactly. Just because somebody doesn't agree with you there is no need to act superior. J K Rowling is very divisive. She has managed to fall out with the main actors the Harry Potter films. I've got got friends whose views I don't agree with and they don't agree with mine.

Everyone is rightly defending JKR against blatant misinformation - but it’s derailing the OP’s original question which I’m also interested in hearing the answer to.

So far, we’ve got people don’t like her as she doesn’t come across as down to earth (fair enough I supposed) and that she doesn’t shout enough about the causes she gives millions of pounds to (weird criticism as they’re not unheard of causes so don’t really need attention drawing to them), and instead she uses her privileged position to talk about things a lot of us are scared to speak publicly on, a topic which is intrinsically linked with the safety of women and children, a cause that JKR feels passionately about and financially supports in many different ways - including using a voice on social media, but this is too divisive a topic and she should only talk about things that we all agree is bad (and infringing women’s rights is a good thing for some people so she shouldn’t opine on it).

Any other reason why we should boycott her as the devil incarnate?

My only problem with JK Rowling is that she hasn't defended Graham Linehan, until she came along he was the biggest celebrity in this fight and the TRAs took his career, wife and family away from him.

I think she should show him the respect he deserves.

And did you think maybe that it is arrogant of others to tell people what issues they should be focusing their attention on?

Just because you and some other people believe that people’s attentions should be focused on issues you believe are the most important, doesn’t give the right to shame others for not putting their focus there, or from not just putting their focus on the political aims that you value more.

You do you. And if you don’t believe the government is spending the right amount of effort on some issues, I really do encourage you to write to ministers and MPs. And make sure you vote for every election you are eligible for and vote according to your political aims in the future, although I would hope you already do these things.

Could you at least address this, Cat, even if you don't come back to post, but for your own sake look into the VAST amounts of money she has given away to charities, including Lumos which she FOUNDED, and was specifically set up to help disadvantaged children?

It's alarming to see someone make such a sweeping WRONG statement without even having checked the facts. For your own sake I'd think you'd want to know, so you don't make such an idiot of yourself again?

Rowling tweeted support for Maya Forstater, the expression of whose views constitute harassment and victimisation of transwomen and discrimination against them.

Rowling spoke out against a Devex article for using the phrase "people who menstruate" instead of "women". She stated that denying the reality of biological sex erases the experiences of women worldwide and eliminates the possibility of same-sex attraction. Harassment etc, as above.

Rowling published an essay on her personal website in 2020 in which she revealed that she was a survivor of domestic abuse and sexual assault, and stated that "When you throw open the doors of bathrooms and changing rooms to any man who believes or feels he's a woman...then you open the door to any and all men who wish to come inside". This conflates TW with male predators.

Rowling argues that adults are promoting an ideology that is harmful to children, and claims the term cisgender is "ideological language signifying belief in the unfalsifiable concept of gender identity." Thus denying the existence of trans people and fulminating against healthcare for them.

She is a hypocrite who claims that her beliefs arise out of a sincere concern for transgender people, and in particular, young transgender men.

Rowling opposes legislation to advance gender self-recognition and enable transition without a medical diagnosis.

She also voiced opposition to the Scottish Gender Recognition Reform Bill, aimed at allowing transgender people to change their legal gender more easily and subsequently she donated £70,000 to the legal challenge brought by For Women Scotland against the Scottish Ministers in the UK Supreme Court, which, on 16 April 2025, ruled that the legal definition of a woman in the UK Equality Act 2010 is based on biological sex.

In response to Edinburgh's rape crisis centre being run by a trans woman, Rowling established a sexual assault crisis centre, Beira's Place in December 2022 that excludes trans women.

In response to a fan praising this decision, Rowling tweeted "Merry Terfmas".

Rowling has also expressed her opposition to the Hate Crime and Public Order (Scotland) Act 2021, and when this went into effect in April 2024, she deliberately misgendered several transgender women to challenge the new law.

TLDR

She doesn't believe that humans can change sex.

@ThatCyanSheep she has given about £200,000,000 to different charities over the years. You may not like what she says, but you can’t deny her philanthropy.

Rowling published an essay on her personal website in 2020 in which she revealed that she was a survivor of domestic abuse and sexual assault, and stated that "When you throw open the doors of bathrooms and changing rooms to any man who believes or feels he's a woman...then you open the door to any and all men who wish to come inside". This conflates TW with male predators.

I don't agree with the rest either, but this is a massive logic fail.

She's saying that if you let some men in, you let all men in. She's explicitly not conflating men with a feminine gender identity with predatory men, hence mentioning them separately.

I think her constant posting on SM now comes across as a deep hatred of ALL trans people. There is no longer any light or shade. Lots
of her posts (and posts on here) feel
unnecessarily personal and mocking to me - for example attacking appearance. I think because of this she has become a bit of a caricature now.

I think @theilltemperedmaggotintheheartofthelaw is quoting some TRA piece.

There’s a £1m reward for anyone who can show how terrible JKR is.

no one’s claimed it yet.

Surely if she "managed to fall out with the main actors the Harry Potter films" their actions also played a part in this. You could equally have said that they "managed to fall out with her" because of their extreme views on a divisive subject.

It's not so much that "J K Rowling is very divisive". It's more that the subject of whether women are deserving of rights is a divisive subject.

She doesn't believe that humans can change sex.

Believing in the biological truth, the monster.

I admire her charity work but dislike her social media presence because I think people with huge reach and influence who engage in petty smackdowns of people they disagree with is not a good look. Does she ever post about anything else?

Val McDermid isn’t in the same league success wise as JKR, she also supports wee Nicola Kranky and self ID, which naturally supports rapists being put in women’s prisons, there’s nothing nice about that.

Things like trans people ... are used by politicians as a diversion tactic to hide that they're not doing anything to address the actual issues.

That's weird. In popular discourse on politics, I hear a lot of "Keir Starmer doesn't know what a woman is." The poor sod. He can't win.

I would say the current government strikes more or less the right balance. In terms of policy, they've taken on board the Cass Review, the SC judgement, etc., but (IMO unlike the Conservatives at last year's GE) they don't make a song and dance about trans issues to win votes. That's probably as good as it gets.

I think she’s a significant philanthropist. The reason she’s assumed an undue prominence on trans erosions of women’s rights is largely precisely because she’s rich and powerful, and can therefore speak frankly without fearing she’ll be fired or her books ‘cancelled’.

I can think of several writer friends, successful and famous in that their names would be familiar to the reading public, but who are reliant on university jobs and rpthejr books continuing to be bought, and live in dread of someone asking them about trans issues at a Q and A because they’re gender-critical, but aware of how kneejerk sympathies are.

https://www.wearelumos.org/

The charity where JKRowling supports children's rights to a lovely family.

Have you actually researched the people with transgender identities who she directly aims those posts at on social media? The ones you find deeply personal and mocking?

I encourage you to do so. From what I have seen, she only targets male people who have directly abused her.

Are you supporting those abusers directly or indirectly through your censuring? It might not be your intention, however, saying that a victim of abuse should not respond publicly to that abuse is limiting the victim’s response and inadvertently allowing that abuse to continue.

Why should she not directly respond to her abusers?

When I read it, it did wonder but I read it again and came to this conclusion too.

I dont think mumsnet should be encouraging and allowing abuse of a celebrity

She’s not your Mum, Graham.