“Heated Rivalry” author Rachel Reid on J. K. Rowling - “the bar is pretty high in how evil you have to be,” “ I’m extremely the opposite of everything she believes”

[YankSplaining]

Well, this is disappointing.

”[Reid] has a keen desire not to disappoint her fans, especially when they’re sending her photos of freshly inked tattoos of her words on their skin. ‘I know of another author that a lot of people got tattoos of but then wanted them gone. Like, J. K. Rowling,’ she says. ‘The bar is pretty high for how evil you have to be, but I don’t want to let a single person down.’ I ask if she’s a TERF. ‘No, I’m extremely the opposite of everything she believes,’ she replies.”

Well, too late, she let me down. “Extremely the opposite of everything she believes,” huh? I guess Rachel Reid thinks teenage girls should be forced to undress after PE in front of naked male classmates who gawp as their dicks get hard. Or that female inmates should be locked in cells with male inmates serving time for serial rape.

I don’t expect Reid to agree with Rowling on trans issues. It’s the monstering of Rowling that I take issue with - the “evil,” and the framing of Rowling as so extreme that Reid feels the need to be extremely the opposite of everything she believes.

Edit: title should read “on how evil you have to be”

Honestly I don't think that would be unpopular with her target audience.

In particular, JKR really tries to understand a subject before expressing an opinion.

Outside of BBC employees, I don't know anyone who's watched Heated Rivalry.

I've never heard of her either.
I'm a bit at a loss to understand how a woman married to a man is queer? Also, isn't it a bit appropriative of her to write about gay men? Not much of the essential 'lived experience' eh?

In 10 years time everyone will have forgotten this person and they’ll be rebooting the HP films or opening a new theme park and people will still want to interview JKR. But well done for using your 15 minutes to polish your halo and stick the knife in.

Evil can be a proxy for inhumane & after all its objectively true JK Rowling is responsible for the demonisation of trans people on a mass scale given her following.

She hasn't demonised trans people.

If anything India Willoughby has done far more to push back trans rights.

I didn’t notice and had to look up who. Even having looked it up, I can’t remember Connors, the character, having more than one or two lines. Casting seems like a stunt for “inclusivity” points.

In stereotyping trans people as dangerous predators she does.

"In an attempt to demonstrate her understanding of where transgender people are coming from, Rowling even says she too might have considered transitioning had the option been available to her as a teenager. “The allure of escaping womanhood would have been huge, “ she writes. “If I’d found community and sympathy online that I couldn’t find in my immediate environment, I believe I could have been persuaded to turn myself into the son my father had openly said he’d have preferred.”

The belief that gender identity is a phase, a choice, or something that is influenced by other people is a stereotype that minimizes the struggles of anyone who experiences gender dysphoria. Transitioning isn’t easy but Rowling seems to be saying people can choose to transition on a whim simply because they think it’s more convenient to be one gender than another.

In her essay, Rowling goes on to reveal that she is a domestic and sexual abuse survivor and those experiences have made her even more focused on biology, “out of solidarity with the huge numbers of women who have histories like mine, who’ve been slurred as bigots for having concerns around single-sex spaces.”

Referring to the debate around public washrooms in particular, Rowling claims she’s concerned for the safety of cis women and girls. “When you throw open the doors of bathrooms and changing rooms to any man who believes or feels he’s a woman—and, as I’ve said, gender confirmation certificates may now be granted without any need for surgery or hormones—then you open the door to any and all men who wish to come inside.”

Throughout her essay, Rowling talks about how easy it is for a biological man to become a woman in the eyes of the law and how potentially dangerous that could be for cis women. The fear that a large number of transgender women are just men who want to be able to use women-only spaces unchecked is a harmful stereotype that paints trans people as predators instead of just human beings who want to live their lives."

https://inmagazine.ca/2020/06/j-k-rowlings-history-of-transphobia/

I believe she and her husband are both bisexual. The show’s writer and director is a gay man.

She’d probably do it, and a lot of her fans would probably love it. I wouldn’t be opposed to the concept at its core, but she’d write it in a way where the reader would be asked to accept the transman character as a “real man” and a “gay man,” which, no.

In stereotyping trans people as dangerous predators she does

Men. She is talking about men, This is not stereotyping. It is just an unavoidable conclusion if you look at any crime statistics.

The belief that gender identity is a phase, a choice, or something that is influenced by other people is a stereotype that minimizes the struggles of anyone who experiences gender dysphoria. Transitioning isn’t easy but Rowling seems to be saying people can choose to transition on a whim simply because they think it’s more convenient to be one gender than another.

I refer you to the man who wrote an article in the Guardian describing how he is affected by the recent Supreme Court because he likes to wear a dress and use women's toilets when he is in London. Blame him for the assumption that people identify as trans on a whim. Blame Eddie Izzard for talking about 'boy mode' and 'girl mode'.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2025/jun/15/trans-australian-uk-britain-tolerance

I also invite you to consider the massive increase in referrals to the Tavistock in the 2000s and the co-morbidities and trauma that were ignored as soon as a children claimed a trans identity. You don't have to listen JK Rowling to be concerned about this. Just read why the clinic was shut down.

“When you throw open the doors of bathrooms and changing rooms to any man who believes or feels he’s a woman—and, as I’ve said, gender confirmation certificates may now be granted without any need for surgery or hormones—then you open the door to any and all men who wish to come inside.”

How is she wrong about this? Why can you not see that she is talking about men?

Throughout her essay, Rowling talks about how easy it is for a biological man to become a woman in the eyes of the law and how potentially dangerous that could be for cis women. The fear that a large number of transgender women are just men who want to be able to use women-only spaces unchecked is a harmful stereotype that paints trans people as predators instead of just human beings who want to live their lives."

No, it paints men as predators.

Again, why is she wrong?

Why the hell are you writing sexual fantasies about children?!

Jesus actual. That is happening nowhere but inside your own head.

Trans kids are a tiny minority, and are given separate places to change at school. Writing paedophilic filth - humiliation fantasies - about children is not activism.

JKR's actions here are no different to stereotyping muslims as terrorists because a minuscule number are. Weaponising isolated instances is a manipulative tactic where a rare, atypical, or singular event is highlighted and misrepresented as representative of a general trend, behaviour, or group characteristic. It's a common political strategy particularly used to influence public opinion, justify abusive behaviour, or create fear and stigma.

Prove it and you could get the million pound reward that been on offer for 4 years now.

Put up or shut up.

Have you actually read Rowling's essay, not a second-hand account telling you what to think about her?

Dude, male violence against women and girls is endemic. It's not "stereotyping" to know that.

Not sure why you're bringing Muslims into this?
If you want humans to exist without sex segregation in certain spaces get men to sort it the fuck out then we'll talk.

This is what Rowling actually says, in her own words:

"I believe the majority of trans-identified people not only pose zero threat to others, but are vulnerable for all the reasons I’ve outlined. Trans people need and deserve protection. Like women, they’re most likely to be killed by sexual partners. Trans women who work in the sex industry, particularly trans women of colour, are at particular risk. Like every other domestic abuse and sexual assault survivor I know, I feel nothing but empathy and solidarity with trans women who’ve been abused by men."

In case you actually want to judge by yourself:

https://www.jkrowling.com/opinions/j-k-rowling-writes-about-her-reasons-for-speaking-out-on-sex-and-gender-issues/

No, it is the equivalent of looking at crime statistics and noting that MEN are overwhelmingly responsible for violent crime against women, sexual abuse, voyeurism and indecent exposure and that women have the right to exclude MEN from single sex spaces.

You're trying to stop women taking about safeguarding.

Great look.

Apparently quite a few people find her super offensive. A woman writing about gay male romance in a way that appeals to women has been deemed appropriation and fetishization.

She might want to be a little less smug about her wokey credentials

these ppl are so endlessly tedious 🙄

It's all a bit AO3 slash isn't it

A significant part of the publishing industry aimed at women, particularly young women, is now essentially AO3 slash.

I can believe it, based on the comments here (because I've never heard of her) I thought a women writing about gay men having sex sounds like 'sexual' appropriation. It says more about her own revolting desires than anything. 🤢