Thoughts on this academic paper about JKR?

[tuneafish]

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/19392397.2026.2660544

TRA talking points on JKR laundered into a research article. There's so much bullshit in there I don't even know where to start.

It's no surprise that the authors are Australian (or at least at an Australian university).

I don't think I want to dignify that with a read beyond the title which is hilariously pretentious and probably libelous.

The abstract is like that of a really pretentious EPQ - I couldn’t get beyond that, sadly.

"<celebrified> transphobia"
That word alone bars the article from any consideration.

Thanks, but no I won't bother, my opinion of all things academic are at an all time low, low enough to have come out in Aus funny enough.

I don’t mean to be thick, but do they know the Wizarding World… isn’t real?

One of the small joys in life is watching the ongoing phenomenon of a woman who just won't acquiesce driving crowds absolutely mental.

To summarise the summary -
JKR sticks up for women's rights and people who think that wizards are real don't like her.
The End.

‘Snowball sampling’ - says it all!

I’ve skim read it so you don’t have to.

This should never have got through even to review, even for a lower ranked journal- never mind publication!!!! (I have some experience of academic reviewing and PhD supervision).

This reflects really badly on the journal imo.

"transphobia/queer" every second word.
Maybe this was some kind of bet, how to get a record number of mentions of these words in a published article.
All I can say is, the authors won the bet by a country mile.

What's truly worrying about this is the way they're trying to present it as a serious academic paper. If this is the cream of the Australian intelligentsia then they're in trouble

'This article employs audience research, presenting and analysing data from a survey carried out with 242 self-identified current and former fans of Harry Potter and the Wizarding World, to explore how Rowling’s celebrified transphobia has been evaluated'

This is the state of academia today. Dismal.

Apart from anything else they appear barely able to construct a legible sentence.

Could only bear to read the abstract, in which they call her a ‘self-described transphobe’

I'm just starting, finally, to learn that 'academic' doesn't mean the same as it did a generation or so ago when I was a post-grad. The enshitification of undergraduate education that today's young people seem to feel forced to purchase at extremely poor value has produced a complete devaluing of the whole university sector at every level.

It's so hard for someone who was lucky enough to receive an adequate university education to really accept what the sector has become.

Emily Hotine (Citation2021) explains:
TERFs are members of a branch of feminism whose ideological beliefs hinge on the idea that sex is biological and fixed, rejecting the idea of socially constructed gender. In essence, TERFs don’t recognise transgender women as women, and their beliefs undermine the rights of trans women by implying that they cannot ever truly be women.

'Terfs' reject the primacy and oppressive power of socially constructed gender. They don't, generally 'reject the idea' of gender as a system. We know it exists. Try using the perhaps slightly more insightful 'gender critical' label if that helps.

Now: answer this - what is a 'transwoman'?

Yeah. I'd have been made into absolute mincemeat for handing something like this in, even as a rough first draft. And this is a PhD candidate and a senior lecturer.

Senior lecturer appears to have started her career writing about Transvestites.

https://espace.library.uq.edu.au/view/UQ:b47175d

'Abstract
Transvestitism (or transvestism) refers to certain modes of, and behaviors associated with, cross-dressing; that is, temporarily wearing clothing and adornments designated to the opposite sex/gender. Those who practice transvestitism are known as transvestites. Transvestitism tends to manifest either as an expression of cross-sex/gender identification (distinct from sexual orientation), or for the purposes of sexual gratification associated with transvestic fetishism.'

I just want to say, it really isn’t the whole of academia. A lot of academia is doing really good work, research that is useful in many fields of engineering and medicine, with industry partnerships widespread.

This article is just a heap of amateurish politically-driven shit that is not worth producing.

And it is in Australia, that famous bastion of academic excellence where they accidentally wrote sex out of their discrimination laws. Morons.

There is so much wrong with this paper that it’s hard to believe the authors (or reviewers) have had any research training, which is usually mandatory for PhD candidates at any reputable academic organisation.

I think they might have been schooled in their "research methods" by the same people who also taught Jason Arday.

Have the social "sciences", sociology, <ever> been such a binfire?

There's lots to analyse about fandoms and the way entertainers use causes for self publicity. But this isnt it.

Love the expression 'celebrified transphobia' though. I might start using the opposite 'celebrified twattery'.

Enshityfication, I love it ❤️ I'm going to have to steal it. 😁