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.

Celebrifried twattery...I mean, where do you start?
"CelebriFRIED, where actors say things that can only be because their heads have been to long in the air frier"

Celebrity studies? What fresh hell is this?

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.

Absolutely. I wrote something in a draft for my PhD that I thought was obvious to everyone (like "the sky is blue") and my supervisor said I had to back it up with references! I wouldn't have got anywhere with drivel like this.

"Rowling began to use social media to publicly champion a ‘gender critical’ transphobic ideology... she has continued to expound these hugely problematic beliefs via social media as well as opinion pieces and press interviews...At the time of writing, Rowling continues to actively align herself with a bigoted form of ‘gender critical feminism’."

"When the UK Supreme Court’s ruling was announced, Rowling again turned to X, this time to gloat and share a ‘victorious’ photo of herself."

Nail your colours to the mast, why don't you, Sarah and Joanna.

A helpful explanatory note appended to the academic paper illiterate fuckwittery.

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.

Nailed it I’d say.

Journal Impact Factor 1.1 (2025), says it all really.

Has all the "impact factor" of a used teabag.

Unreadable, grammar in the first part so poor I couldn't continue- how is it possible something this badly written has been published?

The journal is called Celebrity Studies. It can't really get much worse.

Oh gosh. That's embarrassingly badly written. There's no academic rigour at all. How on earth did that get published?

At least a used teabag can go in the compost heap to nurture my plants. Oh hang on…

Biased, hyperbolic and badly written. Is it serious???
Can't read any more of this. I'm out

We argue the Wizarding World should be considered a cultural field

jesus

audience research reveals a defining principle of the Wizarding World cultural field is trans/queer inclusivity – despite being founded by a self-described transphobe

these people really need to read The Ink Black Heart. it's all about mediocre people who can't create shit trying to steal the creations of others. It's basically about these two no marks

I bet both the authors of this piece have a nimbus 2000, gryffindor robes and a lego hogwarts in their parents loft

Sorry but WTF are "Celebrity Studies" are students going in to debt to get some sort of educational status, based on their in depth knowledge of "Celebrities".

Are we sure that this isn't some sort of spoof???

Not 100% sure about that; while sex is biological and fixed, and as a TERF I know that, I don't 'reject' the idea of socially constructed gender. I think we humans absolutely construct gender in e.g. dressing girls in pink and saying 'boys will be boys'.

True

Watching ‘academia’ dig its own grave is quite something

Why would anyone have the ‘right’ to force others to pretend they are the opposite sex?

The lack of critical thinking here is terrifying.

The idea of socially constructed gender used to be feminism 101 until the men made it necessary to go back a step an explain sex to them.

One of the many problem with reading and understanding gender ideology is they use common words but clearly dont use the common definition. How is sex not biological and not fixed?

It was a sleight of hand, conflating 'sex' and 'gender', so they can use whichever one in whichever context suits the current argument.

I was going to read the "research" but the fact that the introduction includes the words "cis woman" tells you immediately where it's coming from. Would have thought the normal declaration of any conflict of interest at the end of serious peer reviewed research articles is needed.

It's the kind of PhD that Rick from The Young Ones would have proudly submitted.

"Evil"? What kind of word is that to use in a 21st-century academic paper?

What has she done to deserve being called evil - did she curse Goody Willoughby's second-best cow and cause it to sicken and die?

You've put your finger on a very relevant point.
In a secular/atheist age, we still need our gods and devils.
JKR makes a very convenient devil. Alongside Trump and Musk, she completes the Unholy Trinity.
And the mass hysteria over her and trans activism generally, the rapid horizontal radicalisation of those lacking critical thinking skills is a society-wide version of The Crucible.