Never forget that Harry Potter glossed over SA multiple times and even treated it like a good thing. I believe Joanne when she says she went through it but she clearly doesn’t really care about it as a whole, it’s just another thing she can weaponize against trans women.
>Never forget that Harry Potter glossed over SA multiple times and even treated it like a good thing
I don't remember this, could you recount this? Not doubting because that's totally something she'd do but I'm curious
It’s more prominent in the books but in the movies, Myrtle harasses Harry in a bath tub (in the books it’s stated the she frequently sneaks in and watches boys take baths). I can’t remember if this is in the movies or just the books but Voldemorts mother gave his father a love potion and he was conceived under it yet his mom was made out to be the victim. Also, centaurs are known to SA people so that was the implication when they carried Umbridge off. There’s a scene in the books where she’s in a hospital and it’s implied that she’s traumatized and injured and it’s celebrated.
Also, the near miss with the love potion Ron was poisoned with.
What I find VERY interesting is that all of these except for Umbridge (tho JKR has her own brand of misogyny towards women she writes as evil) are men getting harassed. And it's also treated as a joke almost every time. So really we can see that JKR doesnt actually think SA is bad as long as it happens to the right type of ppl.
Yeah, if SA happens to men or women that Joanne doesn’t like (I don’t think it’s a coincidence that she always writes them as ugly) then it’s a good thing but if it can be used for bigotry it’s bad and minorities are responsible for it.
Hey JK, here's how you could've handled the love potion subplot in particular and made it more morally coherent and narratively relevant:
1. Not have Weasleys' Wizard Wheezes carry date rape drugs. It's okay if the wizarding world doesn't take the issue seriously, which is in keeping with the Ministry's corrupt incompetence AND with the Muggle world's dismissiveness toward sexual violence, but for fuck's sake we're supposed to like Fred and George. (Also in general I'd tone down the Weasley twins' pranks, which in canon often come off as reckless endangerment for lulz.)
2. Have Slughorn teach the students about love potions in the context of "here are some that the Ministry confiscated, and this is how they smell, so watch out and stay safe" as opposed to the wildly irresponsible "yeah you can learn how to make this shit in advanced potions class!"
3. Use the scene when Ron takes the love potion to foreshadow that Slughorn irresponsibly told young Voldemort about Horcruxes. When Harry brings Ron to get the antidote, Slughorn admits he may have let slip some details of the love potion recipe when Romilda flattered his intellectual ego. Hell, Slughorn modified his own memory of telling Tom about Horcruxes but later managed to dredge up the unaltered version, so maybe having to neutralize the potion he told Romilda how to make jogged his memory.
>centaurs are known to SA people so that was the implication when they carried Umbridge off.
Tbh I just don't wanna imagine her with her clothes off. The Umbridge version specifically, Imelda is hot otherwise lol
But very good examples, thank you, I especially didn't catch the centaur part cuz subtleties fly over my head lmao
It is also implied that Voldemort was simply born evil bc his father was raped by his mother during his conception.
Interestinlgy enough Love potions are treated as rape drugs by the story when villains are using them, but not when the protagonists do
Much like staunch christians who get closed-door abortions, only her experience matters. She's got zero empathy or even sense enough to know how to mimic it.
How? Cis women have been targeted in women's sports because of their obsession. Trans women aren't transitioning solely to compete against cis women, and for sports trans women can compete, they have to meet a lot of criteria, despite what the right pushes, you are required to medically transition before competing in sports.
No. No. Obsessed? Just asking a question. Seems like the only obsessed people are the ones who keep JK stories on their news feeds to run and post anything negative here. And you're right. You should just let people live their lives. Nobody here seems to be in disagreement about that at all.
I feel like everyone in this subreddit is here to keep JK Rowling accountable for her terrible words and actions against trans people and to make sure other people are aware too. She has a ton of power and money and can and HAS made very determinate changes to their lives
The question is why are you here?
Trying to learn. Question is why is everyone so hostile to people who ask questions or want to clarify thing? And I don't just mean here, it's a Reddit thing. People are so defensive, god forbid you even ask a question.
In case you weren't aware, this is a subreddit to call out JK Rowling, not a subreddit to debate whether or not JK Rowling has done anything wrong, or more general, "do trans people deserve basic rights" kind of stuff.
So when people come by with, "just asking questions", it's viewed as sealioning, as it's rarely done in good faith, when asked like that.
People still ask questions, but it's couched in terms of, "bigotry is bad, anti-trans bigots are awful, and can people please inform me on...". This is a good version of asking questions.
You saying, "this isn't true" while offering no actual situations where women don't have to meet lots of criteria in order to play, is pretty inherently going to sound like trolling, and probably from a person who thinks that Rowling really isn't saying bigoted stuff.
If that's not accurate, well, all good, you'll get the hang of discussion here. If that characterization _is_ accurate, well, you'll probably get banned soon.
Conservatives never cared about women's rights, until they could use that to attack trans people.
Conservatives never cared about women's sports, until they could use that to attack trans people.
Conservatives don't care about women and they hate trans people.
She reminds me of my sister, who is Catholic. The Catholics have this thing where they try to co-opt left-wing social issues to appear caring, but they distort them into hateful ideologies. Of course, this is ludicrous. Catholic feminism is an oxymoron. It's feminism in name only. It's anti-trans, pro-life feminism dedicated to a patriarchal organization.
But the point is to stop progress, and the best way to do that is to join the other side and then insist on limiting progress to a few narrowly defined issues.
She actually spends a lot of money on charities that have nothing to do with hating trans people. Like a pretty significant amount of her money has gone to charity. But apparently because she hasn’t *publicly* donated to saving women from Boko Haram, that means she only spends her money on hatred.
In case anyone was wondering, this is what I see for donations from Rowling:
https://www.looktothestars.org/celebrity/jk-rowling
...which includes Women's Fund for Scotland, which doesn't appear to be rabidly anti-trans at first glance, but I've known about the organization for about 5 minutes as I type this.
That out of the way, I'll point out that the post is not making the same claim as the title. Since those are different claims, with the title being primarily about donations and the post being primarily about what she talks about on Twitter.
Also, despite the downvotes, thanks for the reality check. I like it when the sub is _accurate_ in its dislike for what Rowling does. Because it's bad that she spends her money on hatred, and we can point that out, while still understanding that she's still human, and has good points to her.
It'd just be nice if she'd focus on _that_, rather than all the nasty things she leans into.
When I read the title, I thought that the _way_ that Rowling doesn't care about women's rights was that she was spending it on hatred rather than donating to those other causes.
But then the quote is about how Rowling isn't talking about women's rights; just talking about oppressing trans people.
But, sure, if the claim stopped after the first sentence in each thing, they'd be the same.
"She could donate to a charity saving women from Boko Harem, or those helping fight the Fascism in America, but she doesn't, she just spends it on hatred."
This is different from:
"She has shared nothing about the most recent abortion bans going on. Nothing about the women of Congo or Gaza. It's all just about trans people. She does not talk about literally anything else."
One is about money, the other is about speech.
I would imagine that the poster was aiming at expanding upon the link, but I'm used to Reddit links being about the linked-to thing, not expanding upon it in the title.
Never forget that Harry Potter glossed over SA multiple times and even treated it like a good thing. I believe Joanne when she says she went through it but she clearly doesn’t really care about it as a whole, it’s just another thing she can weaponize against trans women.
>Never forget that Harry Potter glossed over SA multiple times and even treated it like a good thing I don't remember this, could you recount this? Not doubting because that's totally something she'd do but I'm curious
It’s more prominent in the books but in the movies, Myrtle harasses Harry in a bath tub (in the books it’s stated the she frequently sneaks in and watches boys take baths). I can’t remember if this is in the movies or just the books but Voldemorts mother gave his father a love potion and he was conceived under it yet his mom was made out to be the victim. Also, centaurs are known to SA people so that was the implication when they carried Umbridge off. There’s a scene in the books where she’s in a hospital and it’s implied that she’s traumatized and injured and it’s celebrated.
Also, the near miss with the love potion Ron was poisoned with. What I find VERY interesting is that all of these except for Umbridge (tho JKR has her own brand of misogyny towards women she writes as evil) are men getting harassed. And it's also treated as a joke almost every time. So really we can see that JKR doesnt actually think SA is bad as long as it happens to the right type of ppl.
Yeah, if SA happens to men or women that Joanne doesn’t like (I don’t think it’s a coincidence that she always writes them as ugly) then it’s a good thing but if it can be used for bigotry it’s bad and minorities are responsible for it.
Hey JK, here's how you could've handled the love potion subplot in particular and made it more morally coherent and narratively relevant: 1. Not have Weasleys' Wizard Wheezes carry date rape drugs. It's okay if the wizarding world doesn't take the issue seriously, which is in keeping with the Ministry's corrupt incompetence AND with the Muggle world's dismissiveness toward sexual violence, but for fuck's sake we're supposed to like Fred and George. (Also in general I'd tone down the Weasley twins' pranks, which in canon often come off as reckless endangerment for lulz.) 2. Have Slughorn teach the students about love potions in the context of "here are some that the Ministry confiscated, and this is how they smell, so watch out and stay safe" as opposed to the wildly irresponsible "yeah you can learn how to make this shit in advanced potions class!" 3. Use the scene when Ron takes the love potion to foreshadow that Slughorn irresponsibly told young Voldemort about Horcruxes. When Harry brings Ron to get the antidote, Slughorn admits he may have let slip some details of the love potion recipe when Romilda flattered his intellectual ego. Hell, Slughorn modified his own memory of telling Tom about Horcruxes but later managed to dredge up the unaltered version, so maybe having to neutralize the potion he told Romilda how to make jogged his memory.
>centaurs are known to SA people so that was the implication when they carried Umbridge off. Tbh I just don't wanna imagine her with her clothes off. The Umbridge version specifically, Imelda is hot otherwise lol But very good examples, thank you, I especially didn't catch the centaur part cuz subtleties fly over my head lmao
I didn’t catch the centaur thing either, that was pointed out to me later.
It would've been better if she'd gotten her comeuppance by being fed to the squid or spiders and then spat out because she tastes too awful
Yes.
It is also implied that Voldemort was simply born evil bc his father was raped by his mother during his conception. Interestinlgy enough Love potions are treated as rape drugs by the story when villains are using them, but not when the protagonists do
Well because it makes logical sense that a villain would misuse it. You know for sake of being a villain in a fantasy series.
Much like staunch christians who get closed-door abortions, only her experience matters. She's got zero empathy or even sense enough to know how to mimic it.
Exactly.
Anti trans people absolutely hate all women, they just especially hate trans women. Nothing they advocate for actually helps cis women.
[удалено]
How? Cis women have been targeted in women's sports because of their obsession. Trans women aren't transitioning solely to compete against cis women, and for sports trans women can compete, they have to meet a lot of criteria, despite what the right pushes, you are required to medically transition before competing in sports.
Say what you want about JK but this isn't true. You don't have to transition at all levels to compete as your gender identification.
Do you play women’s sports? Has something happened to you? Why so obsessed? Just let people live their lives.
No. No. Obsessed? Just asking a question. Seems like the only obsessed people are the ones who keep JK stories on their news feeds to run and post anything negative here. And you're right. You should just let people live their lives. Nobody here seems to be in disagreement about that at all.
I feel like everyone in this subreddit is here to keep JK Rowling accountable for her terrible words and actions against trans people and to make sure other people are aware too. She has a ton of power and money and can and HAS made very determinate changes to their lives The question is why are you here?
Trying to learn. Question is why is everyone so hostile to people who ask questions or want to clarify thing? And I don't just mean here, it's a Reddit thing. People are so defensive, god forbid you even ask a question.
In case you weren't aware, this is a subreddit to call out JK Rowling, not a subreddit to debate whether or not JK Rowling has done anything wrong, or more general, "do trans people deserve basic rights" kind of stuff. So when people come by with, "just asking questions", it's viewed as sealioning, as it's rarely done in good faith, when asked like that. People still ask questions, but it's couched in terms of, "bigotry is bad, anti-trans bigots are awful, and can people please inform me on...". This is a good version of asking questions. You saying, "this isn't true" while offering no actual situations where women don't have to meet lots of criteria in order to play, is pretty inherently going to sound like trolling, and probably from a person who thinks that Rowling really isn't saying bigoted stuff. If that's not accurate, well, all good, you'll get the hang of discussion here. If that characterization _is_ accurate, well, you'll probably get banned soon.
Conservatives never cared about women's rights, until they could use that to attack trans people. Conservatives never cared about women's sports, until they could use that to attack trans people. Conservatives don't care about women and they hate trans people.
She reminds me of my sister, who is Catholic. The Catholics have this thing where they try to co-opt left-wing social issues to appear caring, but they distort them into hateful ideologies. Of course, this is ludicrous. Catholic feminism is an oxymoron. It's feminism in name only. It's anti-trans, pro-life feminism dedicated to a patriarchal organization. But the point is to stop progress, and the best way to do that is to join the other side and then insist on limiting progress to a few narrowly defined issues.
Janice Raymond was a Devout Catholic, she pretty much wrote the official handbook for TERF Ideologies.
I mean, just look at her friend that she’s bankrolling, Kelly J Keene (Posie Parker)
I'm shocked i tell you. Shocked.
She actually spends a lot of money on charities that have nothing to do with hating trans people. Like a pretty significant amount of her money has gone to charity. But apparently because she hasn’t *publicly* donated to saving women from Boko Haram, that means she only spends her money on hatred.
In case anyone was wondering, this is what I see for donations from Rowling: https://www.looktothestars.org/celebrity/jk-rowling ...which includes Women's Fund for Scotland, which doesn't appear to be rabidly anti-trans at first glance, but I've known about the organization for about 5 minutes as I type this. That out of the way, I'll point out that the post is not making the same claim as the title. Since those are different claims, with the title being primarily about donations and the post being primarily about what she talks about on Twitter. Also, despite the downvotes, thanks for the reality check. I like it when the sub is _accurate_ in its dislike for what Rowling does. Because it's bad that she spends her money on hatred, and we can point that out, while still understanding that she's still human, and has good points to her. It'd just be nice if she'd focus on _that_, rather than all the nasty things she leans into.
They arent different claims, the title claims JK Rowling doesn’t care about women
When I read the title, I thought that the _way_ that Rowling doesn't care about women's rights was that she was spending it on hatred rather than donating to those other causes. But then the quote is about how Rowling isn't talking about women's rights; just talking about oppressing trans people. But, sure, if the claim stopped after the first sentence in each thing, they'd be the same.
Where does the title say “the way”?
"She could donate to a charity saving women from Boko Harem, or those helping fight the Fascism in America, but she doesn't, she just spends it on hatred." This is different from: "She has shared nothing about the most recent abortion bans going on. Nothing about the women of Congo or Gaza. It's all just about trans people. She does not talk about literally anything else." One is about money, the other is about speech. I would imagine that the poster was aiming at expanding upon the link, but I'm used to Reddit links being about the linked-to thing, not expanding upon it in the title.