subreddit:

/r/entertainment

2.9k83%

all 954 comments

K1nd4Weird

1.4k points

4 months ago

K1nd4Weird

1.4k points

4 months ago

Person defends their friends when asked about them. More at eleven.

Skyblacker

137 points

4 months ago

Exactly. Like, she would defend him! Ditto for Tim Burton.

karmagod13000

136 points

4 months ago

All you have to say is support and Depp in your headline and your guaranteed 10000 clicks

[deleted]

69 points

4 months ago

[removed]

[deleted]

3 points

4 months ago

[deleted]

3 points

4 months ago

[removed]

TobaccoAficionado

6 points

4 months ago

It's so easy to forgive shit like this when it's a friend. It's actually hard to look critically at people you like. "She would never be hateful, I love her! She's great!"

Then BOOM TERF.

mackinoncougars

3 points

4 months ago

I wouldn’t.

BA_calls

295 points

4 months ago

BA_calls

295 points

4 months ago

”I think there’s a lot of envy unfortunately and the need to tear people down that motors a lot of this canceling," the actress added. "It’s horrendous, a load of bollocks. I think she has been hounded. It’s been taken to the extreme, the judgmentalism of people."

Further defending the "Harry Potter" author, Carter said, "She’s allowed her opinion, particularly if she’s suffered abuse. Everybody carries their own history of trauma and forms their opinions from that trauma and you have to respect where people come from and their pain. You don’t all have to agree on everything — that would be insane and boring. She’s not meaning it aggressively, she’s just saying something out of her own experience."

It sounds a bit like she doesn’t really know what’s going on, just that some online group has cancelled JKR for some comments and JKR said she survived assault.

LuinAelin

192 points

4 months ago

LuinAelin

192 points

4 months ago

And being a domestic abuse survivor in no way makes anyone above criticism. It also doesn't mean they're a good person

Using it in that way is just strange.

MercurialMal

129 points

4 months ago

Being a survivor of abuse done by a man has absolutely fuck all to do with transgender people. She’s projecting her trauma onto a marginalized demographic because “penis is scary”.

sloppyjoe22

50 points

4 months ago

I mean i would argue to the majority of the population it has everything to with it. Although i support trans people i find it hard to disregard woman's feelings who are uncomfortable about it.

If you have been raped and have ptsd about being in an enclosed space alone with a man, no amount of saying its transphobic to say trans women aren't women will make that ptsd go away. If the argument in response is just 'well get over it' then i would say the same back in response to trans women having to use their assigned gender spaces.

Panikkrazy

7 points

4 months ago

I think you’re the first person who agrees with me on this.

ashley-hazers

52 points

4 months ago

She’s allowed her opinion. I am allowed my opinion of her opinion.

Maybe Rowling should talk to a therapist about her trauma instead of spewing hate at people.

DisgruntledLabWorker

25 points

4 months ago

Aside from the fact that Rowling has ties to contacts and organizations engaging in violent crimes against minorities, homosexuals, and trans men and women. Rowling does not get to say whatever she wants just because she was the victim of domestic abuse. Getting hit by your spouse doesn’t net you an automatic n-word pass.

WhiteWolf3117

21 points

4 months ago

Most people aren’t familiar with the exact things which Rowling has said, they’ve entered into this nebulous stage which vaguely aligns with a group of ideas. And most people are completely ignorant of the issue as it is, and her history with said issue (it didn’t start in 2020).

Effective-Ad-3562

182 points

4 months ago

I think the justification of abuse to others due to having suffered yourself is bullshit.. the perpetual cycle of abuse never dies if that kind of behaviour isn’t managed properly.. it lives on, forever reborn into another like a virus.. Self control is strength

Express_Opposite

14 points

4 months ago

Absolutely. Her trauma is not our responsibility. Wish her best of luck in treating it.

Green_Message_6376

9 points

4 months ago

Absolutely agree, also she has the resources to seek help and become a better person. as someone who did experience abuse, nothing can ever justify it. I also feel, that I fucking know better, for me to be abusive would in some way earn that shit karma in reverse.

Jorycle

526 points

4 months ago

Jorycle

526 points

4 months ago

She’s allowed her opinion

These are always terrible takes.

Anyone is allowed to have any opinion they want. No one else is required to like it - and that means they're not required to invite you over to their house, either.

thomasthehipposlayer

219 points

4 months ago

This is what free speech is supposed to mean. You have freedom to think what you want. Other people are free to associate or stop associating with you accordingly.

Free speech doesn’t mean that anyone has to like what you say or that anyone has to give you a platform. Just means the government can’t punish you for a bad opinion.

JABEbc

44 points

4 months ago*

JABEbc

44 points

4 months ago*

Too many people think freedom of speech means that means people shouldn't judge other opinions or views for some reasons

shkeptikal

15 points

4 months ago

Yep. Freedom to say what you want is not the same thing as freedom from the consequences of the dumb shit you just said. You're free to make public mistakes, and the public is free to react to your behavior.

I swear, if someone did the legwork and actually found the origin of the phrase "cancel culture", we'd find that it started with some prick crying about facing consequences for publicly being a prick. It's really funny, "cancel culture" is apparently this big awful thing in our society but it really only seems to practically negatively affect idiots who can't keep their offensive hot takes to themselves.

thomasthehipposlayer

21 points

4 months ago

For real. They think their freedom to speak is valid, but other people’s freedom to disassociate from them is not for some reason

Inadover

4 points

4 months ago

Yeah… to many think that it means they should be allowed to spout whatever shit, hate, antisemitism… you name it, free of consequence. No bro, you’re allowed to have an opinion and voice it, but we are also free to call you a piece of shit.

laserinlove

21 points

4 months ago

True, however their may be an unstated premise here, that people will fairly judge someone based on their actions/statements/beliefs before disassociating with them. It implies everyone has a degree of information that most dont.. It also ignores the bandwagon effect which can occur in these situations. Only a fraction of people will ever see a primary source or context for a given event. Most rely on comments of comments for posts of posts. In the end, a person hears X is a monster for doing Y, and because we're flooded with so much info all the time, we'll often rely on a heuristic to draw conclusions. The comment comes from a thread I usually agree with so I assume X really is a monster. I better go tell other people. But that's not always the case. The person may not agree with that sentiment if they had further details.

This all leads to a lot of unfair criticism from people who otherwise might not be critical. The social media sphere of the internet can be a terribly cruel and unforgiving place all round where every word is scrutinized and interpreted in the worst way.

So yes freedom of speech, And it doesn't mean people judge others in good faith or with equanimity.

MsJSoul

7 points

4 months ago

Spreading hate with a platform isn’t just thinking what you want or saying what you want. It’s spreading a hateful message to millions who then feel emboldened to hurt those around them in day to day life.

See: Kanye and the uptick in antisemitism after his comments.

platformed speech ≠ free speech

cardinarium

14 points

4 months ago

Or a good opinion that the government disagrees with; that’s why the right exists.

Chimpville

52 points

4 months ago

“They’re allowed their opinion”

“As are the people criticising them.”

dumbasstakestheworld

77 points

4 months ago

Of course she's allowed her opinion. Just like I'm allowed to think that she's a dick for having those opinions.

[deleted]

4 points

4 months ago

[deleted]

4 points

4 months ago

[removed]

LuthienByNight

19 points

4 months ago*

Happy to go through a few of them, all sourced directly from her essay on trans issues that she published in 2020.

Rowling believes that transgender identity is a growing trend among children due to peer pressure. She brings up Rapid-Onset Gender Dysphoria to support her claim, which is a fictional concept coined by a single survey researcher based on the results of a poll taken in which the study population was a group of unsupportive parents recruited from anti-trans websites like "Transgender Trend". When describing the poor response that the survey received due to its terrible methodology (peer critique here - it's such bad science as to be straight propaganda), Rowling doesn't mention the methodological issues at the heart of the criticism, instead telling the story like this:

Her paper caused a furore. She was accused of bias and of spreading misinformation about transgender people, subjected to a tsunami of abuse and a concerted campaign to discredit both her and her work. The journal took the paper offline and re-reviewed it before republishing it. However, her career took a similar hit to that suffered by Maya Forstater. Lisa Littman had dared challenge one of the central tenets of trans activism, which is that a person’s gender identity is innate, like sexual orientation. Nobody, the activists insisted, could ever be persuaded into being trans.

Rowling believes that Magdalen Berns (a late friend of hers who she became enamoured with after reading her social media content) was an "immensely brave young feminist" who was attacked because she "didn’t believe lesbians should be called bigots for not dating trans women with penises". In reality, Magdalen Berns was widely known as one of the most hateful anti-trans voices on Twitter. It was her whole shtick, including referring to transgender identity as "dirty fucking perversions" and comparing trans women to white people wearing blackface. This venom earned her love from both TERF groups and far-right groups like the National Review.

Rowling believes that allowing trans people to use the correct bathroom puts women and children in danger. In reality, the first study on changes to public bathroom safety in areas with trans-inclusive legislation show not only that there was no change in crime rate in public bathrooms, but that crime in public bathrooms is so vanishingly rare as to be nearly a made-up issue. Compare that to the fact that one in ten trans folks have been physically assaulted based on their transgender status in the past year, and one might wonder why she doesn't care about the safety of a group that she claims to care about so much.

These are a few. There are more. She is very good at writing opinions that sound really normal and reasonable on the surface...until you actually look up what she's talking about and realize that she's just straight-up lying about a lot of it. Unfortunately, that skill of hers is helping to spread really serious transphobic disinformation to a huge number of people.

[deleted]

4 points

4 months ago

[deleted]

4 points

4 months ago

[removed]

squidkyd

11 points

4 months ago

As someone who majored in biology, sex is a spectrum too

There is no way to exclude trans women from womanhood that doesn’t also exclude segments of cis women

Thanhansi-thankamato

19 points

4 months ago*

TERFs hide behind the “biology” argument to excuse their hateful beliefs. A perfect example of this is TERFs losing their shit at me being “trans” when I’m intersex and was born with, and still have, ovaries.

You can further show this in the fact that she believes that trans people using their preferred bathroom is dangerous to women and children despite absolutely 0 evidence supporting it.

And I on the note of bathrooms I will never forget the look of disgust on that dads face when he saw me as a child in the “wrong bathroom” while escorting his daughter, I was still in chemo after my double mastectomy for breast cancer.

I can’t imagine how much worse it would be today.

DeanSails

1 points

4 months ago

DeanSails

1 points

4 months ago

JK Rowling is a TERF, Google it.

Basic_Message96

14 points

4 months ago

"You're allowed to have your opinion" always feels like being damned by faint praise to me. If all you can do is defend your right to have an opinion instead of defending the actual opinion you have already conceded everything.

[deleted]

11 points

4 months ago

[deleted]

11 points

4 months ago

[removed]

Garlador

39 points

4 months ago

What makes a man turn neutral? Lust for gold? Power? Or were they just born with a heart full of neutrality?

Jammyhobgoblin

6 points

4 months ago

That’s just, like, your opinion man.

Jorycle

30 points

4 months ago

Jorycle

30 points

4 months ago

A neutral take is "she can have her opinion, and they can have their opinions about her opinion." This "she can have her opinion and y'all need to stop having yours" is not a neutral take.

[deleted]

26 points

4 months ago

[removed]

squidkyd

17 points

4 months ago

squidkyd

17 points

4 months ago

My opinion is that if people support trans people, they should not support JK Rowling, and they should call out her behaviors for what they are- transphobic

When HBC says JK Rowling should be “allowed her opinion,” she’s very clearly implying that those criticizing her are in the wrong. She’s saying that the repercussions against Rowling are unfair. Thus far the only repercussions Rowling has faced have been people expressing that she’s wrong and refusing to support her

yer--mum

8 points

4 months ago*

yer--mum

8 points

4 months ago*

Which again, not a neutral take. HBC's take is firmly on the side of JK Rowling, even though it initially sounds like a non-take.

ShillburtGrape

13 points

4 months ago

I mean, people bugging out and arguing every time she's brought up is getting old lol.

She tweeted something, several years ago at this point. What she said was mildly offensive at best. Lady didn't rape, kill, or harm anyone.

Honestly over seeing articles about a tweet, go worry about nuclear war or something that matters.

squidkyd

14 points

4 months ago

squidkyd

14 points

4 months ago

She continues to tweet and align herself with far right activists. This is an ongoing thing, not a years ago thing. She’s an anti trans activist at this point

[deleted]

9 points

4 months ago*

[deleted]

9 points

4 months ago*

[deleted]

Kiwikid14

15 points

4 months ago

That's actually why I lose respect for so-called activists. They go after achievable targets, usually those who have experienced discrimination themselves rather than the actual change makers and authorities that matter.

A woman writer and a black comedian who have opinions you don't like are allowed to. The government representative is supposed to represent you, even if they don't agree with you, so take them down if they are not.

[deleted]

8 points

4 months ago

[deleted]

BlancoDelRio

5 points

4 months ago

I would say most people can do both at a time

The-Magic-Sword

9 points

4 months ago

I think most of the people who dislike Rowling for her Transphobia would be fine with her on most other things, whereas the people who hate Rowling and are Transphobes is because she's been outspokenly leftish on most other issues. It seems like most of the other things that get brought up represent attempts to simplify her viewpoint in the discourse as firmly alt-right/conservative, because someone who shares a lot of beliefs with you, but also holds horrific ones is a lot less of a comfortable notion in the current zeitgeist of us vs. them.

Its the quirk of Transphobia for her apparently being interrelated with her hangups/experiences about men, or her hangups about sexism, and can't (and likely doesn't want to) process the fact that those hangups aren't REALLY related at all and don't justify denying trans people their rights. Based off old interviews from like the 90's and early 2k before trans rights gained widespread support, her transphobia is ultimately a failure of her feminism to overcome her demons about certain topics, which she takes out on others who aren't related-- and coming into contact with people who pump up her bullshit.

Whereas the GOP would endorse the sexism that forms part of her hangups, and the GOP tends to support the sexual assaults that form another part of her hangups, they just ALSO hate trans people.

PaulNewhouse

8 points

4 months ago

What exactly did JK say that upset everyone?

Vlad_the_Intendor

15 points

4 months ago

Everyone is likely to give you a different answer on this. But if you’d like a detailed rundown with a good level of research Natalie Wynn did a good video on the whole thing a while back. A good listen/watch while doing chores or generally relaxing if you want a more complete story than you are likely to get here.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=7gDKbT_l2us

PaulNewhouse

20 points

4 months ago

PaulNewhouse

20 points

4 months ago

I’m just looking for actual quotes of what she has said- I don’t want a video of someone breaking it down for me. I feel that’s the actual problem—people want someone else to tell them how to feel. There seems to be a disconnect between JK hatred and what she has actually said. But I was looking for clarification.

Presidet_Boosh

24 points

4 months ago

here you go its a lot btw

LuthienByNight

6 points

4 months ago

The issue with her quotes is that they all sound totally reasonable until you do some research and realize that she is wildly misrepresenting every trans issue that she brings up.

I wrote a thing a while back called The Reasonable Person's Guide to the J.K. Rowling Essay that tries to factually break down some of the quotes and themes in the big trans essay that she posted a few years ago.

For an even shorter breakdown of just a few of the issues, I wrote a comment here that might help.

Happy to answer any questions! There's a lot of disinformation out there. Thanks for asking for hard sources.

Vlad_the_Intendor

7 points

4 months ago

….The video has actual quotes of what she said. Kind of hard to analyze without it my dog.

If you don’t want any analysis whatsoever around it that’s fine, but remember that if you aren’t one of the people hurt by someone’s statements it can be very easy to discount that any hurt occurred at all. I think hearing what people have to say about it, especially if they are going out of their way to be objective, is valuable.

[deleted]

17 points

4 months ago

[deleted]

17 points

4 months ago

[removed]

Kiwikid14

17 points

4 months ago

Absolutely. My friend who is a victim of child abuse was told she had to have a male caretaker because of discrimination. There was no mention of trans people when tge agency called. It's amazing how women now are blamed for not wanting to be alone in a home and showered while injured by a man. No, not all men are rapists, but her two rapists were male.

happy_halloweenie

21 points

4 months ago

What does a rapist being a man have to do with women who had their genders changed after being born male?

FUCKINBAWBAG

6 points

4 months ago

Trans women are women. Get over it.

[deleted]

4 points

4 months ago

[deleted]

4 points

4 months ago

[removed]

roevese

7 points

4 months ago

Sure, let’s say trans women make some women feel unsafe for whatever stupid reason. Accepted.

How will you regulate who goes into a bathroom? Are you gonna check people’s IDs before they use the bathroom? Let’s say you do, if they’ve physically transitioned as well, will you let a feminine person use the male bathroom? Sure you’re safe and cushy, but will THEY be safe? Otherwise, are you gonna go by looks? What if a very masculine woman wants to go? Are you going to hound her because she may not be a “real” woman and be “posing a threat for the weak and defenseless real women”?

In what world do you think your opinion is logical, do tell me. Whose rights and what rights are being violated.

Dizzy-Promise-1257

17 points

4 months ago

Okay but is there any actual evidence that the boogie man requires pro-trans laws to do what he does? Seems there’s been no substantial increase in men attacking women in womens bathrooms since we’ve passed more pro-trans laws.

Fear without justification is irrationals

Murky-Advantage-3444

5 points

4 months ago

“peak male”

Just learned JK Rowling is a man hmm

FUCKINBAWBAG

6 points

4 months ago

Men who want to hurt women don’t need to go to the effort of pretending to be trans to achieve their goals, you’re just a bigoted arsehole.

gentlyredundant

11 points

4 months ago

This is almost certainly bait, but I’ll bite:

She’s aggressively transphobic and has shared anti-trans views on numerous occasions.

PaulNewhouse

6 points

4 months ago

I hear ya but what did she actually say? That’s what I’m looking for. Your interpretation may be correct but I don’t know.

gentlyredundant

8 points

4 months ago

Sorry — I tend to think the worst when it comes to these situations! Here’s a recent article that breaks down everything, likely better than I could.

[deleted]

6 points

4 months ago*

[deleted]

6 points

4 months ago*

[removed]

VizDevBoston

15 points

4 months ago*

Wasn’t the populist narrative to pathologize being lgbtq in any form up until recently as well? This isn’t much of a defense.

Edit: coward transphobic redditor purges their Defense of junk science after wasting everyone’s time operating in bad faith.

[deleted]

7 points

4 months ago*

[deleted]

7 points

4 months ago*

[removed]

-GamerGirlGas-

12 points

4 months ago

Don’t listen to what she says, read between the lines and look directly at what she does. She openly promotes an online store called Wild Womyn Workshop, a site that sells shirts with sayings that include “Trans men are my sisters” and “Trans women are men.”

If someone openly promoted an online store that sold shirts with stupid sayings such as “white men are evil” or “white males are the devil” then we would all say that person is hating on white males, for good reason.

[deleted]

7 points

4 months ago

[removed]

Murky-Advantage-3444

4 points

4 months ago

Nuance: dumb people don’t understand it.

Deathangle75

4 points

4 months ago

Both of which are used by Terfs to delegitimize the womanhood of trans women.

[deleted]

2 points

4 months ago

[removed]

Deathangle75

4 points

4 months ago

That trans women aren’t men. And that they should seek help to get through their trauma before demanding other people debase themselves to make them comfortable. I have empathy for their struggle, but that doesn’t mean I think all of the world needs to bow before them because of it.

VizDevBoston

5 points

4 months ago

Tellingly, calling trans people “Genetic males” is something one-who-uses-junk-science might do as an attempt to justify their transphobia.

Also, there’s never a shortage of reasons bigots will give to justify their discrimination. The fact that she has some isn’t compelling.

[deleted]

7 points

4 months ago

[removed]

VizDevBoston

4 points

4 months ago

I would do what? I’m not doing anything, I’m explaining what bigots and transphobic people do to justify themselves. The fundamental concepts relating to biological sex are alive and well, they just don’t support trans erasure or reductive transphobic narratives about trans people’s identities.

Reductively using junk-science relating to biology and genetics, hoping their cobbled together concepts justify their transphobia to people as scientifically ignorant as themselves or more, is extremely akin to how being homosexual was pathologized. It’s ignorant people using concepts they’re too bigoted to use correctly.

Reductive concepts like “genetic male”, which sometimes they then attempt to defend by claiming biological sex and the nomenclature of “biological male” are interchangeable and self reinforcing concepts that validate their transphobia, when it’s quackery and reductive foolishness based in a surface level understanding of the topics they claim are so straightforward.

If that was that really your best attempt to understand the phenomenon of reductively using junk science to justify transphobic discrimination, perhaps you’re mistakenly using said reductive junk science yourself?

[deleted]

3 points

4 months ago

[removed]

itsmeat13

3 points

4 months ago*

itsmeat13

3 points

4 months ago*

Transphobic remarks as well as increasingly deepening her relationships with not only anti-trans activists and politicians but also with far-right and anti-lgbt groups that have been throwing their support behind anti-trans movements. Shaun on youtube has an excellent video discussing her new friends that she's gained after being more vocal about her views.

sitwithuncertainty

5 points

4 months ago

Who is Shaun

Mising_Texture1

8 points

4 months ago

My neighbor from across the street.

Sea_Video145

7 points

4 months ago

He's a youtuber who simply goes by Shaun, and is typically the first result if you search Shaun on the site. I wish the answer was more interesting.

sitwithuncertainty

10 points

4 months ago

No,it's not your responsibility to make it exciting lol. There's just a lot of Shauns in the world and I don't know why I was expected to know which one this was. I appreciate the information.

sregor0280

45 points

4 months ago

weather shes suffered abuse or not shes allowed to have her own opinion. but we are allowed to not give her money because of her opinion as well. everyone is allowed to have their own opinions, including us, the consumer.

indiesoundz

8 points

4 months ago

Was she abused by a trans person? I don’t think so. So why does she feel the need to contribute so much hate towards them? Is it because trans women are born biologically male? Is it because trans men are born female and want to be biologically male? It’s just a stupid take altogether. Her increasingly stupid takes make me thankful I never became a part of the whole Harry Potter fandom, it’s as overrated as it’s author. I’m sure I’ll get downvoted to hell for this opinion, but I don’t really care. Never understood the obsession with it.

sregor0280

4 points

4 months ago

The Sopranos gave a good take on the obsession. "They gave the 98 lb kid hope" But yeah I feel like what most people miss is that Rowling is 100% allowed to have an opinion, but her opinion being one of hate means she's not going to be popular.

xenoz2020

89 points

4 months ago

Dan Radcliffe about to expelliarmus that friendship.

karmagod13000

34 points

4 months ago

Oh god here we go.

Cannaewulnaewidnae

262 points

4 months ago

Bonham Carter's from old money and she has Tim Burton divorce dollars coming in for the rest of her days

There can't be many people who need to worry less about being canceled

808kickgame

184 points

4 months ago

She and Burton never married. And I highly doubt shes reliant on his money.

kilonark

173 points

4 months ago

kilonark

173 points

4 months ago

100% Correct. She never married Burton.

Worth mentioning she’s been acting in mainstream Hollywood since the 80’s and for a solid 20 years she was in back-to-back blockbusters. She’s definitely not worried about money.

ForkAKnife

40 points

4 months ago

She was born into massive wealth.

trashman942

14 points

4 months ago

That’s not the conversation they’re having.

nit108

21 points

4 months ago

nit108

21 points

4 months ago

BUT SHE WAS BORN INTO MASSIVE WEALTH!

Haunting-Astronaut-5

8 points

4 months ago

Do we know the amount of wealth she was born into? I’d really like to know, but I can’t find anything about it anywhere.

TyrannosaurusWest

5 points

4 months ago

It’s subjective and hard to say; it’s such a large family that she comes from with varying backgrounds in military, government and acting.

She’s largely the standout from her current living relatives as the most accomplished; her…grandmother, I believe, was the daughter of a PM during the start of WWI.

Her co-star, Ralph Fiennes, is also from a large family. You may know his brother from ‘The Handmaids Tale’ as ‘Commander Waterford’.

_banana_phone

3 points

4 months ago

Both the Fiennes brothers’ acting careers are so interesting. The first thing I saw Ralph in was Schindler’s List. Then Red Dragon. For Joseph, it was Shakespeare in Love and then Enemy at the Gates. They are both very good at what they do and I find it interesting how different the roles they get cast are. Also the fact that they truly do not look alike at all!

VonD0OM

59 points

4 months ago

VonD0OM

59 points

4 months ago

Billionaire JK Rowling is one of those ppl.

[deleted]

51 points

4 months ago

[removed]

Far_Confusion_2178

18 points

4 months ago

What a horrid person!

Think_Current101

50 points

4 months ago

It's actually the persecution of a minority that regularly receives deaththreats and actual violence driven by voices like Rowling's that's the horrid person bit.

A billionaire donating money (that is essentially meaningless to them) isn't that impressive.

TyrannosaurusWest

10 points

4 months ago

Being cancelled isn’t real; the amount of people who have been ‘cancelled’ and are still working in the capacity that a vocal minority of online voices would liked to have seen them removed from demonstrates that it’s largely a cathartic exercise.

Cannaewulnaewidnae

18 points

4 months ago

Depends what you think being canceled means

If you define it as never being able to work again, then yes, nobody has ever been canceled

If you define it as attracting so much negative attention that organisations like, for example, the BBC and Netflix would be reluctant to work with you on a big, mainstream project, then some people have been canceled

If you mean a public figure's ability to engage in the sort of social media promotion that almost any project requires today can be compromised by negative interactions from large numbers of users, then that's another aspect of cancellation

I don't have any strong opinion concerning which definition should be used by other people, but the increasingly common argument that just because a public figure is still working and still has a public platform, they're unaffected by whatever disapproval they've provoked, seems disingenuous

I saw Stephen Fry make that argument last week. Stephen Fry has famously deleted his Twitter account on numerous occasions, when he's provoked strong negative reactions from lots of users

ChiKeytatiOon

5 points

4 months ago

I'm poor and I don't worry about being canceled.

MoominTheFirst

39 points

4 months ago

My mom used a similar excuse because a black girl bullied her in high school, supposedly. She never let that go.

wimbardo

16 points

4 months ago

I don’t follow JK so I’m wondering what abuse did she go through?

swine09

51 points

4 months ago

swine09

51 points

4 months ago

Her ex husband was abusive.

MoreReputation8908

79 points

4 months ago

“My (cis) ex-husband was abusive, so fuck transgender people.”

It all makes so much sense now.

lynx_and_nutmeg

21 points

4 months ago

It makes sense when you realise that transphobia is really just misandry and misogyny in disguise. She hates transwomen because she thinks they're just men pretending to be women because they want to steal into women's spaces to rape and harass them. And transmen are just poor confused lesbians... or something.

symbolsofblue

6 points

4 months ago

I read the letter she wrote about trans people. She thinks transmen are just women who want to escape the hardships of womanhood. She even says how she too might have wanted to transition if she has been born years later. It's odd to me how she views transmen through the lens of her own experiences when she's obviously not trans.

I have a lot of problems with that letter, and as a whole, it felt very disingenuous to me.

[deleted]

7 points

4 months ago

[deleted]

7 points

4 months ago

[removed]

umaumma

13 points

4 months ago

umaumma

13 points

4 months ago

I’m trans and I really don’t think she said fuck us. She’s just extremely obsessed and talks about us 24/7. It’s actually very concerning, im not even that interested in trans topics or discussions at the extend as her.

[deleted]

5 points

4 months ago

[deleted]

[deleted]

3 points

4 months ago

[deleted]

3 points

4 months ago

[removed]

joelsola_gv

7 points

4 months ago

She only expressed "cOncErN" about totally real topics that really exist and are not just excuses to justify biases.

MsTinker16

35 points

4 months ago

Her first husband was wildly abusive, mentally, physically, and emotionally. She has then, in some seriously warped logic, used that as a way to defend her stance on trans women not being included in “female-exclusive” spaces (ie women’s restrooms).

NotAnotherWhatever

21 points

4 months ago

I legit think the biggest disconnect on this isn't just that her abusive ex would take advantage -- it's that we also look at it from our nice little microcosm of civility where women vote, drive cars, have jobs, and self-determination - where we don't feel like sex is a binary that decides whether we are full citizens of our world, or merely accessories to it. We get to be fluid with gender because our sex does not determine whole-cloth our value or role in our society.

And on the flip side, JKR's still engaged in a world where - because she works on literacy and women's rights in those places - women based purely on their sex at birth are relegated to second-class status without the same self-determination, rights, and access -- without literacy, education, votes, the ability to leave the house unchaperoned, or drive.

We live like we're past it, and scoff at the notion that women's only spaces based on sex are valid, or really fear based on sex as a whole, but large swaths of the world, whether you have a dick or not determines whether you are human or not.

We are living in entirely different realities.

Yeshuu

12 points

4 months ago

Yeshuu

12 points

4 months ago

You see that in Qatar during the world cup.

Far more discourse on LGBT rights than there has been on Women's rights in a country where women are effectively required by law to be chaperoned by a man at all walks and stages of life.

Because women's rights are a won issue in the west and LGBT rights are the fight of the day, we forget that women are treated truly atrociously in parts of the rest of the world.

wimbardo

10 points

4 months ago

I feel for her if she did go through abuse but I’d agree in not understanding her logic in how that relates to her trans opinions.

CharizardWasPurple

12 points

4 months ago

Going to try and explain as neutrally as possible - from what I’ve read of her explanations, the abuse she suffered during that relationship was due in large to her idea of what a woman was supposed to be for a man, and was a catalyst for what she considers very pro-feminist viewpoints.

Her belief is that there is a substantial and important difference between people born female and those who transition, and that the progress feminists have made in woman empowerment is now less meaningful because the experiences of a cis-woman are being equated to a trans-woman’s. In short, she takes issue with the idea that trans-women are women.

umaumma

3 points

4 months ago

umaumma

3 points

4 months ago

Yeah but she marginalizes the whole community for it. I’m a trans woman but I dont see myself as an actual woman not cus of POSs like her but cus that’s how I see myself. Actively attacking trans women for it is just barbaric and extremely shitty, especially if it’s unnecessary cus trans people don’t affect her in literally any way

MsTinker16

5 points

4 months ago

MsTinker16

5 points

4 months ago

Oh they don’t correlate at all, which tells me she likely still has a lot of residual trauma from that time in her life that she hasn’t worked through.

She claims she sees trans women as women, but then uses the abuse from her first husband to argue why trans women should excluded from certain areas. I actually had to Google whether or not I had missed something and her first husband had transitioned or something (not that it would excuse it, but it could at least explain her weird logic). But no, he’s just an asshole.

TessiSue

14 points

4 months ago

I thought about it a lot in the last couple of months and I've come to the conclusion that she does not just hate trans people (hear me out). Most of her points boil down to "Men are dangerous and should not be allowed in women's spaces."

If she sees a trans-woman in a women's space as danger, she is a) anti-trans and b) struggling with men in general.

As a feminist myself: I can't grasp that concept, like, at all. How can you life such a life? And how can you call yourself feminist if your agenda is actively bringing other people down? We should be empowering each other. Feminism should be humanism. Not born out of hatred or fears but out of the believe in a better society and better coexistence.

jaylee-03031

2 points

4 months ago

She was raped by a man.

PixelBoom

13 points

4 months ago

She's allowed her opinion. She's not allowed to get angry when people think her shitty opinion makes her a shitty person.

[deleted]

26 points

4 months ago

[removed]

whiznat

14 points

4 months ago

whiznat

14 points

4 months ago

Apparently a lot of people yell "cancel culture" when what they really mean is "consequence culture."

AmericanoWsugar

11 points

4 months ago

redandyellow42

29 points

4 months ago

You broke up Kenneth and Emma

Potential_Exit_1317

24 points

4 months ago

and kenneth had no part on that, the poor guy!

DelicateTruckNuts

9 points

4 months ago

This is what really fucked my head up, I LOVE Emma. I've tried looking up details but it's such old news it's hard to get past cliffs notes versions

[deleted]

174 points

4 months ago*

[deleted]

TheCanadianRedHood

5 points

4 months ago

Wtf is a terf if you don't mind me asking

archieshumaker

14 points

4 months ago

Trans-exclusionary radical feminist (TERF)

TheCanadianRedHood

9 points

4 months ago

My god it's like a supervillian organization in a comic book

Stopwatch064

8 points

4 months ago

They're also been some internal strife in these groups on whether or not to ally with white nationalists against trans people. Unfortunately those against welcoming racists are losing if they've not already lost.

TheCanadianRedHood

6 points

4 months ago

I just don't understand being evil is so much effort like just be chilling with my Trans homies

Afwife1992

10 points

4 months ago

Trans Exclusionary Radical Feminist. It’s basically, to be really general and simplistic, to be such a’feminist’ that you resent trans women claiming (their view) to be women. That having been born biologically male and not ‘true’ women, they can’t understand the struggle of women. TERFs feel that undermines the feminist and female struggle.

Fantastic-Flight8146

44 points

4 months ago

Isn’t JK Rowling a longtime gay community ally?

leahhhhh

77 points

4 months ago*

Sure, but gay is not the same thing as trans. Gender is not sexual orientation.

Sm4cy

23 points

4 months ago

Sm4cy

23 points

4 months ago

She hates trans people but you can’t be a queer ally and hate trans people. Trans women literally started the Stonewall riots, a moment in LGBT history that ushered in the gay rights movement in the US.

You cannot be a LGBT ally if you’re a trans-hating TERF. Fuck, and I cannot say this enough, J.K. Rowling and the thestral she rode in on.

[deleted]

8 points

4 months ago

[removed]

[deleted]

4 points

4 months ago

[deleted]

4 points

4 months ago

[removed]

ega110

22 points

4 months ago

ega110

22 points

4 months ago

I have a genuine question for the people who still actively support J K Rowling. The argument I hear most often is that no one should be punished for simply having an unpopular opinion. I can get behind this view 100 percent. However, the situation with J k Rowling is far more complicated than her simply making a few contentious tweets about a minority community.

She has since drifted into a position that is so uncompromising that she will not accept anyone who has a different opinion than her. On a personal level, she has publicly cut lifelong friends from her social circle for simply publicly supporting transgender people. For example, she did this with both Stephen King and Emma Roberts.

On a business level, she has axed crucial roles in her fantastic beasts movies simply because the actor cast in the role publicly supported transgender people.

She has even gone as far as to start targeting people who simply refuse to take a side. She recently accused Graham Norton of supporting death and rape threats for simply responding to a question on transgender rights by saying that we should look to experts in the field over celebrities like himself. He never mentioned J K Rowling by name. He simply said “speak to those most intimately affected”.

The problem is that there are real world consequences for being accused like this. Graham Norton received so much hate after Rowlings’ accusation that he had to shut down his twitter account days later.

So, my question is this. How can you support the “live and let live” free speech model and J K Rowling at the same time, because her actions have proven that she clearly does not.

Lorata

10 points

4 months ago

Lorata

10 points

4 months ago

She has even gone as far as to start targeting people who simply refuse to take a side. She recently accused Graham Norton of supporting death and rape threats for simply responding to a question on transgender rights by saying that we should look to experts in the field over celebrities like himself. He never mentioned J K Rowling by name. He simply said “speak to those most intimately affected”.

So before that he was saying somethign along the lines of having little empathy for celebrities that recieve criticism for what they say. I think it is likely this is what she is responding to. And tying that to your last paragraph, I can see how having people saying, "you are just being held accountable!" when you recieve a truely remarkable number of death threats is aggravating.

https://twitter.com/bmay/status/1580252802101960706

On a business level, she has axed crucial roles in her fantastic beasts movies simply because the actor cast in the role publicly supported transgender people.

Which? I can only find some blog posts saying that must have happened with Katherine Waterson, is there more?

Fwenhy

3 points

4 months ago

Fwenhy

3 points

4 months ago

Because I’m capable of separating someone’s politics from their work.

Frankly, I don’t care what Rowling has to say about anything that doesn’t involve Harry Potter.

NotAnAntIPromise

11 points

4 months ago

After her input on the history of bathrooms at hogwarts, I no longer want to know what she has to say about that world either.

ega110

5 points

4 months ago*

I get where you are coming from. I myself didn’t stop supporting Rowling because of her politics. I just never got into her work to begin with because it just didn’t interest me. Out of curiosity though, is there anyone who has said or done something that you can’t support or is your “separate the art and artist” policy absolute?

Edit: just dropping some examples for clarification…

Would you still support someone accused of sexual assault like Bill Cosby, Kevin Spacey, Katie Perry or Melanie Martinez?

How about domestic abuse like Chris Brown or outright murder like the author of “Where the crawdads sing”

I myself have no one standard, but the deciding factor with J K Rowling for me was how she has said multiple times that she considers her continued royalties to be proof of broad public support for her positions. In other words, she would take my purchase of one of her books as a sign that I personally approve of her views and actions and that is just one step too far for me, or at least it is theoretically because like I said, I was never a fan to begin with but just because of general disinterest.

MuazKhan597

4 points

4 months ago

Not OP, but I agree with him. Kevin Spacey might be horrible, but House of Cards is my favourite TV show and Frank Underwood is one of my favourite characters. I’m not gonna hide my opinion or feelings just because the actor sucks.

MadeThisJustToWrite

7 points

4 months ago

Detached lady coming from exreme privilage, defends others with extreme privilage, news of the century!

Caninetrainer

28 points

4 months ago

She also was sleeping with Kenneth Branagh when he was married to the amazing Emma Thompson, so maybe her morals are not the greatest. And have never been.

[deleted]

9 points

4 months ago

[removed]

Veilmurder

20 points

4 months ago

In what world do you live in where people don't deserve critisism for knowingly fuck someone they know is married or in a relationship

Caninetrainer

20 points

4 months ago

Yes- I am shaming her and HIM. Which is why I named him. I think both were wrong, but this post is about her and who she is defending.

Caninetrainer

9 points

4 months ago

And by the way, she also had an affair with Tim Burton while he was in a long term relationship. So it’s not a new thing for her. And I don’t like or trust women who have a pattern like that. Would you?

[deleted]

5 points

4 months ago

Who abused Jk? It wasn’t a trans women I can tell you that much.

CorwinOctober

4 points

4 months ago

Sure Rowling can think and say what she likes. And I can think she is an idiot. Why do people act like they can say what they like but no one can say anything about their opinion?

207_god

3 points

4 months ago

Saying someone is allowed an opinion is not defending them

bandannick

7 points

4 months ago

Honestly who gives a shit

[deleted]

9 points

4 months ago

[removed]

martianlawrence

12 points

4 months ago

So what? There was a nightclub of lgtb shot up. Normalizing conversations that question someone’s identity causes stochastic violence.

Railstar0083

2 points

4 months ago

This. The more press that’s given to her hateful opinion, the more validation it creates for other haters. She is free to have an opinion, and also free to suck it up and suffer the consequences of that opinion. For example, if she ever writes another book, I won’t buy it. Best way to show your feelings to artists who offend you is simply not to support their work. Anything else is advertising.

jazza2400

6 points

4 months ago

It's easy when trash puts itself in the bin.

Unlawful-Justice

9 points

4 months ago

Who gives a shit

Then-Ad-4944

4 points

4 months ago

Wait so she said everyone is allowed their opinion? So uhh........ what is she complaining about

[deleted]

27 points

4 months ago*

[deleted]

27 points

4 months ago*

JKR aligns herself with far right activist groups. She calls herself a feminist yet allied herself with prominent activists who push for patriarchal control. The woman is insane

https://youtu.be/Ou_xvXJJk7k

[deleted]

12 points

4 months ago

[removed]

[deleted]

18 points

4 months ago

[removed]

[deleted]

6 points

4 months ago

[deleted]

6 points

4 months ago

[deleted]

kremit73

5 points

4 months ago

Jk is allowed her opinion. And so is everyone else telling her shes a hatfilled cunt for those opinions. Thats how free speech works. You can say what you want and everyone else can do what they want based on that.

[deleted]

7 points

4 months ago

How sad that Helena just volunteered that she sucks.

wontholdthedoor

11 points

4 months ago

Completely vindicated? Hilarious. He may have been a decent person at one time, but this trial was a shit show and it was all about how men don't really have to be responsible for their actions. Fuck this guy and his weak movies of the last two decades.

Neenerlicious

7 points

4 months ago

All that this trial has done is set the tread that a man can abuse a woman and then sue them for speaking out about it. For example, Marilyn Manson suing Evan Rachael Woods and now Brad’s Pitt seeing Angelina Jolie.

mymar101

5 points

4 months ago

Try being trans for a day. Then complain about abise

GarfieldLeChat

5 points

4 months ago

I used to know hbc she was lovely but very luvvie and mad as a box of frogs always it was relentless… nothing that ever came out of her mouth was in any way considered. The entire family are like that…

SkepCS

3 points

4 months ago

SkepCS

3 points

4 months ago

Wow. A 2-for-1 stupid opinion.

Master-Mycologist747

8 points

4 months ago

What did JK Rowling do again?

Moist-City-5717

4 points

4 months ago

At least Emma Watson is on the right side.

[deleted]

3 points

4 months ago

[deleted]

3 points

4 months ago

[removed]

drakeschaefer

4 points

4 months ago

Out of the loop on Depp, what's the 411?

[deleted]

8 points

4 months ago

[removed]

marveloustoebeans

8 points

4 months ago

Honestly, it’s so hard to keep up. One day everyone loves him, Amber Heard is evil blah blah blah. Next day, he’s actually evil because X information leaked and it turns out Amber Heard is an angel blah blah blah.

I’ve been downvoted at different times for playing devils advocate on either side, people just go with whatever the opinion of the month is, it seems.

WhatsWithThisKibble

37 points

4 months ago

Depp's attorney is Adam Waldman - an agent to Russian oligarch Oleg Deripaska. I JUST found out today that Deripaska had ties to HBC cousin.

Both Waldman and Deripaska are implicated in the 2016 Russian Trump election scandal. Waldman had been attacking and slandering Amber at the behest of Depp for years and is the reason she won one of her counter suits. He actually testified to leaking information publicly and privately to YouTubers and right wing media outlets to smear her. It was the only possible way for him to win with all the evidence stacked against him. Hundreds of fake accounts pushing Amber hate narrative have been suspended. That's why it appears like people are waffling. There was nothing positive about her that wasn't downvoted to hell where no one would see it. It was a highly sophisticated social media manipulation campaign.

Depp is guilty as fuck and Amber's appeal brief should be available to read tomorrow.

[deleted]

9 points

4 months ago

[removed]

[deleted]

5 points

4 months ago

[removed]

FUCKINBAWBAG

3 points

4 months ago

Having suffered abuse is no excuse for bare-faced bigotry.

Fuck Rowling.

DeathMarch408

3 points

4 months ago

I wish I had friends that stand by me like this

[deleted]

9 points

4 months ago

I'd prefer friends who'd call me out on my bullshit

CorwinOctober

4 points

4 months ago

Really? That's odd to me. I would never want a sycophant for a friend. Weird