Read on Twitter
I really don't care if people wanna read Harry Potter. The books are a central pillar of modern pop culture. I assume most households own a set or two. (I certainly do!)
But, like, maybe don't continue to enrich a woman who's revealed her supposed good qualities as fraudulent?
But, like, maybe don't continue to enrich a woman who's revealed her supposed good qualities as fraudulent?
When Silence of the Lambs came out in 1991, there was a huge outcry over Buffalo Bill, even as the movie went out of its way to say Bill isn't "a real transsexual." ('kay)
Rowling's new book is somehow MORE transphobic than Silence of the Lambs. Also, like, terribly written.
Rowling's new book is somehow MORE transphobic than Silence of the Lambs. Also, like, terribly written.
I adore Silence of the Lambs! One of the great horror movies! I think it exacerbated a pop culture trope that has led to the demonization of trans women. It can be both!
Also, like, when Jonathan Demme learned people were mad at him, he made Philadelphia.
Rowling doubled down.
Also, like, when Jonathan Demme learned people were mad at him, he made Philadelphia.
Rowling doubled down.
I THINK Rosenberg's central point is that Rowling's recently espoused bigotry doesn't reflect the values of her most famous books. Maybe! (Though the house elf thing is p. sketchy.)
But you'll forgive trans people for mostly seeing her recently espoused bigotry.
But you'll forgive trans people for mostly seeing her recently espoused bigotry.
Many artists' legacies include a whole heaping helping of bigotry. It's worth considering their prejudices within the context of their lives and their work. A lot of them are dead, tho! They're not making billions of dollars off merchandising deals! Just something to consider!
I'm never gonna tell you what you can and can't read. You love Harry Potter? Go for it. Read every book seven times.
Forgive me for thinking your justifications for doing so are largely empty attempts to say, "Look at what she says, not what she does!"
Forgive me for thinking your justifications for doing so are largely empty attempts to say, "Look at what she says, not what she does!"
(Actually don't read every book seven times. Some of them badly needed editing.)
There are other books that espouse Rowling's basic themes, many of them written by non-transphobes! Why not seek those out and champion them? If nothing else, J.K. fuckin Rowling doesn't need the press.
Fuck.
Fuck.
My beloved colleague @constancegrady has an amazing piece on literally all of this! https://www.vox.com/culture/21449215/troubled-blood-review-jk-rowling-transphobia-controversy
One last thought: Comparing people refusing to engage with Rowling because of her overtly expressed transphobia to people refusing to engage with Cuties because of imagined QAnon conspiracy theories is a gross oversimplification from a writer I admire, who should know better.
Like LITERALLY YESTERDAY, Rowling posted a photo of merchandise she bought from a store that sells pins reading "Trans Women Are Men" and worse.
Being concerned about transphobia does not equal an imagined conspiracy theory. Not even close.
Being concerned about transphobia does not equal an imagined conspiracy theory. Not even close.
