Talk:J. K. Rowling/Archive1

This is an archive page, last updated 16 March 2024. Please do not make edits to this page.

Archives for this talk page:  , (new)(back)

Topic

Will work on this all day, but need to nip out to buy tobacco. Think it's a very good topic, because the response to Harry Potter typifies the problem with Fundamentalist Christianity. Thinking that a book about witchcraft will send children to hell; Grossly misrepresenting separation of Church & State for their purposes; Trying to ban or censor books they don't like; pointedly refusing to see the POINT and MORAL of a book because they're blinded by their faith, etc. etc. Will have sections of different groups' responses and on the revelation that Dumbledore was gay. ^EXTERMINATE 09:10, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

What did young HP achieve - apart from accidentally surviving Lord Voldemart's attempts to kill him? Did the other wizarding nations do a whip-round to aid the reconstruction of the wizarding community in the UK after LV's destructive activities - and did they plan on damage limitation exercises should future equivalents arise? ^{— Unsigned, by: 82.198.250.66 / talk / contribs}

It is certain. ΨΣΔξΣΓΩΙÐ^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 00:28, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

The insurance company is never going to believe what happened to Hogwarts in the last book. Let Them Eat Cake (talk) 18:37, 5 August 2012 (UTC)

So it's bad for them to say HP promotes Satanism or for that matter that The Muppets movie is Socialist, but fine to say HP promotes sexism and neoconservatism? I'm being consistent. It's just not there. Besides, Rowling is a staunch Labour supporter. A liberal, who's stated liberal views in interviews like supporting the Democrats in the 2008 election. Rabbitxhampster (talk) 03:21, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm going to put it back. It seems like the Grauniad's overreacting, Rowling's created one of the most influential feminist figures in children's fantasy (Hermione) and she almost turned her back on Labour while Tony Blair was blighting everything he touched. Osaka Sun (talk) 04:15, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Can you find a copy of the Rod Liddle article that isn't in the Times? We shouldn't cite sources you can only read with a paid subscription. Wēāŝēīōīď^{Methinks it is a Weasel} 11:07, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Why does this open with an inaccuracy?

“”Harry's world says that drinking dead animal blood gives power, a satanic human sacrifice and Harry's powerful blood brings new life, demon possession is not spiritually dangerous, and that passing through fire, contacting the dead, and conversing with ghosts, others in the spirit world, and more, is normal and acceptable.

—Harry Potter: Witchcraft Repackaged, a DVD incapable of making a distinction between fantasy novels and the occult.

This DVD is also, apparently, making shit up. "Drinking dead animal blood gives power", seriously? (For those who have not read the books, that ... is not a thing.) I guess I can sort of see a few of those as twisted versions of stuff in the books, but this quote goes far beyond "incapable of making a distinction between fantasy novels and the occult."

Should we say that, or just remove that from the top altogether, or what? Perhaps replace it with something less likely to mislead, if anyone is worried it might be unclear why we have an article on this at first. -MugaSofer (talk) 16:03, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

Rowling

Is it worth mentioning the controversies over Rowling including her alleged status as a TERF (unconfirmed) and her support for alleged domestic violence perpetrator Johnny Depp? It doesn't seem terribly relevant to this article, but it's the sort of thing mentioned on a lot of other articles.[1][2][3] She also crops up on Wings Over Scotland, as her views on Scottish nationalism have been even more tediously controversial (English person doesn't support Scottish nationalism!). --Annanoon (talk) 10:06, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

Removed Johnny Depp section

It's just straight up gossip, not to mention that entire case from my understanding has been the subject of endless back-and-forthing with not much related to our mission. Techpriest ^{(I am Alpharius! / / / )} 10:06, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

See you next Tuesday

“... proclaim of how much of a cunt they are.”

Really?

47.209.20.52 (talk) 06:16, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

Protecting this page?

Are we being raided by TERFs or what? Maybe we should proctect this page. GeeJayK (talk) 18:58, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

Actually, just checked the fossil record and it's not as bad as I thought. GeeJayK (talk) 18:59, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

JK as leftist who turned right with age

@Tuxer Isn't too early for that? Transphobia isn't a monopoly of the right, and one can criticize Corbyn and be on the left. GeeJayK (talk) 19:17, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Another reason for a center-left/center-right category in my opinion. GeeJayK (talk) 19:18, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Also goes to show how much the world has changed in the past few decades. 30 years ago when Rowling was writing her books, simply believing that gay people should be allowed to exist, just preferably Someplace Else, would've been center-left. Now if you aren't convinced that Trans Women are effectively the same as Cis Women, you might as well join the Klan. Personally, I'm more of the "tolerance" camp, the whole "radical, reciprocal inclusiveness" thing, where we should accept just about any weirdo that is also willing to accept everyone else in return. I'm still going to view you as a weirdo though, even if I don't give a shit about in which toilet you shit. CorruptUser 19:46, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

She's a centrist or centre-left, supporting the right wing of the Labour party. She's even humorously described herself as a "filthy bourgeois neoliberal centrist".[4] Aside from her anti-trans politics her positions are generally liberal rather than leftist or rightist (pro abortion rights, anti-Israel boycott and anti-Netenyahu, anti-Trump, slightly environmentalist, hints at fat acceptance, moderately pro-gay, fond of the Obamas, etc).[5] --Annanoon (talk) 11:06, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

Recent minor edit war

Personally I agree with @VerminWiki, what has Hermione got to do with anything? Christopher (talk) 22:14, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

Same, but this is something that should be on the talk pages before it gets removed. Rockford the Roe ^{boop my snoot}_{praise Oscar Wilde} 22:16, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

@Rockford the Roe If you want to leave this in you need to elaborate on why Hermione's existence being counter to sexism. VerminWiki (talk) 22:18, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

Rockford also agrees with you, it’s @CircularReasoning who reverted your edit. I’ve reinstated your edit for now, I think this was just a misunderstanding. Christopher (talk) 22:22, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

I think the reason why that was put in there by whoever originally put it in there was because she's a strong female character. --Goatspeed. _{Fossil evidence of my evolution}CircularRasoning^{Prototype lab} 01:50, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

You know what I think we should get rid of the whole sentence. Labour may not be conservative but neoconservative, well somebody forgot the Blair years. 68.0.188.149 (talk) 07:03, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

Great now everybody knows my IP address fuck VerminWiki (talk) 07:05, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

Troubled Blood

I mean, apparently this book of hers has a crossdresser male serial killer, which I think is worth noting.

See this page under "Unfortunate Implications".

Exaskliri (talk) 09:25, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

I'd almost forgotten, but yes, definitely topical. I'm unvolunteering from reading it, though! Kntai (talk) 09:33, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

TERF?

How can she be a TERF when she categorically isn't a radical feminist? I don't deny she's anti-trans (although I found myself agreeing with some basic tenants of her views) and completely misses the point on 90% of trans issues...--2A00:23C4:3E08:4000:388E:60BF:3F2B:DBCB (talk) 20:13, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

retweeting does not a nazi make

show one racist statement from rowling. just one, knowingly making a racist statement, show me.

liking a tweet is not racist just because the tweeter is a racist. it does not endorse the tweeters racism. it does not indicate they are even aware of who the tweeter. all it shows is a transphobe liking tweets that support their transphobia, with no regard for who is retweeting.

is transphobia too minor an offence for you? is it not serious enough for you? why do you think spurious accusations of not just racism, but nazism, are necessary? does rowling's name need any more demonisation? her name is pretty much mud is most places and deservingly so.

nope rockets obsession with her does not do us or trans rights any favours. get a grip and knock it off. AMassiveGay (talk)

"Show me one hateful thing JKR said!" has become such a common form of bad-faith sea lioning that it's become a meme. You clearly don't know what you're talking about and you don't seem keen to learn. So maybe leave article-editing to people who are willing to do the research and stay on top of new developments instead of pointlessly JAQing off. Nope Rocket (talk) 18:28, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

(EC) At best, this is guilt by association. And that is supposing that this other person is actually Nazi, which I still haven't seen evidence. Is she an ultranationalist, white supremacist, anti-communist? GeeJayK^{Where all evil dwells} _{Where every lie is true} 18:30, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

The para-fascist category is unnecessary, but with her consistent slavery apologetics (in true "really embarrassing moderates" form) alone I think there's certainly a sound argument to be made for the racists tag. Chillpilled (talk) 18:33, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Her ideology is not fascistic but she bends so far backwards in offensive, vile TERFism she does invariably endorse like a third-removed Neo-Nazi adjacent. That makes her a harmful transphobe, but not a "para-fascist" (that category should be used sparingly if at all) The "racist" category is slightly more fitting but I still would leave out because it's not actively malicious just appalling stubborn ignorance. Her transphobia amounting to hating a POC-inclusive pride flag (which I assume is trans inclusive) hardly crosses the line. Hey, Nope Rocket, engage with the argument rather than assuming bad faith. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 18:34, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

Since this apparently isn't in the page, check it out: https://web.archive.org/web/20170929062836/https://www.pottermore.com/features/to-spew-or-not-to-spew-hermione-granger-and-the-pitfalls-of-activism it strikes me as worse than what she put in the books but the page is apparently gone now. Interestingly, this attitude towards social justice activism by Rowling when it comes to slavery offers some insight to why she's got disdain for pro-trans activists too, I believe. Chillpilled (talk) 18:40, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

Reactionary opposition to social change and conspiracy-based demonisation of a minority group that simultaneously invests them with great power and delusional weakness. Thus "para-fascist" because she hasn't gone full nationalist or embraced authoritarianism. She still seems to think democracy is good but wants the government to oppress and control people she hates. I could probably find a number of sources that applied the proper F-word to her politics. But I've got limited time to spend and I'd rather focus on creating articles we don't have than humouring a bad-faith argument. Nope Rocket (talk) 18:46, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

Ultranationalism and racism are two of the most defining parts of fascism, even in its mitigated forms. So far you haven't proved that she's actually a racist, let alone an ultranationalist. Also, please, stop assuming bad-faith, so far everyone on this page seems to disagree with you. Are we all arguing in bad-faith? GeeJayK^{Where all evil dwells} _{Where every lie is true} 18:51, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

ec. so you have nothing to support your accusation? how exactly is my argument in bad faith? is it just that it disagrees with you? try addressing my argument rather than think your ideas are so unassailable you dont need to defend them. AMassiveGay (talk) 18:53, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

(edit conflict) "Reactionary opposition to social change and conspiracy-based demonisation of a minority group that simultaneously invests them with great power and delusional weakness" that's one of the definitions for fascists but this is not the only one; otherwise this would fit all TERFs, and TERF is a spectrum ranging from the "I don't hate you but you don't understand cis women issues and you aren't a feminist" to the "trans people are groomers and we should mandate out their existences". To paint them with a broad stroke of "para-fascist" like that, eh? It's almost like the use of the term "communists" or "socialist" to describe vaguely supporting federal extended worker protections. Also we also established that "para-fascist" should refer to transitionary regimes and not to individuals because the vague definition you made with them was why I found so much issue with the category and brought it up in the Category talk. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 19:00, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

I believe the racists category ought to stay, as there are solid arguments behind it that have been discussed around the fandom for years and aren't just liking or retweeting things (which nonetheless can serve as supporting evidence though). In addition to the slavery thing there's her naming conventions (Kingsley Shacklebolt, Cho Chang, the wizarding schools on other continents). It's not cross-burning but it's still kind of racist. The para-fascists category is a non-starter IMO, because it's been established at the category talk that it's a more narrow defined category, as I understand. Chillpilled (talk) 19:03, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

I could see the racist category staying but the evidence for it, factoring intent, it's really shaky. She probably has intentions of wanting to create a multicultural wizard world (which is removed from being sincerely racist) but she ends up playing to lazy stereotypes. Her results ended up very racist, definitely, but I think maybe it's better served as a more complex discussion in the article body than a category. If she wasn't a TERF IMO and was this milquetoast trans supporter (think the average Biden-esque pro-capitalist Democrat in the United States) with the same wizard world with the bad names and whatnot, and she makes uncommitted retweets to like pundits complaining about TERFS, I don't think people would be as quick to label her racist. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 19:10, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

>If she wasn't a TERF IMO and was this milquetoast trans supporter [...] I don't think people would be as quick to label her racist.

I somewhat agree but don't you think people would still be quite critical of her insane both-sidesing of slavery? I think that is really the strongest evidence here, with naming conventions as secondary evidence and random RTs/likes as tertiary (or more secondary perhaps) evidence. Especially given that the slavery is in the context of a whole fictional race being enslaved. It seems very clear cut to me and also, some have pointed out that she lent some credence to Hermione being black in the past on Twitter which makes the anti-SPEW posing stranger. Chillpilled (talk) 19:17, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

disagree. her work is a product of lazy writing relying on long established fantasy tropes. so established are these tropes that even they were originated with racist or anti-semitic intent, that it will lost to any reader who is making an academic study of racism and anti semitism. if rowling is a racist for using them then so is every fantasy author that has ever lived. i am not aware of any claims or of her statements that racist or antisemitic that do not concern interpretations of harry potter. it really is transphobia that we can hand on heart accuse her off AMassiveGay (talk) 19:19, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

I would not argue for an 'antisemites' category and consider that a bit of a separate question; indeed the arguments for her being antisemitic are pretty much just reliant on her use of fantasy tropes. I believe the racism question includes some stances of hers that are much more unique to her however. Also here's a snippet I meant to add to my last comment: "Keep in mind that before her going down the TERF rabbit-hole, socially-progressive people were already making fun of her completely tokenized inclusion on a regular basis, e.g. with 'Dumbledore is gay', and else-wise mocking her uber-status-quo centrist-liberalism (which stands completely in line with the slavery both-sidesing)." Chillpilled (talk) 19:22, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

AMassiveGay clearly is arguing in bad faith given that he's broken out the classic "Show me one hateful thing JKR said" and "Twitter likes aren't endorsements" (five years after that latter excuse's expiration date). Here is a screenshot of JKR retweeting someone saying "get your shit off our flag" in reference the Progress Pride flag. The "shit" in question refers to stripes representing people of colour and trans people. Pretty unambiguously racist. Kellie-Jay Keen -- who JKR has spent the last few days endorsing -- also has has a very dodgy history on this front including screaming "go wash your dick" at BLM protestors. JKR has spent the last day screaming about how KJK had soup thrown at her in New Zealand but said nothing about KJK's security guards throwing a Aboriginal cis woman senator to the ground in Australia. Nope Rocket (talk) 19:16, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

(EC) I agree with LGM. While I could live in a world where our page on JKR calls her a racist, I still find the evidence wanting. I'm not saying that she isn't a racist, just that I don't think we have enough evidence to call her that. Like, she is a TERF. But that doesn't make her a racist. It'd say that Harry dating... Cho Chang? I think that was the girl's name... Kinda implies that she at least supports to interrational relationships , something that most racists aren't, though you can argue that this is also an awful low bar. GeeJayK^{Where all evil dwells} _{Where every lie is true} 19:20, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

@Nope Rocket Your screenshot shows that she's an asshole, not a racist. She's clearly talking about trans people, but there's nothing that remotely suggest that she's also talking about POCs. GeeJayK^{Where all evil dwells} _{Where every lie is true} 19:24, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

Chillpill: "but don't you think people would still be quite critical of her insane both-sidesing of slavery" of course they would be, they wouldn't excuse her in this hypothetical scenario, (people are still very critical of Tolkien and Dahl iirc although those authors predate U.K. Englishlady so a product of their time thing?) but I think they'd still be charitable would probably consider this brow-raising and not quite enough to label her a racist? They'd chalk it up to the whims from an out-of-touch white person. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 19:29, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

indeed. nothing that cannot be attributed to lazy writing and tired tropes. we read too much into a book about a magic schooolboy ;;;;;;;;;;AMassiveGay (talk) 19:35, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

and nope rocket, i specifically stated racist not hateful. racism being the pertinent issue. geejayk has spelled out the blindingly obvious as to why your example is nonsense. AMassiveGay (talk) 19:39, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

As seen in the Pottermore archive I linked before, she's making a very explicit political ideological argument about slavery ("Yeah but what if the slaves wanna be slaves?"), which I think is very clearly not at all just lazy writing but political argumentation (she uses the term 'activism' to criticize Hermione who is a stand-in for social justice reformers). Chillpilled (talk) 19:41, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

The black and brown stripes are wiped out in that graphic right along with the trans price stripes. There is no plausible deniability there. So she's not a raging white supremacist, but if that's the standard of racism in operation here, lots of racist people will get a pass. I always felt the Cho Chang was mostly just tonedeaf because I'm old enough to remember the kind of lazy tokenistic representation that was considered good in the 1990s. That said I'm not willing to discount those who would charge Rowling with racism on that basis. Combined with her political statements and allegiances, it's enough to support the label "racist." Anyway, I gave this site a second chance but I'm done. Nope Rocket (talk) 19:40, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

that she is a white supremacist is simply not claim that is supported by the evidence presented. the claim is nonsense. you are seeing what you want to see AMassiveGay (talk) 19:46, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

JFC, are you evening reading my comments? I explicitly said she's "not a raging white supremacist" but pointed out racism is broad spectrum that covers more than just avowed white supremacy. Stop putting words in my mouth. This is the second time you've done that (accusing me of calling her a "Nazi" when I deemed her "para-fascist"). The fact you're arguing against blatant straw men makes it even more transparent you're not approaching this in good faith of interested in actually considering evidence that contradicts your preconceived conclusions. Like I said, I'm done. Nope Rocket (talk) 19:55, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

i misread. i apologise. my point still stands. you seeing what you want to seeAMassiveGay (talk) 19:59, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

I hope you'll reconsider; to have you go over a labeling dispute would suck. Many of the things which you find important to document on pages here, we do as well. Chillpilled (talk) 19:54, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

And now the bothsidesist image rehabilitation programme has reached the point of someone scrubbing the fact JKR is a Libs of TikTok supporter and has developed an insane cult of personality where her followers literally wear cutout masks of her face. You do good and necessary work, Chillpilled, but I fear RW is a lost cause. Nope Rocket (talk) 23:28, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

The way I saw it when editing Wikipedia was that if a decent chunk of my edits stood then I was doing well enough. Something I didn't realize about that Libs of TikTok mention when I had added it, is that I'd inserted it into a section which was specifically about the Harry Potter series. Her like on that same tweet is still mentioned in this other section in addition to what LGM mentioned (in fact may need to remove either of the duplicate mentions). The cult of personality is a thing I've seen, but isn't mentioned in the article as yet. It reminds me somewhat of stan culture. Chillpilled (talk) 23:55, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

It isn't an example of stan culture. It's an ideologically-based based cult of personality akin to that of Jordan Peterson. Her cultish TERF following doesn't love her for her books or her media presence as stans would. They like her for her politics because her public professions of transphobia validate their own bigotry. Nope Rocket (talk) 00:16, 27 March 2023 (UTC)

(edit conflict) As an aside, Nope Rocket: That's not grounds for assuming bad faith. Engage. If AMG refuses to engage (as opposed to disagreeing, challenging your statements) or makes strawmans/misrepresents your arguments, repeatedly, etc. i.e. has shown no signs of debating to try to discern the truth of statements rather than to "win", that's bad faith. This isn't bad faith, it's a challenge to your edits. He's asking you not to show a "hateful" thing, he's asking you to show a "racist" thing. You made attempts at examples but people seem to agree that the racism is just transphobia.
Also, AMG is also correct to express skepticism regarding Twitter actions IMO, because the extremely limited and possibly ambiguous nature of "retweeting" or "liking" transphobic tweets that just so happen to be made by a racist on top of a transphobe, it is not necessarily an endorsement of racism. Even one tweet of her saying things should be taken with a grain of salt and should preferably supported (U.K. Englishlady luckily has tons of transphobic opinions and actions outside Twitter) because Twitter often doesn't clarify views; it actually can obfuscate them through character limits (and the aforementioned retweets and likes) and also the site's atmosphere validating and granting visibility to opinions that rile people up rather than more well-thought ones that probably better illustrate a particular stance. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 19:50, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

Also regarding the flag anti endorsement: yhe trans stripes is the reason she hates it. It's obvious why she'd tweet it, she doesn't want trans people share a spot there. I don't think she'll retweet the thing if it was a lesbian flag with people of color stripes. Also we gave a lot of people that aren't raging white supremacists the "racist" label; a lot of anti-immigrant Tories and Republicans are saddled with that label, are they not?

One more thing, I understand this argument is heated but I suggest much more patience with people (and this applies to other people here, not just you) rather than giving up at any sign of disagreement or a devil's advocate challenge. I've witnessed and been involved in far worse and contentious debates involving trivial Super Mario™ characters.[6][7][8] --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 19:50, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

Chillpilled: I think she's just wanting a copout answer for that reality. I won't deny that she probably doesn't like activism she sees as misguided hence the ridiculing of Hermoine here and it illuminates her ideology as this uncommitted pro-capitalist Biden/Obama liberal (like in my hypothetical!) who really doesn't keep on top of political analysis or literary analysis. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 19:50, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

reading through that pottermore article, its just playing out a 'what if' scenario. the conclusion still says hermione is right but naive in thinking it wont be a long progress. at best its tone deaf. AMassiveGay (talk) 19:57, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

I just re-read it and it's a pot of false balance, tone policing, etc. on an incredibly sensitive issue that in the UK/US is very racially charged. The line "‘tricking’ elves into freedom is arguably as unethical as enslavement" is quite the knee-slapper. I can see where you're coming from at least, but if you can see where I'm coming from here too, you should see why keeping the category isn't exactly so out of bounds. Chillpilled (talk) 20:09, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

it presents it as debate within the harry potter, and how it would play out that universe. as slaves, house elfs are very different to slaves to in the real world,. i have no idea of the story of how they came to be slaves in the first place, ive not seen that discussed, but it seems in harry potter they are absent of the trauma something like the triangular slave trade.

the race issue is in the uk is not as prominent as it is in the us, not saying things are any better but it is different in a lot of fundamental ways that it plays out differently. the article is tone deaf, but a lack of awareness of the issues that many in the uk have been oblivious to and still are is not really a damning indictment of rowling here. of the uk perhaps but not rowling specifically.

this on its own is not enough to justify a racist tag imhoAMassiveGay (talk) 20:27, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

Well I guess I failed to sway consensus short of other editors commenting later on or else my remembering some other smoking-gun I've forgotten about (in her books published as Galbraith she has some stuff that's arguably anti-Muslim if I recall right but that's just sort of "racism-adjacent" the way antisemitism is so I haven't brought it up). I'll leave it be for now. It's just categories, I doubt most readers pay a lot of attention to them anyway. Chillpilled (talk) 20:34, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

Yeah honestly people pay more attention to the body text than a category. I haven't paid attention to categories for years as a wiki reader until I started editing and even then, not right away. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 20:37, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

it seems to be too often a way to accuse people of something on the sly. they are 'only' categories, but they make bold claims. but honestly, we read too much into a book about a magic school boy AMassiveGay (talk) 20:40, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

On another note, the Category:Cult leaders is... 🤨 I removed it. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 20:50, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

ha, my point exactly AMassiveGay (talk) 20:55, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

Thinking on it some more, I'm coming up with additional arguments either side of her being racist (atm I think she may kind of be but unintentionally so). I think this should just be turned into a section discussing the topic and leaving it to the reader. Some things that lacked mention above, how she described non-white characters in the Galbraith novels. The general concepts of "wizard vs. halfblood vs. muggle" and how this was handled. She made a pro BLM statement in 2020 and was pro refugees earlier on. Also there seem to be some academic journal papers discussing race in the Harry Potter series, such as whatever this was which is from 2010. Also whatever this is from 2022. There are more papers than that but just examples; I didn't realize academic analysis on this was around but it makes sense I guess. Chillpilled (talk) 21:07, 26 March 2023 (UTC) The way she handled wizard vs. halfblood seems egalitarian to me but the way she handled wizards vs. muggles very not so... it's not a one-to-one race thing but with the talk of "blood" and it being passed from parents it's close. Chillpilled (talk) 21:19, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

this is just lazy writing imho. theres an attempt at a broad tackling racism within her kids books, it just done kack handedly AMassiveGay (talk) 21:30, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I don't think her pro-refugee statement and pro BLM statements are necessarily mutually exclusive to her depictions of nonwhite cultures in her fiction. She's just not very committed to these positions so they seem contradictory and wishy-washy when you investigate the framework she's on. It's, well, lazy ideology which amounts to lazy writing. Moreover, she's willing to abandon these principles/carve out nasty exceptions when it comes to trans people. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 21:32, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

the books are just being over analysed because they are so wildly (and inexplicably) popular. and rowling just couldnt stop talking about them. i doubt she had any idea they would be so scrutinised, intending just a fun book for kids. they should be seen in that context, rather than as a deliberate and well reasoned or consistent incite into her world views or as some kind of manifesto. damn her on her actual opinions rather than her fiction. she is completely unable to keep her mouth shut - if she were any kind of racist, she'd be racist tweeting long ago AMassiveGay (talk) 21:42, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

in english lit, you study shakespeare, chaucer, hardy etc. you dont study the very hungry caterpillar AMassiveGay (talk) 21:48, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

Welll, to be fair to kids' books, I'd argue The Very Hungry Caterpillar has a place regarding contemporary cultural and artistic analysis (there's some interesting commentary on the Wikipedia page) but in terms of like political ideology and socioeconomic commentary, not much you can glean off of it without having to go into the author's life experiences. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 22:01, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

I've about had my fill of "pondering Rowling or her writing" for a month (or twelve) personally. For some context on the conversation above though: I could speculate that part of why Rocket was particularly set on this (a part that was alluded to but not wholly elaborated on) is the other background details on Kellie Jaye Keen, including what I dumped at Draft talk:Kellie-Jaye Keen-Minshull along with the fact Rowling was supporting Keen-Minshull the other day. Chillpilled (talk) 21:55, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

Nope Rocket: The Libs of Tik Tok thing was relocated, not removed.[9] I also maintain that calling her a cult leadsr is also a stretch compared to just characterizing it as a batshit fandom on the Internet. --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 23:46, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

This is quite unambiguously a cult of personality. Harry Potter fans don't do this. There's now a very stark divide between Potter fans and Rowling fans. Remaining Potter fans would generally cosplay as characters. The only people cosplaying as Rowling and having #JKRLadiesLunches is the cult-like following of TERFs and assorted transphobes she's attracted in the past three years. If you want Category:Cult leaders to house only the religious sense of "cult," then Trump, Alex Jones, Jordan Peterson, etc need to go as well. It honestly seems like a number of editors here don't actually know how far gone JKR is. Nope Rocket (talk) 00:06, 27 March 2023 (UTC)

In general, I'd favor looser use of categories than stricter, for most (some exceptions like ones having to do with crimes and ones we choose to use narrowly like para-fascists). For stuff like "cult leader" I do favor a looser use of it this way, partly just because it's kind of cheeky and this isn't Wikipedia (and also just because it's somewhat subjective where the line on that is anyway once you start putting it on Stalin's page for instance). Though there is certainly some type of line in this view of categories of mine, that people do still cross, e.g. using the "TERFs" category for people who aren't even feminist, I guess.

I hadn't realized though, that apparently (at the least) several active editors think all categories should be used by strict definitions or something. Also RE: your other comment, yeah comparing it to stan culture may have been downplaying it (though in actuality just intended to show my disdain for stan culture, yet still). Chillpilled (talk) 00:19, 27 March 2023 (UTC)

You stated above that you've had your fill of Rowling for a while. It's understandable that many people aren't plugged into her nonsense and the nonsense of TERFdom in general. Everyone must choose what they want to focus on and what battles they want to fight. Transphobia is weirdly corrosive. It rots the brains of those who fall into it in a special way, and it grinds at the hope, patience, and general faith in humanity of pro-trans rights people who try to document it. You can probably tell from this discussion that I've exhausted my stores of those things. I think I'm still feel in a headframe to document transphobia on RW, but I just can't with trying to explain why it's so scary and wrong to people who can't or won't understand. Nope Rocket (talk) 00:38, 27 March 2023 (UTC)

It's also telling that the only women's issue Rowling has concerned herself with besides her crusade against trans-rights is the Iranian woman's liberation movement. Not pay equality. Not abortion rights. Not #MeToo. Not abysmal rape conviction rates or rape-kit processing backlogs. Not any of the other things feminists have fought against in the last decade. Concern trolling over the state of women's rights in the Islamic world is often a plausibly-deniable proxy for Islamophobia and racism the way that concerning trolling over ~~women's spaces~~ is a proxy for transphobia. KJK has a similar history. There's blatant Islamophobia in her Mumsnet posting history and she was disowned by a TERF group for her "her stated views on race and religion." Nope Rocket (talk) 01:05, 27 March 2023 (UTC)

I get what you mean. If you're super burnt out on a certain subject you can edit elsewhere for a while or take a break however.

Kind of random suggestion, but I was thinking about starting a blog as an outlet to talk about these matters among other random less-depressing ones. You may benefit from the same? Chillpilled (talk) 01:18, 27 March 2023 (UTC)

Jon Stewart doesn't think that Jk Rolwin is antisemtic

A simple research shows precisely that. Such as BBC or NBC --Tuxer (talk) 22:34, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, I recall, he doesn't but he was trying to call attention to the goblin portrayal through a light-hearted manner. Is there a way we can word this? --It's-a me, LeftyGreenMario! 22:40, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

Just take his name out of it. Or a separate sentence saying he just poked fun at it or something. Chillpilled (talk) 22:48, 26 March 2023 (UTC)