Never Meet Your Heroes

[angua9]

*sigh* Just my luck.

I've been wallowing in Harry Potter nostalgia during this lockdown, indulging myself with some long-overdue essay writing, re-reading the books, discovering new fan fiction, etc., and then finding myself really enjoying Rowling's new children's book "The Ickabog." So naturally J.K. Rowling has to choose this time to remind

Comments

[connielane]

Yeah the old "Rowling cultist" thing was never literal -- just an insult our former debate opponents threw at us that we jokingly turned into a badge of honor (like they did with "delusional"). I confess that I had always had admiration for JKR as a person because she *has* put a lot of good into the world. And she could be so wonderfully snarky, which is my number one kink. And all of that is still true about her. But she has undeniably harmed people as well, even if she thinks she's doing the right thing (she absolutely is not, but I can't imagine she would be so adamant if she weren't convinced she was right). She says she's read a lot on the subject but I have to wonder *what* she is reading and if it's just further indoctrinating her in this toxic viewpoint.

None of it makes me never want to read the books again, though I certainly understand why others feel they can't. I know that my ability to still enjoy them is largely possible because of my privilege as a cis straight white woman. But I think we as a culture would be well served if we did less "stanning" and stopped placing people in moral leadership positions when their job is to entertain us. I've always thought it was great that people took life lessons from the HP books and have been inspired to activism because of them. But at the end of the day, that's not the books' primary purpose. And while the books may have been the initial spark of that activism, Rowling really doesn't have anything to do with it beyond that.

[author_by_night]

Honestly, JKR is basically Percy Weasley in OoTP. She's so convinced that she's right, she doesn't care who she hurts. She's the worst kind of Gryffindor, because I do think that's a very dark side of the House. IRL, the dark side of being someone driven by causes and action.

[angua9]

I can't imagine she would be so adamant if she weren't convinced she was right

Yes, I'm sure she gets her self-righteous certitude from the feeling that she is defending the vulnerable, which in this case is apparently cis women being "attacked" by trans women who had male privilege before they visibly transitioned and I don't know, I guess are considered to be extra aggressive or scary or something because of testosterone?

But, wow, I seriously don't feel threatened in that way at all, just like I don't understand how my straight marriage could have been harmed in any way by gay marriage.

[connielane]

The fact that these women had male privilege before they transitioned feels like reason to be ESPECIALLY compassionate toward them and TRUST their claim to that identity. Because why would they give that up if it weren't something they knew in their soul was right for them? Why would they trade it for not just the discrimination that cis women face, but the EXTRA discrimination (and outright danger!) they must know they'll face being trans?