J.K. Rowling’s new book isn’t actually about a transvestite serial killer

[drbat]

JK Rowling's Troubled Blood: don't judge a book by a single review https://t.co/bx9sVK2xmS
- Guardian Books (@GuardianBooks) September 15, 2020

The Telegraph review chose to go big on [the character] Creed, describing him as “a transvestite serial killer” and asking “what critics of Rowling’s stance on trans issues” would make of it. But Creed is

Comments

[bttrsondaughter]

cool explanation, but she’s still transphobic and is using her massive platform to spread rhetoric that is actively harming trans people, so maybe the Guardian can cut us some slack for not giving her the benefit of the doubt on this one

[teenxwolf]

fr what is this gotcha moment? wow we thought someone who generates press from their transphobia was continuing to generate press from transphobia, u got us

[drbat]

[eldvno]

How is it actively harming trans people? Where is the actual evidence of that? I'm really tied of that line being used when there is zero evidence of that happening. Stop blaming women's words for men's actions.

[trueloveisrarex]

Lmao

[bttrsondaughter]

Trying to frame this as a feminist issue is bullshit, as is the insulation that the only way her words can be considered harmful is if they are inciting violence.

Insisting that trans people do not exist, penning essays that basically include every single anti-trans dog whistle in the book is harmful, especially when the person doing that has an audience the size of JKR. Her opinion influences people and that bigotry and prejudice festers and infects so many people. It might not translate to violence but that doesn’t mean it’s not harmful

[eldvno]

I'm not going to say that she or anyone else said that "trans people don't exist", but I'll take your word for it. But this idea that her words influence bigotry and infects so many people and then turn an eye to what actual TRAs say? Nagl.

For reference, nothing JKR has ever said would count as a literal violation of the 1st amendment (even thought she is not in the US). But the TRAs who last week said: "suck my chopped off dick, btch", "why hasn't this violent transphobe been jumped yet? I'm gonna need you cis bits to step up"? Those both are clear directives inciting violence.

She might have more followers but telling people they have failed at being a trans ally if they don't violently attack JKR? Imo, that's not comparable.

[simontheduck]

Yeah, the language that people use to attack her is scary and I've honestly just checked out of those posts/threads entirely because it's frightening. Pretty telling that men with the same opinions get off without any backlash, and yet JKR is the one who deserves to die/be raped, punched, shot, etc. Even if she was literally Alex Jones this would still not be okay.

Once again as I always say the problem is men. The people out there killing transpeople? Men. The people out there who won't be influenced by a woman's words no matter her fame or cultural influence? Men.

😔 Guess I'm too pacifist for modern day activism. lol

[omni_videns]

I agree and it's what bugs me about the whole "punch TERFs" narrative.

Leave the fucking TERFs alone to have their menstrual blood moon circles and folk music festivals and start advocating for beating the shit out of cis men who actually *are* harming trans women.

[minouminou]

Come on, to say a bunch of sheltered idiots mouthing off on Twitter is an incitement to violence is a bit much. People have said more radical and violent things online in defence of Selena Gomez.

[triviagogo29]

Lol it’s so fucking stupid to act as if random weirdos on Twitter being violent are compare to a multi-billionaire author that is one of the most powerful people on the world.

“Omg it must be so scary for this vastly powerful billionaire that can easily hire someone to run her social media to read some weirdo anon Twitter users saying violent shit”.

Those people aren’t even TRYING with their bullshit argument lmao

[eldvno]

People with tens of thousands of followers, blue check marks, and bylines in TeenVogue and seats on major non profits are not "random weirdos".

Someone who sits on a humans rights organization should not be telling their followers they are secretly against trans people because they haven't assaulted someone to the point where they lose all their teeth. You are being purposefully obtuse because I even pointed out that their follower count is incredibly different.

[triviagogo29]

JK Rowling is a billionaire Iraq War defender. So-called violent discourse (and I have a hard time believing in your interpretation of what progressives are saying to her) pales in comparison to the actual violence she defends (on the top of her transphobia, which you’re still in denial over).

[eldvno]

See? You are proving my goddamn point. You just refuse to believe because it's inconvenient for your argument.

I don't care about JKR, I'm not defending her although you probably think I am. I'm arguing against the clear misogyny and libel being thrown towards her which is unacceptable regardless of what she's done. Unlike you I don't compartmentalize and read tweets that say "choke to death on my trnny dick you terf btch" and go "well, she said some transphobic things, so she DOES deserve to die that way, and really that person doesn't even have a billion followers so they don't have any influence whatsoever".

We know that incel/mgtow/pua sites influenced acts of violence in the last few years and they don't have a gazillion members. Magnitude is not the only factor here. You can't go after JKR and dismiss everyone else just because they aren't at her exact level.

[minouminou]

God, your disingenuous suggestion that anyone who is unimpressed by her transphobic views literally want to see her raped and die is disgusting.

Seek help.