[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

Point out to me where I said she didn't have a full right to respond? I'll wait.

She's a moron for how she chose to respond, I'm not denying her right to respond. Trying to misconstrue what I'm saying to make out that she doesn't have a right to respond won't really work.

No. I said you called her a "moron unable to take criticism" for responding. It's literally what you said.

Which leaves the people opposing her views what exactly?

She's a moron for not allowing herself to be shouted down, but they're not for not being able to respond to a reason argument in anything other than venemous attacks.

[Oliver_W]

Originally Posted by Marsh.

The Hermione backlash was utterly absurd. All she was trying to illustrate was that Hermione did not NEED to be white. She could have been black from the start and it would not change her character or the story in the slightest. So, therefore limiting the actresses considered to play her on stage just because Emma Watson is white is ludicrous. The stage play takes many liberties with the source material but it's a stage adaptation, it's neither the novels nor the films.

But that's probably another instance where no response at all would have been better because the backlash was nonsensical.

The backlash for black Hermione was dumb af. All she had to say was "it's not how I imagined her, that's true, but I support this casting." By engaging with the trolls beyond that she acted as if they were worth attention at all.

Originally Posted by Niamh.

Well this is the thing, the idea that JK Rowling was always some sort of intolerant monster and was just waiting all these years to reveal herself (and lose a lot of fans in the process) just doesn't make a lot of sense. All she has done is speak about genuine concerns she has around the topic but it seems like you are just not allowed to ask any questions at all or raise any concerns or else you're a TERF and are banished from the left forever.

I never will understand how a feminist focussing on female issues is seen as "problematic." Also term TERF (aside from being a slur) makes no sense to begin with - feminism is about females, so why would it include males?

[Elliot]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

The thing that really bothers me here is that this is a pretty much textbook definition of intolerance, and frankly I have no idea how people have come to the belief that they can campaign for (let alone achieve) progress for ... well ... anything at all with outrage and inflexibility. "You got this WRONG so BYE BYE NOW" is only ever going to be counterproductive when it comes to mainstream thinking, so all you end up with is increasingly insular communities, full of confirmation bias, preaching-to-the-choir, and resentment.

This is the real "culture" problem we're facing right now, and it applies to countless groups from all across the spectrum. I see a tonne of practical similarities between LGBTQ, BLM, MAGA and Trumpites, Tommy Robbo and his ilk, and at the extreme end of the scale, extremist groups across the political spectrum.

All that because I said she’s kinda problematic, god you must have learned a thing or two about taking criticism from miss Rowling herself

[Oliver_W]

Originally Posted by Elliot

All that because I said she’s kinda problematic, god you must have learned a thing or two about taking criticism from miss Rowling herself

How is she problematic?

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by Elliot

All that because I said she’s kinda problematic, god you must have learned a thing or two about taking criticism from miss Rowling herself

Yet, you're the one in a tizzy about Rowling's comments. So, what does that say about your ability to take on board her comments? Or do people only have to listen to you and your side of a debate?

[Ninastar]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

Well this is the thing, the idea that JK Rowling was always some sort of intolerant monster and was just waiting all these years to reveal herself (and lose a lot of fans in the process) just doesn't make a lot of sense. All she has done is speak about genuine concerns she has around the topic but it seems like you are just not allowed to ask any questions at all or raise any concerns or else you're a TERF and are banished from the left forever.

This is basically what it all boils down to, in the end

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by Marsh.

No. I said you called her a "moron unable to take criticism" for responding. It's literally what you said.

Which leaves the people opposing her views what exactly?

She's a moron for not allowing herself to be shouted down, but they're not for not being able to respond to a reason argument in anything other than venemous attacks.

It's not a venomous attack to call someone out on something they've said or done that screams transphobia, and she's an idiot for, instead of refuting it properly or doing anything useful, doubling down on things instead. If she wasn't an idiot and actually checked who she was agreeing with or retweeting, than this controversy would have been long forgotten.

And she can't handle criticism, she's been criticised loads lately and she's responded, like I've said before, by doubling down on it in a way that screams '**** you! If you don't like it, I'll just do it more!' You can defend yourself and respond to criticism and accusations in a lot of ways but the approach JK has taken has only made things worse for herself when she could have put all of this to bed if she had an ounce of sense.

You can defend yourself without making a situation worse, she did not.

[Stu]

Originally Posted by DouglasS

a great writer also

Steady on.

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

It's not a venomous attack to call someone out on something they've said or done that screams transphobia, and she's an idiot for, instead of refuting it properly or doing anything useful, doubling down on things instead. If she wasn't an idiot and actually checked who she was agreeing with or retweeting, than this controversy would have been long forgotten.

Screaming TERF, TRANSPHOBE, Demi Lovato wrote Harry Potter!, SUCK MY LADY DICK is not calling anyone out. It's venom.

She refuted it properly in a thoughtful essay none of them bothered to read.

Reducing the backlash down to a retweet of a t-shirt is being disingenuous. It's not about that at all and she received it long before that for doing nothing more then defend women's sex based rights. Which she's fully entitled to do, and it is not transphobic to do so.

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Elliot

All that because I said she’s kinda problematic, god you must have learned a thing or two about taking criticism from miss Rowling herself

Were you criticizing me? I'm sure I was criticizing you, but it was a few hours ago to be fair and I've not checked back so maybe I'm mistaken...

Also are you new here? Because "all that" was a pretty abridged post by my usual standards . A tiddler!

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by Marsh.

Screaming TERF, TRANSPHOBE, Demi Lovato wrote Harry Potter!, SUCK MY LADY DICK is not calling anyone out. It's venom.

She refuted it properly in a thoughtful essay none of them bothered to read.

Reducing the backlash down to a retweet of a t-shirt is being disingenuous. It's not about that at all and she received it long before that for doing nothing more then defend women's sex based rights. Which she's fully entitled to do, and it is not transphobic to do so.

You call me disingenuous when you're making the conscious decision to make out that I'm defending everybody that's sent her abuse when that's clearly not the case. Okay.

People are allowed to think that JK Rowling is transphobic, they are allowed to say to someone 'I think you are a transphobe' just as she's allowed to try to refute it. It's no one's fault but her own if she screws the pooch when it comes to her responses.

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

You call me disingenuous when you're making the conscious decision to make out that I'm defending everybody that's sent her abuse when that's clearly not the case. Okay.

People are allowed to think that JK Rowling is transphobic, they are allowed to say to someone 'I think you are a transphobe' just as she's allowed to try to refute it. It's no one's fault but her own if she screws the pooch when it comes to her responses.

I never said people aren't. You're being disingenuous again.

I refuted your claim that the backlash was "criticism" when it is anything but. "Transphobe!" is not criticism, it's nothing. It's not addressing a single point she made in her essay. Shouting "But! But! She may or may not have known the person she retweeted so could quite possibly maybe have been transphobic" is completely ignoring the fact she wrote a nuanced essay on the topic outlining her entire views on the subject that wasn't transphobic in the slightest and didn't just have a knee-jerk reaction to "criticism". Yet that kind of response to her opinions is lauded as simply "criticism" and not a group of people unable to take any reasoned criticism without assuming someone is a phobe.

Someone isn't transphobic simply for having an alternative view when it comes to the cross section of rights for transpeople and women.

She's a "moron" for not accepting a false representation of her opinions, but people who can't accept views that don't align with their own without shouting them down by calling them bigoted are somehow giving valid criticism? No.

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by Marsh.

Screaming TERF, TRANSPHOBE, Demi Lovato wrote Harry Potter!, SUCK MY LADY DICK is not calling anyone out. It's venom.

She refuted it properly in a thoughtful essay none of them bothered to read.

Reducing the backlash down to a retweet of a t-shirt is being disingenuous. It's not about that at all and she received it long before that for doing nothing more then defend women's sex based rights. Which she's fully entitled to do, and it is not transphobic to do so.

[Mystic Mock]

Originally Posted by Elliot

He didn’t just wear them as disguises. He wore women’s clothing for pleasure in private that he stole off family members and also wore it to ‘imitate’ a female pop star in public, and the reason given for it was that he wanted to live out a fantasy

I've not read the Book in fairness, but that description doesn't sound too far off Movies like Psycho and Split minus a couple of differences.

[Ammi]

...just to add because I’m not sure if it’s been posted before ...but this seems to be the article that JK was accused of mocking with the tweet...

‘People who menstruate.’ I’m sure there used to be a word for those people. Someone help me out. Wumben? Wimpund? Woomud?

...all through the article it refers to girls, women, and gender non-binary persons who menstruate...so all inclusive...?..it doesn’t exclude ‘woman’ or change ‘woman’ in any way...so I am quite confused by her initial tweet that this seems to have sparked from...because it seems quite defensive and I'm not sure why it would be...and then this whole thing with the reaction to that and to her has escalated into something quite ugly...anyways, the article...which is being inclusive of ‘all menstruating’...because it’s specific to attention through the pandemic to providing sanitary care and giving attention to birth control etc ...when clinics that had usually provided for, had become closed through an extraordinary situation across the world...

...this was at the beginning of the pandemic quarantines and closures etc and has some great points...


https://www.devex.com/news/sponsored...nstruate-97312

[Ammi]

...I guess that what could be said about JK is that she was clumsy in addressing concerns that she had and things that she wanted to say... But we’ve had enough discussions on the forum to know that her concerns are something felt by many women and their basis has no ‘phobic’ foundation...these concerns have to be voiced, I mean that’s always the starting point and what JK was attempting...?....and that things can’t ever and shouldn’t ever be silenced or cancelled or whatever because it will only become deeper and deeper so these difficult conversations have to be opened up....JK has tried to do that because maybe she thought that she would be a good person to do it, as an ally of LGBT etc...? ...but her conversation has been rejected ...at some point though, if the conversation isn't opened up in a non hostile way and without all of the ugliness that it’s brought atm...then two groups in society will just remain feeling ‘vulnerable and under threat’ and that will only cause to regress and prevent any progressiveness for either group...

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Ammi

...I guess that what could be said about JK is that she was clumsy in addressing concerns that she had and things that she wanted to say... But we’ve had enough discussions on the forum to know that her concerns are something felt by many women and their basis has no ‘phobic’ foundation...these concerns have to be voiced, I mean that’s always the starting point and what JK was attempting...?....and that things can’t ever and shouldn’t ever be silenced or cancelled or whatever because it will only become deeper and deeper so these difficult conversations have to be opened up....JK has tried to do that because maybe she thought that she would be a good person to do it, as an ally of LGBT etc...? ...but her conversation has been rejected ...at some point though, if the conversation isn't opened up in a non hostile way and without all of the ugliness that it’s brought atm...then two groups in society will just remain feeling ‘vulnerable and under threat’ and that will only cause to regress and prevent any progressiveness for either group...

Yeah absolutely right Ammi. Not being allowed to speak about these issues properly is just going to worsen relations and bad feeling and I'm sure most people on either "side" just want a solution, a proper line of communication needs to be opened. Sometimes it feels like people are deliberately trying to sabotage those avenues of reasoned debate/discussion for whatever reason and yes agree with others on the thread that social media and more specifically Twitter is making this whole topic so much worse, so full of angry people riling each other up

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by Ammi

if the conversation isn't opened up in a non hostile way and without all of the ugliness that it’s brought atm...then two groups in society will just remain feeling ‘vulnerable and under threat’ and that will only cause to regress and prevent any progressiveness for either group...

Which, IMO, is exactly the goal of a certain subsection of extreme groups in regards to these issues. Erode women's rights under the pretence that it's benefitting transpeople, in the end benefitting no one but themselves.

[Tom4784]

'Not being allowed' By whom?

No one is being silenced, people are free to have whatever viewpoints they please, and other people are free to have their opinions on that as well. All opinions come with consequence, you'll draw ire from someone if your reach is big enough but the key is how you navigate it.

[Marsh.]

"Transphobia" is not an opinion. It's something that either is or isn't.

Misrepresenting someone as transphobic when they've gone to the trouble of writing an entire essay outlining and explaining their opinions that are categorically not transphobic is just dumb and doesn't help anyone.

You can criticise and pick apart her opinion, but it is not transphobic.

[DouglasS]

I for once agree with what Marsh is saying.

[Marsh.]

In that case I completely take back everything I've said.

[Fetch The Bolt Cutters]

[GoldHeart]

Originally Posted by Mystic Mock

I've not read the Book in fairness, but that description doesn't sound too far off Movies like Psycho and Split minus a couple of differences.

I was thinking the exact same thing , sounds like a Norman bates character. However I haven't read it .

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by GoldHeart

I was thinking the exact same thing , sounds like a Norman bates character. However I haven't read it .

He's not even that extreme. Most people complaining about it haven't even read the book, he's not even in the book a whole lot and he doesn't really dress up as women as such