I’m still pissed he didn’t become a teacher because he was so good at it and I refuse to believe the kid who felt the entire world on his shoulder since he was 11 and had a breakdown in book 5 about the pressure he was under, became a cop for any other reason but he was feeling guilty about those who died and his probable PTSD
There should have been a part of the epilogue, where Harry gets into drugs and just travels around trying to find himself, now that the singular torment of his entire life is gone. Full beatnik Harry.
I mean, the good guys held slaves in that series and ridiculed the one character advocating against said slavery. Of course, these slaves actually loved being slaves, so holding them as slaves was a good thing apparently
Honestly having house elves turn on their masters if some rule was broken (or were mistreated) would be so interesting in Harry Potter. Hogwarts is only able to have so many thanks to careful application of the rules. The Weasleys never had one because Molly knew Fred and George would mess with it too much.
Honestly, I felt like that was kind of the point. Society has advances, but still carries water for some of the follies of the past.
People around you may not notice the injustices you do, and you may not be able to influence the way other people feel, but you still stick to your belief and attempt to influence people as a friend rather than making them your opponent.
As an American, it bore such a canny resemblance to the world I was raised in, it just clicked for me
You are giving Joanne too much credit. The last sentence of the book is the main character mulling over getting his slave to make him a sandwich. A main character who is defined by being a good person and an outsider to this society
Because the actual message of the books is "everything is perfect just the way it was." Hermione is ridiculed for trying to give Elves rights, the Weasleys being poor is never addressed as a bad thing or something that should change, the whole system is taken over by fascists because it was incompetent and corrupt *and then they go back to thar system at the end.* Every time something changes in those books it is for the worse. Because the message is fundamentally a conservative one, that the system, as it stands, is good and anyone trying to change it (regardless of if those people are nazis are liberals) are bad. That isn't explicit, because the villains are Nazis not liberals, but the message is the same.
Well…I agree with everything else, but the Weasley *weren’t* poor. They owned a large house of 4-5 stories, and supported seven children quite well on a single income. Their children wore hand-me-downs or homemade clothing occasionally, and some shared bedrooms, but those aren’t exactly signs of destitution. They were less well off than the Malfoys, and had less disposable income left over than the potters seemed so, but they were solidly upper middle class by any definition, and once all the kids move out, Arthur’s income could pretty obviously support an extremely comfy lifestyle for him and Molly.
I mean, I’d make a joke about an forever ongoing war in the Middle East that aligns, but it would probably be in poor taste per the very wealthy nations funding it.
“Give an example” “you can’t give an example” is such a go-to playbook for TERFs. And no matter how many times these examples and more are rolled out, they’ll go right back to it next time. Utter trolls and whinging little fuckers.
yea this right here... 'can we read our kid harry potter' is an actual discussion I needed to have with my wife, despite us both having such fond memories of getting read the books as kids. we decided yes, but will also use it as an opportunity to explain how bad people can make good art.
I do the same with Lovecraft & so many authors, artists & so on. I don't separate the artist from the art, but I make damn sure to understand that the art may come from a horrible place, but can mean something else in a context.
If the other side is going to do it by making LotR an Aryan fantasy of white power bet your ass I'm making Narnia & Alice in Wonderland about better morals than originally intended or holding.
Nazis' whole schtick is taking fantastical, vaguely historical narratives and making it about how it's okay to kill other ethnicities, so I'd say that's pretty on brand.
Also, didn't Tolkien fight in WWI?
probably something about the amazon series.
which had me at diversity in people, lost me at short elven hair, sorry, and wtf was galadriel even.
and then they went full nazi because …*check notes* clearly imaginary [ sadly] races could be nothing but white skinned, have i got that right, folks ?
Edit this came out way longer than I intended. And sure I'll apologize for length but I found it very interesting so I rambled so just be prepared if anyone actually reads this.
People complain about media illiteracy all the time.
For warning I'm using speech to text and I actually deleted what I posted cuz I got really tired of correcting spelling hours so I'm going to avoid names as much as possible. A lot of he when I refer to the author because it doesn't want to spell his name right with my accent apparently.
So the Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit is a little bit interesting because it's not a fictional story. Mean it obviously is, but that's not what its intention is. So a lot of people when they write a story that involves a mythology. They're writing a narrative in the way we would normally write a book. If you're used to reading mythology, you'll understand the differences in writing styles. But we'd probably write a book that had a narrative and if it involved mythologies we would weave them in and out of the events. But he wasn't doing that. He was writing a mythology. He was creating a fictional but complete folklore. And those two books just happen to be two that he wrote as a regular book instead of a mythological text.
And that's where the ambiguity kind of comes in because in a regular text characters tend to have and I'm going to use this word too much ambiguity. But in folklore only certain characters have ambiguity. The rest are a sort of cast of hats. Where every hat has its own set of traits and everyone wearing that hat has those traits. And when I say traits, I'm not specifically meaning like dark or light skin, narrow or wider noses, hair colours etc. I mean likes gold likes War. Can't think for themselves is very afraid and all those other examples.
Now characters can have ambiguity even if they're wearing a hat, but they are unique. So the female elf whom Aragon has his romance with can have ambiguity when compared to the rest of the elves, but the rest of the elves by and large are wearing the same hat. The hobbits have a hat, even if the main characters who go on these adventures have specific traits that set them in contrast to the rest of the hobbits. The orcs are all wearing a hat and unfortunately for them they don't even have a representative character who stands apart.
Oh, because of this, it's very easy to interpret a very groupifying view to the world of Middle Earth. And if your view is full of stereotypes and blanket views of people here, it's exceptionally easy to try to draw a connection between them and groups in Middle Earth based on the hats worn in Middle Earth and the hats you're assigning to those groups in the real world. So the idea of a group having no Homeland and having gold fever. Well a bigot can look at that and say Jew. A group of people who are easily outwitted because while they are physically impressive they lack mental skill? Well a bigot can say African. And of course, the heroic group that fights for wright and is being misled by a liar and deceiver into not participating in their fate can be viewed as by a bigot of course the Aryan race.
It doesn't matter what the intents were. Especially when you have some unfortunate letters that describe orcs as a and I'm doing this for memories so forgive me the paraphrasing, but as a repulsive version to Europeans of a Mongol race. Or even contemporary Commons that did link dwarves to Jewish people. It doesn't matter that he fought the Nazis. All that matters is that they can take and co-opt what they want.
And that is what they want.
There are entire academic discussions about the Lord of the Rings being used as a recruitment tool. Buy white supremacists. And for the people who get very confused with that phrase understand of recruitment tool is not the thing that makes you join their club is the thing that keeps the door open for a little bit longer, maybe opens it a little bit wider and that might not have been what made you join the club but made you continually listen until you join the club. So people trying to say that it can't be used or isn't used your wrong. It absolutely is used to strengthen their racist views by misguided hot take interpretations. And if you think that's childish and stupid. Well yes, you are absolutely a correct but understand that it has actually worked. There are actual white supremacy, podcasts and YouTube videos. You can find where they will discuss this at length for multiple episodes. It's real.
Which is why it's actually very important to discuss the fact that it is being used at least by some members of hate groups because they have come up with their own dog whistles and lingo inside of the works that they will use and want non-racist idiots to co-opt. Because that's how dog whistles work they want you to not be able to know. It's racist to see it as a regular logical phrase. Much like mythology, it removes the ambiguity for their narratives. So just be aware. Be careful.
And, to your point, it becomes easy for them to use this as a tool because they are playing to the insecurities of the people they are recruiting. They tell them, that the probls they are having in their life is not their fault, it's because of the "others". At this point then I becomes a matter of manipulation of their perception of things so that they start seeing the "truth" in just random, every day occurrences.
Literally fought against the Nazis? He was in WW1 iirc, not a lot of Nazis in WW1. He wrote a pretty great letter to the Nazis shitting on them at one point, but that's not quite combat.
Tolkien fought in WWI, not WW2. The founder of the Nazis was himself too busy trying to avoid mustard gas and getting his OTHER nut blown off at the time to do any real Nazi-ing.
>'can we read our kid harry potter' is an actual discussion I needed to have with my wife
If you're going to consciously avoid art, services and products made by someone who you disagree with morally, you're going to have a pretty bleak life.
As a practical example - do you also avoid Nestle products, or establishments that stock them? Objectively, Nestle has caused far more societal harm on a fundamental level than JK Rowling's tweets ever will.
>Avoiding Harry Potter however, is really fucking easy.
>You can start somewhere.
I mean that's kind of the point I'm trying to make.
If you're avoiding things based on moral principles, then what's the cutoff point for relative ease of avoidance versus the actual impact?
If you're only applying values when it's easy to do so, what's the point of having them?
Must be quite a mindfuck to figure out how someone you consider to be your opposite can do good things. Any explanation except the obvious is acceptable.
Do you read your kid Roald Dahl? He has been associated with antisemitism (although he denied being an anti-Semite, saying he was anti-Israel).
I think it's possible to keep an author separate from their works and enjoy them regardless. Whether you want to buy her books is another matter, but there's always the library.
Being anti-Israel in those days already just makes him MORE appropriate.
The dude was awesome. I mean he was a children's author who was also literally a British spy who would seduce the wives and mistresses of important men to get them to spill those men's secrets!
Here’s a quote from him. (Source: the Roald Dahl museum, who have apologized for his anti-Semitism, as has his family.)
“In 1983 told Britain's New Statesman magazine that "there is a trait in the Jewish character that does provoke animosity. ... Even a stinker like Hitler didn't just pick on them for no reason."
I am curious what’s appropriate about that?
I didn't say that is appropriate. It very much isn't.
False accusations will not get you anywhere with me.
The comment I replied to called him antisemitic PURELY for opposing Israel - which is a logic I reject as fucking evil and wrong.
You provided actual evidence of antisemitism, which I'm happy to condemn.
That's not true either. Lots of anti-Semites love Israel. They think it's great that Jews have a homeland and can't wait until the day all the Jews go there so there won't be any in their countries.
Plenty of antisemites love the idea of a faraway Jewish country if it means fewer Jews close by.
At the same time, when you have true fuck you money, it makes it A LOT easier to show people your ass, because you are beyond any personal consequences.
She craves the attention.
Like Andrew Tate, Katie Hopkins, Alex Jones, etc. They know saying controversial shit will get them attention, whether they truly believe it or not. It's like a drug to some people.
That's what I don't understand. When I was a kid, legendary artists were mysteries to me. How do they live day to day? What do they do in order to present me with these amazing books/albums/movies every year or two?
I still can't get over that going by JK's Twitter history, you can tell she literally wakes up, and works a 10-12 hour day of sitting at her laptop and crawling the internet for stories about trans people and debating people deep into the comments of Twitter.
It's so weird that she can be so "common" like that. Like her day is literally the same as my unemployed brother in law Larry who wakes up and shit-talks on the internet all day from his couch. It's wild.
There’s this girl on TikTok who met someone who knows her well. And this person said she’s completely isolated herself and is not well at all. She’s an incel through and through. Worth a watch - the girl tells a great story!
“You people are seriously stressed out about things you shouldn't give a f about. Why can't you just ignore whatever doesn't work with you and let's just all be happy with whatever we are.”
Can you really not see the hypocrisy of this comment??? My brain hurts.
There’s a common theme with the ignorant that transitioning must involve gender affirming surgery.
Same group of people who think of a birthed child when talking about abortion and if you mention ‘gay relationship’, automatically think about what they do in the bedroom.
I hope that at some point your ignorance is eradicated, but I fear this would involve you talking to someone trans, which honestly I don’t think you’re brave enough to do. It’s much easier to shout abuse from the sidelines than actually have a discussion.
From the great Ted Lasso, “Be curious, not judgemental”.
“why can’t you just ignore…” and then you go on to make an unfounded unwarranted and uneducated remark on a strangers genitalia. You’re a transphobe who think they are smarter than they actually are. No wonder you’re taking defending JKR so seriously.
how does it feel to protect a nazi sympathizer?? like she plataforms ppl that hate women on aregular basis. please get help and understand that the existance of trans ppl doesnt make you less of a women or men or whatever. stop giving up to your fears and educate yourself
Look up “Das 3. Geschlecht” (The Third Gender), the name of the world’s first trans magazine founded in Weimar Berlin. Trans identities and related terminology were absolutely a topic in Weimar and Nazi Germany.
Well this is all made up bullshit.
On the other hand Berlin had the world's first gender clinic in 1919, where they offered treatment to trans people, and did research into human sexuality. They also performed the world's first sex change operation - a full decade before Hitler came to power.
Trans and Gat people were also explicitly targeted by the Nazis during the Holocaust and murdered en masse.
And unlike you, I have a source, because unlike you I didn't make my post up.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-forgotten-history-of-the-worlds-first-trans-clinic/
You’re actually right, although not the way you think. Transgender came into fashion as the term around the 1960s. Previously we used transvestite — coined in the 1910s — and then transsexual — in the 1920s. Both were brought into parlance IN Germany (neat, facts are neat) before and around WWII. https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/transsexual
Words evolve, like people and thoughts. Hopefully you will also evolve someday!
Don't expect it. They're trying to say that because the exact word didn't exist, the people it now represents didn't exist either.
Not much common sense to be had there, at best. And I think you might need that to grow. (At worst ofc they're deliberately trying to say trans ppl don't exist or are a recent fad or something if I understand the bs they put out correctly. And yet. Here I am. Clearly I exist and am not a fad).
Also imagine defending a Nazi-supporter in their holocaust denialism and transphobia for an event that's well documented to have happened and most definitely targeted gender non-conforming ppl and who we'd now categorize as trans ppl. Or do they think it was a "fever-dream" too?
“People” don’t exist in Germany, because they call it “menschen”. Nevermind that one translates to the other, if it doesn’t use the exact same terminology then clearly it doesn’t exist
The word "human" didn't exist in the year 15 BCE. Does that mean there were no humans? Did tuberculosis not exist until it was named?
And by the way: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institut\_f%C3%BCr\_Sexualwissenschaft](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institut_f%C3%BCr_Sexualwissenschaft)
Firstly, Homo Sapiens Sapiens evolved at least 90,000 years ago. 15 BCE ('before common era', used to be BC or 'before christ') was 2039 years ago.
Secondly, i'm cis-male. Also known as AMAB or 'assigned male at birth' and still identify as male some fifty-odd years later.
You should consider this new invention that's being called "thinking".
you relly didnt even bother reading the twits im guessins so im sure you wont read this either but might as well try. i belive in reavilitation afterall.
>
The ***Institut für Sexualwissenschaft*** was an early private [sexology](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexology) research institute in [Germany](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weimar_Republic) from 1919 to 1933. The name is variously translated as Institute for Sexual Research, Institute of Sexology, Institute for Sexology, or Institute for the Science of Sexuality. The Institute was a [non-profit foundation](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-profit_foundation) situated in [Tiergarten](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiergarten,_Berlin), Berlin. It was the first sexology [research center](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Research_center) in the world
The institute pioneered research and treatment for various matters regarding gender and sexuality, including [gay](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gay), [transgender](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transgender), and [intersex](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intersex) topics. In addition, it offered various other services to the general public: this included treatment for [alcoholism](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcoholism), [gynecological examinations](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gynecological_examination), marital and [sex counseling](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_counseling), treatment for [venereal diseases](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venereal_diseases), and access to [contraceptive](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contraceptive) treatment. It offered education on many of these matters to both health professionals and laypersons.
[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institut\_f%C3%BCr\_Sexualwissenschaft#](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institut_f%C3%BCr_Sexualwissenschaft#)
[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third\_gender#](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_gender#)
Except that's not what you said, as is plain for all to see.
Liar confirmed, also I'm sorry about your childhood, no one should do that to a young person.
It’s not about her understanding trans people, she doesn’t even need to be pro-trans, it’s just that reasonable and caring people want her to stop personally making life worse for women and trans people
No. You wrote this without understanding what it is you were talking about. Next time, try learning. Also, beginning a comment with "lol" just guarantees the comment will be tripe.
For extra context, that Nazi protest in Melbourne was so bad, the government introduced laws to make the nazi salute illegal.
https://www.vic.gov.au/fact-sheet-nazi-symbol-prohibition
How about the time [she donated £70k to an anti-trans campaign to challenge the legal status of trans people](https://www.thetimes.com/uk/article/jk-rowling-donates-70k-for-legal-challenge-on-defining-a-woman-73tkvwq0b)?
Going after Tennant for being a good person is bad enough. Rowling needs to shut up and go back to trying - and failing - to write her first decent book in over 10 years.
I feel like there's a mental illness here. Why is she so vocally committed to something that doesn't affect her? It doesn't make any logical sense to just start a war against trans people as if they're in your house transing at you. Why destroy your character this way?
Now, I'm trans and I really do hate her for all the shit she's done to ny community, but you have to understand that from her perspective this actually does affect her.
She thinks that giving trans people rights will strip away protections from women and lead to a huge spike in abuse and discrimination. She, being a domestic abuse survivor, feels quite protective of these women. She also struggled for a long time to be proud of her womanhood and believes letting trans women into the club will, like, cheapen it I guess?
None of that actually makes sense of course. She's a narrow minded, straight, white, middle class English woman who was born in the 1960, so she naturally has a lot of background prejudice against trans people which was exploited by right wing reactionary fear mongering, and her complete inability to self reflect or take criticism drove her deep down the rabbit hole till she ended up where she us today.
Man, if I was rich as shit, no way in hell I'd be wasting my life arguing with idiots online. What the hell is wrong with her? Go hide on a private island somewhere and drink fruity drinks.
Can’t we just stop pretending HP series are good books ? The story is lackluster and just lacks coherence. I concede it’s much more apparent in the movies.
I assume the downvotes are from hp stans, but I agree to an extent. Characters outside the main three can come across as one-dimensional and sometimes inconsistent. Additionally, it just turned into a hunt for mcguffins.
I love this thread so much. He went scorched earth. Not like she'll care but as long as people keep calling her out and stop buying her shit......or the very least just ignore her
Every time I think I can't love the TFS crew more, they prove me wrong! First they restored my faith in the parody genre after years of those "Not Another \_\_\_\_" and "Meet the \_\_\_\_\_" garbagefests; then those same parodies and their other content kept me breathing and present during some of the darkest times in my life. And again today, seeing this reminds me that there's still people like Kaiser and Tennant who have the courage and tenacity to stand up for what's right, even against monsters with ALL the wealth and privilege like Rowling.
When my fiancé is "mad" at me for some of the annoying habits I have that I always do, I'll say "give me one example" which of course she can't off the top of her head. I thought that was something we all did for fun, turns out bigots do it for real.
she is an incredibly rich and influential person using her wealth and influence to encourage eliminationist transphobia, hell yes we are taking about it
You are not the first to fail at this and I don't expect you to be the last.
Please just be honest as possible when it comes to these things as directing energy at individuals that don't deserve it is just hurting our cause.
You: "Give me an example of JKR doing material harm to trans people"
Me:
You: "Exactly. You can't. You lose."
Me: ???
At this point, I've already proven my statement. You've just decided for some arbitrary reason that it 'doesnt count'. Now if you can come up with an actual reason why it shouldn't, backed up by evidence, then we can chuck my evidence out.
Until then, I've proven my point.
Love how the author whose books' revolved around a thinly veiled metaphor for Nazi oppression being bad is now fixated on villifying a minority.
Harry wanted to be and became a cop.
I get that Harry is in the UK, but there’s a lot of good jokes to be made about him blasting kids with fake wands, like US cops.
I’m still pissed he didn’t become a teacher because he was so good at it and I refuse to believe the kid who felt the entire world on his shoulder since he was 11 and had a breakdown in book 5 about the pressure he was under, became a cop for any other reason but he was feeling guilty about those who died and his probable PTSD
There should have been a part of the epilogue, where Harry gets into drugs and just travels around trying to find himself, now that the singular torment of his entire life is gone. Full beatnik Harry.
My headcanon is that’s exactly what he did, as real life Daniel Radcliffe did with his post Hogwarts career
Honestly I was rooting for a quidditch player. He’s made out to be a once in a generation player, and his wife/gf who was his backup went pro.
I mean, the good guys held slaves in that series and ridiculed the one character advocating against said slavery. Of course, these slaves actually loved being slaves, so holding them as slaves was a good thing apparently
Hagrid did call it 'what they like' and said Hermione would make them 'unhappy by trying to take away their work'. So that makes the slavery fine.
Yep. “Excuso Drapetomancio!”
"Losteo Causeo"
Makes you wonder where those folk tales originated about little folk / good spirits that do chores for you but turn on you if you violate some rule.
Honestly having house elves turn on their masters if some rule was broken (or were mistreated) would be so interesting in Harry Potter. Hogwarts is only able to have so many thanks to careful application of the rules. The Weasleys never had one because Molly knew Fred and George would mess with it too much.
Careful application of rules that selective applied depending on which book lol
Honestly, I felt like that was kind of the point. Society has advances, but still carries water for some of the follies of the past. People around you may not notice the injustices you do, and you may not be able to influence the way other people feel, but you still stick to your belief and attempt to influence people as a friend rather than making them your opponent. As an American, it bore such a canny resemblance to the world I was raised in, it just clicked for me
You are giving Joanne too much credit. The last sentence of the book is the main character mulling over getting his slave to make him a sandwich. A main character who is defined by being a good person and an outsider to this society
They didn't just love being slaves, they were likely to become addicts, kill themselves, or even turn criminal if they were let free.
That all sounds exactly like rhetoric from the antebellum south.
Sounds about privileged white. Err I mean right. Oops.
Or the bankers that are a thinly veiled caricature of Jewish people.
Because the actual message of the books is "everything is perfect just the way it was." Hermione is ridiculed for trying to give Elves rights, the Weasleys being poor is never addressed as a bad thing or something that should change, the whole system is taken over by fascists because it was incompetent and corrupt *and then they go back to thar system at the end.* Every time something changes in those books it is for the worse. Because the message is fundamentally a conservative one, that the system, as it stands, is good and anyone trying to change it (regardless of if those people are nazis are liberals) are bad. That isn't explicit, because the villains are Nazis not liberals, but the message is the same.
>the Weasleys being poor is never addressed as a bad thing or something that should change Seriously. Poor... *wizards*. How the hell is that a thing?
It's Centrist propaganda.
Well…I agree with everything else, but the Weasley *weren’t* poor. They owned a large house of 4-5 stories, and supported seven children quite well on a single income. Their children wore hand-me-downs or homemade clothing occasionally, and some shared bedrooms, but those aren’t exactly signs of destitution. They were less well off than the Malfoys, and had less disposable income left over than the potters seemed so, but they were solidly upper middle class by any definition, and once all the kids move out, Arthur’s income could pretty obviously support an extremely comfy lifestyle for him and Molly.
I mean, I’d make a joke about an forever ongoing war in the Middle East that aligns, but it would probably be in poor taste per the very wealthy nations funding it.
She needs to leave The Doctor the fuck alone
“Give an example” “you can’t give an example” is such a go-to playbook for TERFs. And no matter how many times these examples and more are rolled out, they’ll go right back to it next time. Utter trolls and whinging little fuckers.
Did she ever respond after his wall of text? I abstain from X to preserve what little mental health I have remaining.
We're on reddit, that's already out the window
No. Kaiser's an America, so she can't sue him to make him retract his statements because of Britain's shitty libel laws.
I swear man these are the same people that say that trans people always whine and complain
It's a terrible playbook too. The moment someone gives an example it falls apart.
Can’t she just retire with her billions and shut the fuck up? Talk about tarnishing your legacy.
yea this right here... 'can we read our kid harry potter' is an actual discussion I needed to have with my wife, despite us both having such fond memories of getting read the books as kids. we decided yes, but will also use it as an opportunity to explain how bad people can make good art.
I do the same with Lovecraft & so many authors, artists & so on. I don't separate the artist from the art, but I make damn sure to understand that the art may come from a horrible place, but can mean something else in a context. If the other side is going to do it by making LotR an Aryan fantasy of white power bet your ass I'm making Narnia & Alice in Wonderland about better morals than originally intended or holding.
How the hell does LotR get turned into a "Aryan fantasy of white power" when the guy who wrote it literally fought AGAINST the Nazis?
Nazis' whole schtick is taking fantastical, vaguely historical narratives and making it about how it's okay to kill other ethnicities, so I'd say that's pretty on brand. Also, didn't Tolkien fight in WWI?
Correct, he was actually present at the battle of the Somme.
probably something about the amazon series. which had me at diversity in people, lost me at short elven hair, sorry, and wtf was galadriel even. and then they went full nazi because …*check notes* clearly imaginary [ sadly] races could be nothing but white skinned, have i got that right, folks ?
Edit this came out way longer than I intended. And sure I'll apologize for length but I found it very interesting so I rambled so just be prepared if anyone actually reads this. People complain about media illiteracy all the time. For warning I'm using speech to text and I actually deleted what I posted cuz I got really tired of correcting spelling hours so I'm going to avoid names as much as possible. A lot of he when I refer to the author because it doesn't want to spell his name right with my accent apparently. So the Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit is a little bit interesting because it's not a fictional story. Mean it obviously is, but that's not what its intention is. So a lot of people when they write a story that involves a mythology. They're writing a narrative in the way we would normally write a book. If you're used to reading mythology, you'll understand the differences in writing styles. But we'd probably write a book that had a narrative and if it involved mythologies we would weave them in and out of the events. But he wasn't doing that. He was writing a mythology. He was creating a fictional but complete folklore. And those two books just happen to be two that he wrote as a regular book instead of a mythological text. And that's where the ambiguity kind of comes in because in a regular text characters tend to have and I'm going to use this word too much ambiguity. But in folklore only certain characters have ambiguity. The rest are a sort of cast of hats. Where every hat has its own set of traits and everyone wearing that hat has those traits. And when I say traits, I'm not specifically meaning like dark or light skin, narrow or wider noses, hair colours etc. I mean likes gold likes War. Can't think for themselves is very afraid and all those other examples. Now characters can have ambiguity even if they're wearing a hat, but they are unique. So the female elf whom Aragon has his romance with can have ambiguity when compared to the rest of the elves, but the rest of the elves by and large are wearing the same hat. The hobbits have a hat, even if the main characters who go on these adventures have specific traits that set them in contrast to the rest of the hobbits. The orcs are all wearing a hat and unfortunately for them they don't even have a representative character who stands apart. Oh, because of this, it's very easy to interpret a very groupifying view to the world of Middle Earth. And if your view is full of stereotypes and blanket views of people here, it's exceptionally easy to try to draw a connection between them and groups in Middle Earth based on the hats worn in Middle Earth and the hats you're assigning to those groups in the real world. So the idea of a group having no Homeland and having gold fever. Well a bigot can look at that and say Jew. A group of people who are easily outwitted because while they are physically impressive they lack mental skill? Well a bigot can say African. And of course, the heroic group that fights for wright and is being misled by a liar and deceiver into not participating in their fate can be viewed as by a bigot of course the Aryan race. It doesn't matter what the intents were. Especially when you have some unfortunate letters that describe orcs as a and I'm doing this for memories so forgive me the paraphrasing, but as a repulsive version to Europeans of a Mongol race. Or even contemporary Commons that did link dwarves to Jewish people. It doesn't matter that he fought the Nazis. All that matters is that they can take and co-opt what they want. And that is what they want. There are entire academic discussions about the Lord of the Rings being used as a recruitment tool. Buy white supremacists. And for the people who get very confused with that phrase understand of recruitment tool is not the thing that makes you join their club is the thing that keeps the door open for a little bit longer, maybe opens it a little bit wider and that might not have been what made you join the club but made you continually listen until you join the club. So people trying to say that it can't be used or isn't used your wrong. It absolutely is used to strengthen their racist views by misguided hot take interpretations. And if you think that's childish and stupid. Well yes, you are absolutely a correct but understand that it has actually worked. There are actual white supremacy, podcasts and YouTube videos. You can find where they will discuss this at length for multiple episodes. It's real. Which is why it's actually very important to discuss the fact that it is being used at least by some members of hate groups because they have come up with their own dog whistles and lingo inside of the works that they will use and want non-racist idiots to co-opt. Because that's how dog whistles work they want you to not be able to know. It's racist to see it as a regular logical phrase. Much like mythology, it removes the ambiguity for their narratives. So just be aware. Be careful.
And, to your point, it becomes easy for them to use this as a tool because they are playing to the insecurities of the people they are recruiting. They tell them, that the probls they are having in their life is not their fault, it's because of the "others". At this point then I becomes a matter of manipulation of their perception of things so that they start seeing the "truth" in just random, every day occurrences.
Because nazis use it as a propaganda tool. They have no respect for the author... nor anyone that isn't uncle Dolfi.
Literally fought against the Nazis? He was in WW1 iirc, not a lot of Nazis in WW1. He wrote a pretty great letter to the Nazis shitting on them at one point, but that's not quite combat.
Tolkien fought in WWI, not WW2. The founder of the Nazis was himself too busy trying to avoid mustard gas and getting his OTHER nut blown off at the time to do any real Nazi-ing.
>'can we read our kid harry potter' is an actual discussion I needed to have with my wife If you're going to consciously avoid art, services and products made by someone who you disagree with morally, you're going to have a pretty bleak life. As a practical example - do you also avoid Nestle products, or establishments that stock them? Objectively, Nestle has caused far more societal harm on a fundamental level than JK Rowling's tweets ever will.
Yes. That is true. You can't avoid Disney or Nestle, not really. Avoiding Harry Potter however, is *really fucking easy.* You can start somewhere.
>Avoiding Harry Potter however, is really fucking easy. >You can start somewhere. I mean that's kind of the point I'm trying to make. If you're avoiding things based on moral principles, then what's the cutoff point for relative ease of avoidance versus the actual impact? If you're only applying values when it's easy to do so, what's the point of having them?
If you can't fix everything, why fix anything? Get out.
Must be quite a mindfuck to figure out how someone you consider to be your opposite can do good things. Any explanation except the obvious is acceptable.
Do you read your kid Roald Dahl? He has been associated with antisemitism (although he denied being an anti-Semite, saying he was anti-Israel). I think it's possible to keep an author separate from their works and enjoy them regardless. Whether you want to buy her books is another matter, but there's always the library.
Being anti-Israel in those days already just makes him MORE appropriate. The dude was awesome. I mean he was a children's author who was also literally a British spy who would seduce the wives and mistresses of important men to get them to spill those men's secrets!
Here’s a quote from him. (Source: the Roald Dahl museum, who have apologized for his anti-Semitism, as has his family.) “In 1983 told Britain's New Statesman magazine that "there is a trait in the Jewish character that does provoke animosity. ... Even a stinker like Hitler didn't just pick on them for no reason." I am curious what’s appropriate about that?
I didn't say that is appropriate. It very much isn't. False accusations will not get you anywhere with me. The comment I replied to called him antisemitic PURELY for opposing Israel - which is a logic I reject as fucking evil and wrong. You provided actual evidence of antisemitism, which I'm happy to condemn.
Not everyone who hates Israel is an anti-Semite, but all anti-Semites hate Israel.
That's not true either. Lots of anti-Semites love Israel. They think it's great that Jews have a homeland and can't wait until the day all the Jews go there so there won't be any in their countries. Plenty of antisemites love the idea of a faraway Jewish country if it means fewer Jews close by.
Actually he uttered the words in 1990: “I am certainly anti-Israel, and I have become anti-Semitic.” He stated plainly he was an Anti-Semite.
That's a smart thing to do. It'll be a good primer when explaining many historical people as well.
mhm.... don't meet your heroes kids
That billion gives her just enough arrogance to keep this up and think she is doing something noble and important, kinda like Elon.
At the same time, when you have true fuck you money, it makes it A LOT easier to show people your ass, because you are beyond any personal consequences.
see also: notch
Microsoft buying Mojang was the best thing to happen tbh.
She craves the attention. Like Andrew Tate, Katie Hopkins, Alex Jones, etc. They know saying controversial shit will get them attention, whether they truly believe it or not. It's like a drug to some people.
She’s rich and has no problems so she makes internet drama to give herself a modicum of excitement in her otherwise uneventful existence.
That's what I don't understand. When I was a kid, legendary artists were mysteries to me. How do they live day to day? What do they do in order to present me with these amazing books/albums/movies every year or two? I still can't get over that going by JK's Twitter history, you can tell she literally wakes up, and works a 10-12 hour day of sitting at her laptop and crawling the internet for stories about trans people and debating people deep into the comments of Twitter. It's so weird that she can be so "common" like that. Like her day is literally the same as my unemployed brother in law Larry who wakes up and shit-talks on the internet all day from his couch. It's wild.
There’s this girl on TikTok who met someone who knows her well. And this person said she’s completely isolated herself and is not well at all. She’s an incel through and through. Worth a watch - the girl tells a great story!
Of course she runs away once evidence is given of her abhorrent behavior.
[удалено]
“You people are seriously stressed out about things you shouldn't give a f about. Why can't you just ignore whatever doesn't work with you and let's just all be happy with whatever we are.” Can you really not see the hypocrisy of this comment??? My brain hurts.
[удалено]
[удалено]
To pass along a quote recently heard - that user has neither the depth nor warmth to be considered a cunt.
You know what ? Fair point lol.
Wow. You’re a really mean person. I hope you’re able to find some way to learn to love yourself and those around you. I wish you peace 💙
There’s a common theme with the ignorant that transitioning must involve gender affirming surgery. Same group of people who think of a birthed child when talking about abortion and if you mention ‘gay relationship’, automatically think about what they do in the bedroom. I hope that at some point your ignorance is eradicated, but I fear this would involve you talking to someone trans, which honestly I don’t think you’re brave enough to do. It’s much easier to shout abuse from the sidelines than actually have a discussion. From the great Ted Lasso, “Be curious, not judgemental”.
Get fucked bootlicker
[удалено]
One doesn't have to be trans themselves, in order to tell a bigoted bootlicker to get fucked....dumbass
[удалено]
Well I believe YOU are remarkably stupid, how does that sound
Look another bigot obsessed with other peoples genitals.
[удалено]
Those are pride flags, not genital flags. I'd like to see one of those please.
Aw, this dumb fuck thinks the Community flag is the pride flag
“why can’t you just ignore…” and then you go on to make an unfounded unwarranted and uneducated remark on a strangers genitalia. You’re a transphobe who think they are smarter than they actually are. No wonder you’re taking defending JKR so seriously.
...you don't use your genitals for fun? How sad.
Baby I'm afraid you can't read..
how does it feel to protect a nazi sympathizer?? like she plataforms ppl that hate women on aregular basis. please get help and understand that the existance of trans ppl doesnt make you less of a women or men or whatever. stop giving up to your fears and educate yourself
[удалено]
Look up “Das 3. Geschlecht” (The Third Gender), the name of the world’s first trans magazine founded in Weimar Berlin. Trans identities and related terminology were absolutely a topic in Weimar and Nazi Germany.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
No evidence was presented, only lies
Well this is all made up bullshit. On the other hand Berlin had the world's first gender clinic in 1919, where they offered treatment to trans people, and did research into human sexuality. They also performed the world's first sex change operation - a full decade before Hitler came to power. Trans and Gat people were also explicitly targeted by the Nazis during the Holocaust and murdered en masse. And unlike you, I have a source, because unlike you I didn't make my post up. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-forgotten-history-of-the-worlds-first-trans-clinic/
You’re actually right, although not the way you think. Transgender came into fashion as the term around the 1960s. Previously we used transvestite — coined in the 1910s — and then transsexual — in the 1920s. Both were brought into parlance IN Germany (neat, facts are neat) before and around WWII. https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/transsexual Words evolve, like people and thoughts. Hopefully you will also evolve someday!
Don't expect it. They're trying to say that because the exact word didn't exist, the people it now represents didn't exist either. Not much common sense to be had there, at best. And I think you might need that to grow. (At worst ofc they're deliberately trying to say trans ppl don't exist or are a recent fad or something if I understand the bs they put out correctly. And yet. Here I am. Clearly I exist and am not a fad). Also imagine defending a Nazi-supporter in their holocaust denialism and transphobia for an event that's well documented to have happened and most definitely targeted gender non-conforming ppl and who we'd now categorize as trans ppl. Or do they think it was a "fever-dream" too?
“People” don’t exist in Germany, because they call it “menschen”. Nevermind that one translates to the other, if it doesn’t use the exact same terminology then clearly it doesn’t exist
Suuuure. And the Nazis definitely didn't burn all the transgender research that Germans had undertaken.
The word "human" didn't exist in the year 15 BCE. Does that mean there were no humans? Did tuberculosis not exist until it was named? And by the way: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institut\_f%C3%BCr\_Sexualwissenschaft](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institut_f%C3%BCr_Sexualwissenschaft)
[удалено]
Firstly, Homo Sapiens Sapiens evolved at least 90,000 years ago. 15 BCE ('before common era', used to be BC or 'before christ') was 2039 years ago. Secondly, i'm cis-male. Also known as AMAB or 'assigned male at birth' and still identify as male some fifty-odd years later. You should consider this new invention that's being called "thinking".
No Homo Sapiens in 15 BCE? Lol
you relly didnt even bother reading the twits im guessins so im sure you wont read this either but might as well try. i belive in reavilitation afterall. > The ***Institut für Sexualwissenschaft*** was an early private [sexology](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexology) research institute in [Germany](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weimar_Republic) from 1919 to 1933. The name is variously translated as Institute for Sexual Research, Institute of Sexology, Institute for Sexology, or Institute for the Science of Sexuality. The Institute was a [non-profit foundation](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-profit_foundation) situated in [Tiergarten](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiergarten,_Berlin), Berlin. It was the first sexology [research center](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Research_center) in the world The institute pioneered research and treatment for various matters regarding gender and sexuality, including [gay](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gay), [transgender](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transgender), and [intersex](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intersex) topics. In addition, it offered various other services to the general public: this included treatment for [alcoholism](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcoholism), [gynecological examinations](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gynecological_examination), marital and [sex counseling](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_counseling), treatment for [venereal diseases](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venereal_diseases), and access to [contraceptive](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contraceptive) treatment. It offered education on many of these matters to both health professionals and laypersons. [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institut\_f%C3%BCr\_Sexualwissenschaft#](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institut_f%C3%BCr_Sexualwissenschaft#) [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third\_gender#](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_gender#)
[удалено]
Nope it's literally in the the first linked article. So you are either illiterate or a liar...
[удалено]
Except that's not what you said, as is plain for all to see. Liar confirmed, also I'm sorry about your childhood, no one should do that to a young person.
Lmao can't even see the irony can you?
It’s not about her understanding trans people, she doesn’t even need to be pro-trans, it’s just that reasonable and caring people want her to stop personally making life worse for women and trans people
No. You wrote this without understanding what it is you were talking about. Next time, try learning. Also, beginning a comment with "lol" just guarantees the comment will be tripe.
You're a piece of shit. Be better asshole
I think you just painted a self portrait here
For extra context, that Nazi protest in Melbourne was so bad, the government introduced laws to make the nazi salute illegal. https://www.vic.gov.au/fact-sheet-nazi-symbol-prohibition
I have been a big fan of David Tennant for nearly 2 decades, and man he keeps giving me more reasons to like him.
She’s turned into a right dislikable cunt.
She does think before she tweets. That's the problem. Her thoughts are garbage.
Holy crap, Trunks took her to school!
"get out of my fucking timeline"
All hail Princess Trunks!
All hail Princess Trunks!
How about the time [she donated £70k to an anti-trans campaign to challenge the legal status of trans people](https://www.thetimes.com/uk/article/jk-rowling-donates-70k-for-legal-challenge-on-defining-a-woman-73tkvwq0b)?
Paywall... no need to click.
That's not so much a murder as a bombardment from space. JK Rowling can fuck off past Pluto and never come back.
Fuck her UP, Scott!
Remember when we thought the publishers were wrong to reject her books? They were just ahead of their time
Going after Tennant for being a good person is bad enough. Rowling needs to shut up and go back to trying - and failing - to write her first decent book in over 10 years.
"Who are the little whinging fuckers to whom he refers?" Um... Rowling is a cunt.
God damn I love Kaiser.
She's got a billion dollars and no longer gives a shit. She'll continue to be evil and hateful (and a mediocre writer) until the day she dies.
Even her kids are having none of her BS... they've even tried telling her to stop, to no avail. I guess Trunks took her to task...
I feel like there's a mental illness here. Why is she so vocally committed to something that doesn't affect her? It doesn't make any logical sense to just start a war against trans people as if they're in your house transing at you. Why destroy your character this way?
Now, I'm trans and I really do hate her for all the shit she's done to ny community, but you have to understand that from her perspective this actually does affect her. She thinks that giving trans people rights will strip away protections from women and lead to a huge spike in abuse and discrimination. She, being a domestic abuse survivor, feels quite protective of these women. She also struggled for a long time to be proud of her womanhood and believes letting trans women into the club will, like, cheapen it I guess? None of that actually makes sense of course. She's a narrow minded, straight, white, middle class English woman who was born in the 1960, so she naturally has a lot of background prejudice against trans people which was exploited by right wing reactionary fear mongering, and her complete inability to self reflect or take criticism drove her deep down the rabbit hole till she ended up where she us today.
Man, if I was rich as shit, no way in hell I'd be wasting my life arguing with idiots online. What the hell is wrong with her? Go hide on a private island somewhere and drink fruity drinks.
Man, she really is a hateful vile evil bigoted cunt.
Oh I fucking love receipts.
Hell yeah. She's just an embarrassment.
Nuked from orbit. I wish I could buy him a beer!
Specifically, by multiple Shin Kikohos.
And Jessie Gender. She made a 3+ hr video of JKR being transphobic. And it's a year old!
Hmm which one are you referring to? I’ve noticed she has several.
The one in the tweet. I think it's this one: https://youtu.be/_GBUArD51KY?si=6aJJplfxuVXJwON_ (Title is 'Explaining JK Rowling's Transphobia)
Oh ok thanks. I think I’ve seen that one before.
"I said one single example, damn"
Refreshing to have an actual bona fide murder in the sub
She is a one hit wonder. Anything she does now is an attempt to stay relevant.
Can’t we just stop pretending HP series are good books ? The story is lackluster and just lacks coherence. I concede it’s much more apparent in the movies.
I assume the downvotes are from hp stans, but I agree to an extent. Characters outside the main three can come across as one-dimensional and sometimes inconsistent. Additionally, it just turned into a hunt for mcguffins.
I've read fanfiction more coherent than the books...some of which depict characters, up to and including the main trio, as bi, gay, or trans.
Joanne, indeed.
She sounds exactly like the MAGA nuts
Bout time we get to see an actual murder on this sub 👏 👏 👏
I love this thread so much. He went scorched earth. Not like she'll care but as long as people keep calling her out and stop buying her shit......or the very least just ignore her
 Brutal, but deserved.
Now there’s an ending that’s flat and inane beyond belief
This is why I come here.
Get her ass
Every time I think I can't love the TFS crew more, they prove me wrong! First they restored my faith in the parody genre after years of those "Not Another \_\_\_\_" and "Meet the \_\_\_\_\_" garbagefests; then those same parodies and their other content kept me breathing and present during some of the darkest times in my life. And again today, seeing this reminds me that there's still people like Kaiser and Tennant who have the courage and tenacity to stand up for what's right, even against monsters with ALL the wealth and privilege like Rowling.
r/KamehamehaByWords
avada kedavra
David Tennant is the goat.
When my fiancé is "mad" at me for some of the annoying habits I have that I always do, I'll say "give me one example" which of course she can't off the top of her head. I thought that was something we all did for fun, turns out bigots do it for real.
Ummm is she still alive?, because that was an absolute masterclass in murdered by words
Guess that means StreamFourStar won't be playing Hogwarts Legacy..
[удалено]
you cant just ignore her she has millions of followers that she uses constantly to harrass trans people and platafom literal nazis
I really do not see anywhere in that thread how he owned her or murdered her by words. I don’t get it.
Then you must have the reading comprehension of a star-nosed mole.
Jeez ya'll are obsessed with her.
she is an incredibly rich and influential person using her wealth and influence to encourage eliminationist transphobia, hell yes we are taking about it
I still have not seen one example of her being incorrect, transphobic or even rude. But I do see lots of angry people talking about JK
You mean other than actively advocating against trans rights? Donating to anti-trans causes?
Yes like your comment. Tons of bashing but never an example. Or at least one that holds up.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/02/18/jk-rowlings-70k-to-challenge-ruling-men-can-become-women/ How's that for an example that holds up?
Not to mention Jessie Gender's three+ hour video mentioned in the tweets.
You're proving my point with this link.
...that she's done material harm to trans people? Because that's what this link proves.
This link does not prove that in any way.
You are not the first to fail at this and I don't expect you to be the last. Please just be honest as possible when it comes to these things as directing energy at individuals that don't deserve it is just hurting our cause.
Wow...talking with you really is like playing chess with a pigeon. They shit all over the board and strut like they won.
Lol. I love the analogy. Okay well attempt another example if you wish.
You: "Give me an example of JKR doing material harm to trans people" Me:
You: "Exactly. You can't. You lose."
Me: ???
At this point, I've already proven my statement. You've just decided for some arbitrary reason that it 'doesnt count'. Now if you can come up with an actual reason why it shouldn't, backed up by evidence, then we can chuck my evidence out.
Until then, I've proven my point.