this post was submitted on 11 Jun 2025
680 points (86.6% liked)
Microblog Memes
8110 readers
2600 users here now
A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.
Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.
Rules:
- Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
- Be nice.
- No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
- Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.
Related communities:
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
it does seem extremist as a perspective, but that extremist might think talking about the franchise is akin to marketing or a more passive or subtle way of the franchise receiving funding.
Probably a better argument is that JK Rowling is not as influential as some anti-trans activists, and our behavior and norms should ideally be rational and reflect those priorities.
I agree with you that coalition building is important, and in this particular case probably more important to trans rights than strict adherence to rules like never speaking of Harry Potter.
JK Rowling is probably the most influential anti-trans activist.
Yeah I've got to firmly agree on that one. Her fame, and the fact that she created such a beloved franchise, gives her a lot of influence. Most people haven't heard of the likes of say, Posie Parker, especially outside of the UK.
ah, perhaps "influential" is not the best word choice on my part - I guess what I meant by that was not most famous or reaching the most people, but rather the most successful in their anti-trans advocacy, i.e. Rowling hasn't had the same kind of influence on trans rights as other anti-trans activists like Matt Walsh, and even Posie Parker I would argue has been more successful at achieving goals of the anti-trans movement than Rowling. Rowling is more famous as a transphobe and in that sense I agree with you she has a bigger platform and can bring more people into the anti-trans movement.
I don't know, I still don't agree with that simply by the fact she's donated such large sums of money to the cause...
The president of the United States is a pretty open anti trans activist and has made deliberate efforts to use being anti trans as a way to whip up his base
I don't think he's as influential though. He has a wide-ranging influence over his base, but they already are full of hatred. She's able to say the quiet parts quietly a lot better, and I think is more likely to radicalise new people to her cause.
I personally haven’t heard anyone go from being neutral to anti trans from jk Rowling bringing up a new perspective but instead have heard people from both the right and the left criticize her. Trump on the other hand radicalized the average bush era Republican into the MAGA cult we see today that is unafraid to openly show hate
I guess if you're not up to date with the politics of the UK that it would seem like he had a much larger influence than her. We are talking about trans politics only here, don't forget.
To put it in a different perspective, look at how many people that don't agree with Trump's politics that interact with his businesses, compared to the same for JK.
I think she's the most famous anti-trans activist, but that's not the same as being the most influential. You might watch ContraPoints' videos on JK Rowling, she discusses the analogy of JK Rowling to Anita Bryant (a famous homophobe)
here is her first video on JK Rowling establishing that she is indeed a transphobe, there was a time when a lot of people wouldn't accept that Rowling was actually transphobic
and then her second video covering the "witch trials" of Rowling as a transphobe.
In the end I agree with ContraPoints that JK Rowling has outsized hate directed at her relative to the harm she actually does, and that there is a misogynist tendency for people to target a woman to take out their frustrations on. Marie Antoinette is another example of this - the perceptions of her as a villain exceeded her actual crimes so to speak.
My point isn't to say Rowling is not a transphobe or not dangerous to trans folks, etc. - I just believe there are plenty of anti-trans activists who are more successful as activists and are more influential than JK Rowling, even if they don't end up in the headlines as much. That is, they are getting more done to strip trans folks of their rights than JK Rowling, and that's what I meant by "influential" - as in having power and influence to achieve the political goals of the anti-trans movement.
Matt Walsh for example has basically made a career of advocating against trans folks - creating anti-trans propaganda like What is a Woman?, and going to state legislatures to help pass laws against trans rights. I think he is less famous than JK Rowling, and has a smaller platform - but I would argue he has been more successful at advancing the anti-trans movement than Rowling, and the tangible harms from him are greater.
As far as I can tell, JK Rowling has primarily tweeted her support for the anti-trans movement, then she started funding women-only spaces that are trans-exclusionary, and only recently (as in since last year) has started a fund to help anti-trans legal cases. None of those activities are anywhere as "influential" or effective as the anti-trans activism by others who have actually influenced legislatures and had laws passed to deny healthcare and legal rights.
I would even say Chloe Cole has done more to advance the anti-trans movement than Rowling, for example. She is flown across the U.S. and now across the world to speak on the news and in legislative sessions to help anti-trans laws to be passed.
It's obvious Rowling is transphobic and is now using her influence to advance the anti-trans movement, I just think the perception of her influence is greater than her actual accomplishments as an anti-trans advocate.
Trump alone has done more to undo trans rights recently than anyone else, people I know personally have lost access to HRT as an adult because of his executive orders. Rowling has never accomplished anything that significant AFAIK.
ContaPoints does a better job evaluating some of this in her videos, I know they are long but I think they're worth watching and considering.
These are good points. Fair enough, I would retract my statement to her being perhaps the most famous instead of most influential. Fame of course has its own influence though, so it's still a big problem. A win against JK rowling could possibly be better than a win against Matt Walsh.
I disagree that it's misognyistic to have such an opinion of JK Rowling. In fact, I think it is misogynistic to suggest that because she's a woman, we shouldn't take her at her word for fear that our hatred of her might be motivated by misogyny instead of rationality.
I would agree it's not misogynistic to think JK Rowling is one of the most infamous transphobes, but that wasn't quite ContraPoints' argument. I am admittedly sharing the conclusion without providing her argument, and I'm actually in the hospital right now recovering from surgery so my head is a bit fuzzier than usual. If you watch those videos it should cover that territory though, in case you are interested. Either way I get what you mean about Rowling being so famous and influential in her transphobia, I tend to agree with you.
EDIT: it's the second video, the Witch Trials of JK Rowling that has the argument I'm talking about, the way that women bigots in particular are such popular targets of outrage. The first chapter of that video is entirely about Anita Bryant as an example.
I do enjoy ContraPoints. I saw one of those videos, I'll check out the other one. Cheers