It wasn't just the goblins — is J.K. Rowling doing Holocaust denial now?

https://lemmy.world/post/13138715

It wasn't just the goblins — is J.K. Rowling doing Holocaust denial now? - Lemmy.World

The most famous forms of Holocaust denial and revisionism tend to focus on Jews, casting doubt, for example, on how many were exterminated in the camps. But denying the impact the Nazis had on the other groups they targeted, including queer and trans people, disabled people and Romani people, is still Holocaust denial. Maybe someone should tell J.K. Rowling.

She knows she is doing it and doesnt care.

Like every conservative, they just want queer people dead, unless its their own children.

She’s not a conservative, she’s a liberal (in the political science sense of the word, not the USian synonym for leftist).

It’s not 100% clear where Rowling’s transphobia comes from. She certainly fits into the group of transphobic cis women who have been abused by cis men and concluded that all men are evil, including the ones that want to be women.

But there’s also a dynamic which I think you can see with Graham Linehan and Dave Chappelle as well. Born into comfortable middle-class families, well-educated, never really thought about their bog-standard liberalism. Became extremely successful, became accustomed to near universal adoration, made a thougtless transphobic comment/skit, received criticism and reacted with absolute fury at the idea they could possibly be prejudiced about anyone. Because they’re liberals, you see.

All three just keep digging that hole deeper rather than face up to the idea that maybe they got something wrong. Linehan’s career is over (as is his marriage), Dave Chappelle is hanging on by a thread and flirting with the right, and Rowling doesn’t give a shit because she’s a billionaire and does not have to give a shit about anything at all.

Her world views are absolutely conservative by today’s standard. Especially her views on gender roles. I mean have you read Harry Potter when you were younger? All important characters that actually shape the plot are male. She went out of her way to give Harry different father figures, believing that‘s what a boy needs when he grows up. But it‘s enough when his mother just loved him. Her female characters are far less layered than the male ones and more often than not reduced to mere tropes. The most prominent one being the pedantically strict auntie, a template which wich gets pasted a lot. There’s also the crazy auntie character and the tomboy. But that‘s pretty much it, really. Hermione herself ranges between overly strict and tomboy throughout the books and the only way she managed to escape this pattern is by… magic plastic surgery to shrink her front teeth. Rowling has clearly defined genders to be a black or white kind of thing for herself and she clearly outlined which gender has to fill what role.

Totally agree with all of that. But I think the disagreement is based on what you think a liberal is. She is a New Labourite through and through.

British transphobia is as prevalent amongst middle-class, white liberals (centrists) as it is on the right; I’d say that they started it here.

Writers for The Guardian (US) wrote a letter protesting that bastion of liberalism’s transphobic stance: Why we take issue with the Guardian’s stance on trans rights in the UK.

The political dividing line here is very, very different to that in the US.

Why we take issue with the Guardian’s stance on trans rights in the UK

A recent editorial on the Gender Recognition Act in the UK was met with dismay by Guardian US journalists who believe it advanced transphobic viewpoints that are driving attacks on trans rights in America

The Guardian

The reason traditional gender roles are called than and are that is because most people act in accordance with them.

And I disagree that all female characters have less depth intentionally.

These are still books about a boy, told from his point of view. Most of the depth is in his head.