Harry Potter fans tend to argue for the seperation of art from the artist.
That's a maybe.
But unlike, say, Lovecraft, your money is going to an alive person that is trying to eradicate my people *using* that money.
I wouldn't be able to look myself in the mirror if I did that to any minority.
I've seen many arguments for/against the franchise based solely on subjectives: that the stories are good or bad, nostalgic or unfamiliar...
Objectively, whether you like it or not, it's a massive franchise that directly funds transphobic politics.
No argument can really make me ignore that fact.
I get the nostalgia.
Harry Potter was a big part of my childhood. Gaiman's works were a big part of my teenage years.
I put my books and things away, and away they will stay. And I will never give either another penny.
Because they're just things, and things are never more important than people.
@thejessiekirk I remember having this exact same argument a long time ago about still listening to bands / artist / rocks stars who are known sexual predators. Trying to put across that basic understand that by doing so you are feeding that behaviour and making it acceptable... urgh...
I am going to be asking my friends / family politely not to watch the new Harry Potter series... but that said, I still can't get anyone off Facebook... sigh...
You mention Neil Gaiman, and I was also too a big fan, though I've not kept up with much in recent times, so have I missed something there? He hasn't gone all Rowling on us has he?
@shyestrange @thejessiekirk I didn't read the details but re Gaiman a large number of credible claims of sexual assault and abuse over many years, particularly from young women who were fans.
The British journalist who first reported this story is upset that the left / the fans so quickly turned against Gaiman over this - she expected us to excuse him because he's leftwing and we like his art.
@RachamimOnWheels @thejessiekirk Thank you for taking time to reply to me, much appreciated. I have not heard about this at all (and I'm British!). I suppose that goes back to what I was originally comparing things too.
There does have to be a sense of "innocent until proven guilty" for sure, but when multiple people start speaking up, and things start to escalate...
@RachamimOnWheels @shyestrange @thejessiekirk oh yes it’s so gross, I don’t know why I chose to listen to a podcast series about it.
It was a balanced take, they reported his side too, but then they did a great job of pointing out the inconsistencies in his statements and also the stuff he admitted to that he claims wasn’t wrong that was GROSS AND AWFUL.
I haven’t done anything with my books because I don’t know what to do with them. I’ve already paid for them, I’ve already read them, do I stick them in one of those little roadside libraries so someone else doesn’t have to give him money if they want to read his book or does that spread his sickness somehow??
Gaimin has been accused of sexual misconduct by eight women so far, including at least one rape. His legacy is turning to mud.
@StarkRG @shyestrange @thejessiekirk
The actors who have agreed to be in the new TV series are dead to me.
Nick Frost, you idiot!
@thejessiekirk I'm 45 this year.
One of the things I've learned over my years is that there is nothing sacred in this world. Everything is ejectable, especially the things we grew up on.
Shit, I grew up on shit like Rolf Harris and Bill Cosby. Took about 30 seconds to eject them from my life, despite how much they made up my childhood
@siobhan @thejessiekirk I don’t think I can reread these books without feeling sick after hearing his victims talk about what went down.
This thread has helped me figure out what to do with them though. I think they need to go in one of those roadside library boxes we have all over the place. That way someone who wants them can have them without giving him more money.
I’m not comfortable putting books in the garbage, the only books I have ever thrown away in my life have been the Bible and Peter Thiel’s book I found at my brother’s after he died. THAT deserved the trash.
@maggiejk @siobhan @thejessiekirk
a few years ago I found in charity shop some book set in drum and bass/jungle scene of 1990s London (I like the music and was a DJ/rave organiser). But the books characters glorified not only drug use but violence (including violence against women). Whilst having a bonfire for garden rubbish, I doused that book in naptha and lit it up - I genuinely did *not* want it falling into the hands of a young kid/teen in their formative years..
@maggiejk @siobhan @thejessiekirk My partner and I discussed what to do with our (mostly their) collection of HP books and DVDs.
The money's irrelevant to us: putting that author's work into new hands still promotes that author.
Same goes with Gaiman. An expensive collection of bound editions is about to get recycled, along with a bunch of smaller items.
When somebody turns out to be that vile, we feel their legacy should be forgotten.
If they're remembered at all, it should be as examples of what kind of person not to be.
@thejessiekirk I've been trying to work through thoughts on this topic for the last half decade. I think where people fall on this relates to their education, the level of complexity they can process, which relates to their politics too. conservatism is about nostalgia and ignoring/nor parsing complexity. moving more left and anti authoritarian usually seems to involve managing more complexity and also less nostalgia clutching.
harry potter was never my thing so that was easy to put away, but my experience with this was when author warren ellis, who i spent 20 years reading most of his ongoing works, was revealed to be a colossal sex pest (https://somanyofus.com/). but having more complex frameworks, as much as there was some pain, loss, frustration, it ultimately came down to putting all his work away, but keeping any inspiration i gathered from it, and looking for new works to continue fueling and growing that. and hey, neat thing, there's so much new art and stories being made, and by cooler people that are growing their work on previous bases.
sometimes it doesn't feel perfect, if you spent a long time or formative years growing with one authors voice, sometimes new things don't perfectly fit that, but that's just... part of growing?
it comes down to how flexible your brain and mind is. some people just, don't seem to be able to, and that seems to have a big overlap with conservative leaning and it's all just... disheartening to watch. and frustrating and angry making as people scrabble for reasons to not do any work growing up and changing.
I guess i still don't have much in the way of any good answers, just some time spent trying to dig into it a bit. i mean ultimately, my answer is the same root for most issues, way better education, from just more knowledge, to more frameworks for thinking, to way more emotional intelligence as well. with out that I fear we're stuck with societies still churning out a lot of people unprepared to grapple with the real world complexities of our actual world and whom will keep responding terrible, fearfully, and clutching / leaning on nostalgia rather than challenging themselves and growing.
@thejessiekirk I would doubt of the core values of a person who wrote a series of books about children going to a private school in a castle like privileged aristocrats. Even if you can use magic you can't go there without money to pay the fees. 2nd class aristocrat to be used by others.
The whole series is based on the premise of good and bad aristocrats. Those who respect the plebs and those who don't and go full berserker against all of them (aristocrats included) for the sake of power.
I was never a Lovecraft fan, and just learned he harbored a bit o' bigotry. If you read his wiki, though, you can see a man born into elite white privilege gradually becoming a flaming liberal. He didn't live long enough to complete the transition, but he was definitely on that arc.
"Race is the most controversial aspect of Lovecraft's legacy, expressed in many disparaging remarks against non-Anglo-Saxon races and cultures in his works. Scholars have argued that these racial attitudes were common in the American society of his day, particularly in New England.[149] As he grew older, his original racial worldview became classist and elitist, which regarded non-white members of the upper class as honorary members of the superior race. Lovecraft was a white supremacist.[150] Despite this, he did not hold all white people in uniform high regard, but rather esteemed English people and those of English descent.[151] In his early published essays, private letters, and personal utterances, he argued for a strong color line to preserve race and culture.[152] His arguments were supported using disparagements of various races in his journalism and letters, and allegorically in some of his fictional works that depict miscegenation between humans and non-human creatures.[153] This is evident in his portrayal of the Deep Ones in The Shadow over Innsmouth. Their interbreeding with humanity is framed as being a type of miscegenation that corrupts both the town of Innsmouth and the protagonist.[154]
Initially, Lovecraft showed sympathy to minorities who adopted Western culture, even to the extent of marrying a Jewish woman he viewed as being "well assimilated".[155] By the 1930s, Lovecraft's views on ethnicity and race had moderated.[156] He supported ethnicities' preserving their native cultures; for example, he thought that "a real friend of civilisation wishes merely to make the Germans more German, the French more French, the Spaniards more Spanish, & so on".[157] This represented a shift from his previous support for cultural assimilation. His shift was partially the result of his exposure to different cultures through his travels and circle. The former resulted in him writing positively about Québécois and First Nations cultural traditions in his travelogue of Quebec.[158] However, this did not represent a complete elimination of his racial prejudices.[159] "
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H._P._Lovecraft#Personal_views
@Uair HPL was a child of his time, and a child of his class (although impoverished) and he was also a very lonely kid.
If you only see one "type" of people when you're a child, and nobody takes the time to explain to you that other "types" exist and they're worthy of respect and love, you're likely going be unsettled when you meet (or, worse, _learn_ about) them. How you manifest it is probably due to your milieu.
It takes time to grow into acceptance, and HPL didn't get it.
I truly think things were slower back then. Maybe he wasn't getting it as fast as he should, but he definitely, by wiki, was on the road to getting it.
I dunno. I think I'm more forgiving of the oldsters because I know I can't empathize with the world in which they lived. I can't imagine a world where it takes weeks to cross the Atlantic.
JK, on the other hand, inhabits my world. I have full expectations she recognize it in all its glory. She doesn't get to cut trans people out of /my/ fucking world.
@thejessiekirk I’ve no issue with that separation, I do it quite often.
But, I’ve no interest in supporting a person who actively harms others with intention.
So, Rowling can eat shit, and I’ll happily ignore her works, and inform others that she advocates the dehumanization of a minority group of people.
100% agreed.
Here's another 10%: I used to love Heinlein. Then it became clear to me what a fascist asshole he really was, and that fascist asholerly is what he celebrated in his books. He's dead now, but I still don't want his works in my life. It's not because I couldn't look myself in the mirror. It's because I find Heinlein nauseating.
@thejessiekirk We might want to differentiate between already owning a book (from the early 2000s) that one might re-read or purchasing new media from this franchise.
The latter is most definitely unacceptable.
The former is debatable as Rowling doesn't benefit from this or looses anything from not re-reading it. However, @maggiejk makes a good case even for not re-reading already bought copies.
@JustinMac84 @thejessiekirk She is one of the biggest backers of anti-trans activism and legislation globally. She regularly expressed joy about the denial of trans rights. Meanwhile, the critics of JKR who appeared on that podcast say they feel used and like their voices didn't come through. (See the response of Natalie Wynn who appeared on the podcast.)
Edit: I realized the article I linked to only showed part of the issue. I am working now and don't have time to look up the full responses.
@JustinMac84 @thejessiekirk There may be some conflation going on, but it's very clear she isn't a fan of transgender people.
JKR in December 2024 stated "there are no trans kids": https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-14233581/JK-Rowling-says-no-trans-kids-says-NO-child-born-wrong-body-response-online-troll-accused-hateful-focus.html
She reportedly aims for her new TV show to "totally eradicate the memories of the old movies and the old cast" according to an insider: https://thehooknews.com/2025/03/21/jk-rowlings-plan-to-get-revenge-against-three-harry-potter-stars-revealed/
A listing of all her vitriol towards transgender people can be found here: https://www.thepinknews.com/2025/04/11/what-has-jk-rowling-said-about-transgender-people-trans-views-tweets/
@JustinMac84 @thejessiekirk Who did this podcast? A podcast which JKR felt comfortable being on likely wasn't a podcast that would put her in a bad light. Fuck, Joe Rogan is a podcast. Podcast != reputable and even if it was reputable, transphobia has an insidious way of sounding rational to people who aren't personally close to the issue.
Yes, she claims to not be transphobic and in support to live free of 'persecution'. It's unclear what her definition of persecution is as she does a lot of trans persecution herself.
@JustinMac84 @thejessiekirk [I am quoting and summarizing some of the shit JKR has said]
If this doesn't qualify as transphobic then you have made it an easy decision to block you. This post is made in good faith that you really aren't aware.
She follows social media accounts which dedicate themselves to hating transgender people (see Maya Forstater). She has liked social media posts that describe trans people as 'men in dresses' and 'male with all the bits who things he is a lesbian'. She peddles in lies about excessive detransitioning rates.* She also advocates for stronger restrictions in gender marker changes (see Scotland).** She has called transwomen as 'penised individuals'. Look no further than her book 'The Ink Black Heart' which is totally not a vendetta on how she sees herself. She has equated trans women to 'men performing their idea of femaleness'. She also continually mentions 'biological sex' without defining it. As a researcher in public health, this is asinine. Those two words put together have no official, widely recognized definition. Sex is not just two things. High school XY knowledge does not mean you understand the full breadth of what influences sexual development. Fuck, scientists are still continuing to find genetic segments which contribute to sexual development. It's just a dog whistle to attack trans people. She insists trans people do not exist - sounds like complete erasure to me. Saying trans women are men kinda sounds like a way to destroy a community. In the recent UK ruling she gloated about being a TERF and how she 'loves when a plan comes together'. She also donated ~$100,000 to the firm arguing against trans rights.
* some evidence suggests well over 50% of the general population which undergo any plastic surgeries regret it. Trans regret is less than 1%...
** One of the easiest and least controversial ways for a government to recognize trans people's existence and aid in reducing trans suicide rates
@JustinMac84 @thejessiekirk I apologize for coming across like that. Please understand that I am coming from the perspective of years of being told that I don't know anything from people who have no advanced biology or genetics experience. It comes from a place of frustration that people use the 'I learned this in high school' as support for - incorrect - statements on biology, i.e. since I learned this in high school and you don't know this basic high school level fact you must be terrible at your job or stupid.
It also comes from a place of frustration of experts and specialists being denigrated because podcaster/youtuber/twitch streamer/etc has convinced them expert = privileged elite who just wants power, money, and control. They have made it a personal identity to not learn facts from experts or challenge their viewpoints.
In broad strokes the high school XY lessons are not technically incorrect, just a combination of oversimplification and scientific knowledge improving over time.* Depending on your generation you may or may not have learned about X and Y non-typical configurations. XX with the SRY (the active part of the Y) being on one or both of the X's, XXY, etc etc. But even if you learned those configurations, most high school curriculum today hasn't caught up with all of the new genes and epigenetic factors we are discovering.
@JustinMac84 @thejessiekirk Yes education should be prioritized and improved. I would love that. But I am pretty jaded from the world rejecting education and experts. I am exhausted from watching in dismay at the dismantling of the US education system to keep these types of conversations from happening in classrooms. For example, in the US, only 39 states + DC require sex education with only 18 of those requiring that education to be medically accurate. No state has a mandated curriculum. 6 states explicitly prohibit the discussion of LGBTQ sex education. Another: Florida refuses to let the word gay be mentioned in a classroom.
I don't fault people for not knowing things. I fault them from not knowing and refusing to learn. I am not frustrated at people for choosing (or not being able to choose) to become specialists. I am frustrated at those who reject those who did choose that path and have that expertise.
* Sidenote: sex chromosome is not an official term and the person that coined it regrets coining it that because it leads to confusion
JT Leskinen
Jessie Kirk • 🏳️⚧️ 🇪🇺 • 🇺🇦 🇵🇸
🍄💀Shye Strange💀🍄
Rachamim Farnworth
Maggie Maybe
Bob LeFridge 
StarkRG
adaddinsane (Steve Turnbull)
Jennifer
Maki
sortius
Siobhan
Alex@rtnVFRmedia Suffolk UK
FiXato
Kat
David 🏳️🌈🏳️⚧️NB he/they
Dan Ballard
Hacker
🌺 Local Area Network 🌈
Nikola Orsinov [Joseph Grimaldi]
Nick
Noodlemaz
pgcd
Poloniousmonk
jb
Professor_Stevens
Zuri (he/him) 🕐 CET
Justin Macleod
Jeremy le fou
Danni Storm 🇺🇦 🇺🇦