Love Harry Potter but Not the Author!

Hi 

I just want to thank everyone for giving their opinions/advice. I guess the reason this topic was bothering me so much is because I have a couple of friends who are trans and I know that the recent events would really have affected them. So I guess I was anxious about how they'd feel if they knew I still loved Harry Potter. But luckily I've spoken with them and they've assured me that I am very much entitled to love harry potter as they know I can separate it from J.K Rowling herself. It does make me feel more at ease as I know they and what most of you have said is correct, I am very much capable of separating the beloved work from it's author and creator. So once again thank you, you’ve been very helpful 

I also love Harry Potter and very much oppose JK Rowlings views. I am nonbinary/LGBTQ and always have been. I tried to separate the stories from the author for a while, but now I just can't. I refuse to put more money in her pocket, and while she is still around and crusading, it feels too much like I'm enabling her if I do still consume the works. 

Men dressing up as women is a myth designed to scare people, that's maybe based on a couple instances. It's been blown well out of proportion in order to propel the narrative of JK and people who share her views (who are also a small group of people, in the grand scheme of things).

When we loon at the word transphobia it literally means fear of transgender people. That's what this is. The exact same narrative was spun about gay people. People with disabilities also suffer the same type of toxic narratives. Fear is dredged up to cause panic, then those people who created the fear offer a restrictive, exclusionary solution that people jump on. And people don't stop to think why they were even afraid in the first place. 

Also, besides all this, trans people are people. If someone who was alive and kicking and saying these things about any other marginalised group of people, I would also not want to be a customer of theirs. 

It's tough because I do love Harry Potter - it was an intense interests of mine for 20 years, but I just can't anymore, sadly.  

I like to keep my posts concise, decades of scientific writing have had an effect. 

I'm just going to post about this once and then I'll be turning off notifications on this thread because this isn't what I use this forum for.

Initially JKR was speaking about biological women's rights and safety, but due to some of the pushback she got from some possibly extreme trans women and trans supporters it's now gone way beyond that.

Under the guise of 'keeping women safe in womens spaces' she now goes out of her way to publicly call out any person who doesn't fit into her ideal of what a woman should look like. This has included androgynous, queer, intersex and heterosexual women who have been challenged and bullied out of women's spaces simply for the way they choose to dress. This law she's used her millions to push through not only makes it less safe for women but also less safe for trans men. She's also aligned herself with and financed far right figures and hate groups.

Thanks to this law women can now be challenged and ordered to prove their gender for not looking female enough. Thanks to this law now any man could walk into a women's space claiming to be a trans man or 'biological woman'. Thanks to this law trans women will have to use men's spaces where I'm pretty sure they will feel far less safe and will be far more at risk of abuse and/or assault. I'm sure Joanne can now feel safe in her cubicle without having to wonder what genitals the person in the next cubicle has. Does any sane person actually wonder this?

During the Olympics JKR publicly shamed professional boxer Imane Khelif calling her a man when she is a biological woman. Her lot often get it wrong, and far too often. In March this year in Texas a biological woman identifying as a 'stud lesbian' was ejected from a womens bathroom by police and accused of being a man. Granted they're a lot more extreme over there, but with Reform on the rise how long will it be before that happens here?

She's not a well woman, and she only cares about her own little middle class ideal of what women should look like. Why does she get to decide that? Why does anyone? My wish for her fitting end is to be forever hounded by angry biological women who no longer feel safe expressing their identity and entering women's spaces thanks to her hate and fearmongering campaigns. That's what she has created and I hope she reaps the whirlwind for it. She refuses to back down and deserves no peace after this.

Additional...

Transgender people are far more likely to be survivors of sexual assault than perpetrators.50% of transgender people have been sexually abused or assaulted during their lifetime.

A man who wants to attack women isn't going to take any notice of a Women Only sign. There are far more risks to women's safety by men than a hypothetical man dressing up as a woman to enter a women's space to attack women.

Trans people, and trans women especially, are at far greater risk of assault by men than women are at risk from a man pretending to be trans to enter a space to attack women. This is a case of 'man bites dog' for how rare it actually is and most often trans people are attacked just for being trans..

WitchyPrincess06 said:

my point is, I love harry potter but I do not support J.K. Rowlings views in anyway shape or form

I thought JK was supporting (biological) womens rights and when there was a conflict with trans rights she sided with (biological) women.

From what I have read (admittedly I do not have a deep knowledge of the history of these events) she has been consistent i her view and has largely only defended herself form personal attacks with barbed sarcasm.

I don't see why we are expecting her to side with trans people when it is at a detriment to (biological) women.

To me this is the core of the conflict - can anyone clarify if this is factually incorrect? Please keep opinions out of the response as I'm just trying to understand the facts of the situation.

I think you have high intelligence or maturity but you suppress it, hide it, to avoid controversy like everyone else blending in. You keep it simple, hit and run, no strings attached.

I know where you are coming from. I grew up with the Harry Potter books and films, and though I am not LGBTQ I DO support people who are because we’re all different we all deserve to be a part of this world whatever our gender, colour or sexuality is.

It’s crushing to see how horrible JK actually is. It blew my mind and still does – how can someone who wrote such magical stories be such a horrible person in real life?

At first I really did turn my back on the whole Harry Potter world but then I realised the problem isn’t Harry Potter, it’s the creator. The stories themselves are the same as ever, same as the films, magical, fun, a good escape. JK is horrible but what she made is timeless, it doesn’t change and it can’t be changed.

I realised I don’t love JK, I don’t support her views and opinions on others, I just love everything about Harry Potter, the books, the films, the actors and how they’re characters were relatable or fun, how their performance truly brought it all to life.

My dad likes the Christmas song by Gary Glitter – he doesn’t support Glitter, who would!? -  But the song he loves to play at Christmas and sings it, very loudly! My dad always says you need to separate the person from the song – and it’s the same with JK.

Separate her from what she’s made and done.

She wrote amazing books, but they don’t hold her awful views on transgender people. The books ironically celebrate people who are different and don’t fit in, they are shown in a positive light. They are magical and impossible, and that’s why people loved them and continue to love them.

It’s a shame she has ruined her image but one thing she will never ruin for me is Harry Potter. I have no respect or love for her, or anybody who targets people like she does, but Harry Potter is separate from that and I will always love it.

For me the answer is to enjoy the media I already own, but avoid buying new, or promoting/advertising (eg tshirts, badges, bags etc). Once the creator is dead I may consider buying new stuff, depending on how I felt at the time.

History is littered with gifted artists and writers who were also quite terrible people! If we rule out enjoying art that is made by flawed individuals then we would have very few artists to enjoy! Personally - in most cases - I find it easy to accept that artists are not angels! 

I think it's totally up to you, it's no one else's business what you like and you don't need approval. Maybe you could see and love the story for what it is and dissociate it from Rowling. It is a wonderful story and it's a shame for it to be ruined for you. Maybe you could love the books for what they are and ignore the author, don't follow her or read about her. I honestly don't know what her latest comments are because I don't research her at all (although I know what has been going on overall), so I feel I can still enjoy HP for what it is, rather than who wrote it. Whatever you decide, make sure it's your personal decision. The internet shouldn't dictate how you should feel about it.

In addition to the relevant points made below, I find that from a personal perspective, if the creator of the works has recently been convicted of a crime or some misdemeanour, it would be more likely to turn me off their works than something they might have done years earlier, and certainly more likely to turn me off than the works of someone who died many years ago.

Years ago, a shop near me had a beautiful signed animal print by Rolf Harris. I debated for ages before deciding not to purchase. A few weeks later, he was convicted of indecent assault. I knew if the print had been hanging on my wall, it would have been taken straight to the bin.

I think works of art, including literature, can have a life of their own independent from that of their creator. Yukio Mishima was a xenophobic, Fascistic, Japanese ultra-nationalist who committed seppuku after an attempted coup d'état. His politics disgusts me, but his writing is often beautiful. Being able to separate the work from the artist is often useful.

Its a strange feeling, isn't it, there are people who's work I admired, then I found out they are abusers or undesirable in some other way, maybe politically, but I think/justify it to myself, by thinking something like I quite fancy Cpt Jack Sparrow, but I don't fancy Johnny Depp.

I guess enjoy her existing work, but don't go for the new stuff if it makes you uncomfortable and you won't be giving her any more money?

It’s a great question because the ethical and moral tension between famous artists and their works has been debated and is continuing to be debated at length today. For instance, the sculptor Eric Gill sexually abused his daughters, he was a paedophile, and people continue to admire his works displayed in churches, including those at Guildford Cathedral and Westminster Cathedral, yet the continued appreciation of his works has caused outrage in other circles. Exhibitions of art have reduced but not eliminated Gill’s works displayed. One argument asks ‘is it ever right to delete history? Another asks ‘Is it ever right to deprive people of great art!’.

I am not comparing Rowling to Gill in terms of crimes, ethics or anything else. My point is that the same type of tension exists in all sorts of artistic  genres. I don’t think it is possible to say it is right or wrong to continue to enjoy Harry Potter. It is possible to distinguish between the two and love the works but not the creator, for others, that proves impossible. Only you can decide what is right for you.

In my opinion, it is perfectly OK to enjoy work by someone whose views are reprehensible provided those views have not leaked into what they have done. So I think Harry Potter is fine. By contrast, I would not be able to bring myself to read anything by Ayn Rand.

One additional thought, if you ever have to replace your copies of the Harry Potter series, you can boycott Rowling by buying secondhand.

I enjoyed the books and the later films (3 onwards...) but the author has doubled, tripled and quadrupled down on what we're initially opinions worth discussion, and has also since allied herself and helped to finance some very extreme and unsavoury characters.

I don't put my views out about certain issues in the trans community because it's impossible to please everyone, and there are extremists on both sides, so it's just not worth getting involved at the risk of offending someone.

I'll address people in a way they wish to be addressed and respect their choices whether I can empathise with them or not.

I've not watched the films in a while but if I was at a loose end for entertainment then I might stick one on the TV. I liked the cast and the story generally, and many cast members have since spoken out against JKR and her increasing poisonous views and actions. That's how I disassociate. Personally I think she's lost the plot.