Overfixation on sexual identity issues is bad for trans people. Slow and steady progress is better than letting radicals steal the microphone. If you don’t believe me, take a look at what Alberta and Saskatchewan are doing to trans rights. The only reason they are persecuting trans people is to spite the previous federal government whose performance was so lackluster that they resorted to identity politics slogans in order to appear “progressive”. Trans people already have it tough. Using them as a banner instead of actually supporting them is going to make things even more difficult for them.
I kinda feel vindicated now. after the whole “dumbledore is gay” thing, I complained that it was bullshit and made absolutely zero sense.
the whole journey none of it came up once, nor did it progress his character arch at all. it was a bit of fluff that sold books.
it cheapened the struggles of being gay IMO and honestly makes more sense now than it did then considering what kind of a vile troll she is.
I thought it was fine in a “it didn’t come up because it didn’t and shouldn’t have mattered” way.
Yup, the month has only begun but I’ve already bought a 2nd Order of the Phoenix to burn. Poetic, really.
You bought it used right? Don’t give her sales.
Pay her to burn her books. I’d guess she’s fine with that deal.
Removed by mod
As a psychotherapist, let me tell you, it would be a good idea if more adults read some children’s books sometimes.
It would be a good idea if they read any book, so yeah that tracks.
A kids book owned by someone who is using the money and fame to campaign to destroy the lives of a bunch of my friends and millions of others.
You can like the book at whatever age idc, but please understand the sentiment that the author should not be getting revenue from those books because they are trying to legally define people out of existence. I’m not a fan of erasing media and, not having read the books, I have no way to be offended by their content, but I do not want Rowling profiting from their sale. Spread pirated digital copies in place of print until it ends up in public domain.
Public domain is 70 the author’s death. None of us will be around for that, and it won’t matter a long time before public domain.
I used to be of that opinion, but after a series of conversations about it I came around to the idea that any engagement, even non-commercial, has the effect of promoting the brand.
I’m just waiting for her to die so we can do like Lovecraft and enjoy the books while hating the author.
This just ends up with the argument of “there is no ethical consumption under capitalism”
People are gonna do what they can to stay sane and engage with the things they find enjoyable. Unfortunately, literally everything in some way shape or form contributes to the oppression of minorities, LGBT+, workers, etc… through the fact that those producing these things have to engage in an exploitative system in order to maintain any sort of business.
That’s just the society we live in. So don’t blame people for being human, blame the system for exploiting our humanity and encourage the individual to find ways to bypass it, such as pirating media.
I’m not blaming anyone, I’m just investing my energies in other things. I have plans for after she dies, but as long as she can draw a profit form the brand I would personally rather boycott it.
Except you did when you said that “any engagement, even non-commercial, has the effect of promoting the brand.”
That is assigning blame onto the consumer, as you blame them for the effect of their action. Her brand is being promoted regardless, because the industry that is “advertising” exists. Additionally, the effect from people consuming her media is negligible, as even if you boycott and spend that money elsewhere it is still just being funneled to some other bigoted owning class fat-cat doing the same shit because that is how the system is designed. It just means that she, specifically, won’t be getting the money, while just denying yourself something that you wanted, assuming you actually liked the franchise to begin with.
So the best thing to do is encourage people to find ways to bypass these systemic barriers without needing to sacrifice their own desires so that the system which enables these bigots loses its power to restrict our access to the things we need and desire unless we enable them.
everyone’s pretty much on board with burning Harry Potter books.
No they aren’t.
The displays at pretty much every bookstore I have been to recently are pretty massive. And kids still like the stories. It is hard to argue against a small child who is begging to read a massive book, as opposed to a kid wanting to stare at a screen all day.
I don’t want to burn the books, just strip Rowling of ownership so she doesn’t profit off of them any further is all. Maybe put them in the public domain early
The problem with this is that if presumably the government had such power it wouldn’t just be used to silence hateful voices but also those who proclaim liberty and tolerance. The pendulum can only be given so much power when it swings both ways.
This is why we should just wholesale abandon the concept of intellectual property, which is simply an extension of the exploitative private property system.
I feel this when someone from the left asks for licenses to have kids. Like you know, that swings the other way more often than not.
If wishes were horses, beggers would ride.
One of this things is within your power; the other, isn’t.
That said, burning her books only benefits her. If you want you hurt her, find someone who wants to buy and read them, and give them yours.
Not really down with burning the books, just that Rowling is using money from the series to fund a campaign against trans people.
I’m not going to spend money that someone is going to use to turn around and attack my rights with.
Like, if I was in the UK - it would be illegal for me to piss basically anywhere. Trans women are supposed to use the men’s, but because trans men are autistic self hating lesbians (the kind of shitty propaganda that bitch funds) we don’t exist and can’t piss in the men’s or the women’s.
I’m not very opposed to the mediocre children’s book series for their content - it’s just typical “the status quo is good actually.” I’m not going to give money to people who are using their money to hurt me.
Can we please avoid “autistic” as an insult.
Edit: I get that this was hyperbole/satire but it still can hurt people’s feelings.
I wouldn’t want to give any money to her but I also wouldn’t be opposed to purchasing HP books from a thrift store that donates funds to charity and then burning them just for the sake of removing just a little bit of her legacy from the world.
I got threatened with a ban on Blahaj because I pointed out basically this when somebody posted a picture of a burning Harry Potter book. It wasn’t even a criticism, it was just pointing out how funny life is that, for completely opposing reasons, trans people (and allies) and crazy Fundamentalists would both support what was happening in the picture.
The author (who was apparently a mod) made some comment about “hurr durr, mah both sides” and deleted my comment. It was very confusing, as my comment showed I clearly supported one of those sides (since I even referred to the Fundamentalists as crazy).
Megan Phelps-Roper did a great podcast exploring the reasons behind the backlashes against Rowling. The Witch Trials of J. K. Rowling
The crazy fundamentalists support her now. It’s all over Facebook.
There’s a difference between burning a book as a political statement because the author is actively harming you, and having a meltdown because the book has magic in it.
It also makes me uncomfortable that you characterize this as “sides.” As a trans person, my “side” is that I deserve to live, have access to medical care, and be treated equitably. Treating this like it’s an issue with “sides” is fucked up - one “side” thinks that all trans people should be forced back into the closet or detransitioned against our will, the other “side” just wants to be fucking alive.
Yeah, you’re missing the point.
They (the mod who deleted it) mentioned “both sides.” I said that two groups, for that one particular thing, both arrived at the “J.K. Rowling is bad” conclusion, and those two groups are fairly diametrically opposed. Not two sides, two separate groups.
My commentary on their “both sides” was that it was a weird take, since it’s clear (if there were two sides) which “side” I was on.
The why, though, wasn’t the issue, and I was attaching no commentary on their motivations (with the exception of calling the Fundeamentalists crazy, because, like… “magic is real and evil and a made-up story about a magical school promotes magic” is preeettttty crazy). It was purely the irony of seeing that post and realizing crazy Fundamentalists also hate Rowling. It’s like that “two strong arms clasping together” meme, with two groups that have nothing (or worse) to do with each other having one particular thing in common.
And look, I get it. It is a touchy subject, and trans people have been getting shit on for too long (especially now) and assuming the worst intentions of comments made is probably correct way more often than it should be. But even the slightest read into anything I’ve said shows no ill-will against trans people and their allies (and lots against crazy Fundamentalists who believe in magic).
When you reveal yourself to be a bigoted, hateful person, most evolved and compassionate people tend to dislike you.
The setting is fun. The author is garbage. Also don’t think too hard about the characters or the way different magical races are portrayed.
Yeah if you start analysing it and paying the slightest attention with -phobias in mind the whole thing starts looking at bit sus.
The first movie has a couple possibly problematic things (“you’re supposed to be a good athlete, it’s in your genes”), but I feel like a lot of it goes away the longer the movies continue.
The goblins made me go “uhh…” even when I first saw the first movie as a teen.
When you pay the game you realize how few women and non-white characters there were.
Which game lol
Hogwarts legacy
When I played it, I felt like they kinda bent over backwards for representation. An Indian spells teacher, an African fortune telling teacher, a Japanese broom coach, etc… Plus not to mention all the classmates that are straight up from other countries, and that mention other countries in their conversations.
There’s also the married interracial lesbian witch couple, the trans witch who runs the Three Broomsticks and the letter you can find that implies she and Garlick were a thing back when they were younger.
A lot of the NPCs felt like specific middle fingers right to JK imo
Not enough people. You still see people talking about it, citing their Hogwarts houses, playing the games, squeeing about news of the TV show snd so on as if nothing was amiss, and dismissing any concerns about the profits going to persecute trans people as some kind of weird Peta-tier puritanism. It’s still considered acceptable in the mainstream to be into HP and be accepted as a good person.
Yeah seriously, I’m not sure I’ve seen any anti HP sentiment in years except from people directly affected. And references just keep cropping up everywhere
“It’s the work of the devil!”
Maybe they were right all along. 🤔
In order to burn her books, you first have to purchase them, and at that point you’ve defeated your own purpose.
Yep - I think the best strategy is what Richard Stallman suggested in 2005 - don’t give her money under any circumstances.
I’d suggest not giving the works any form of oxygen; definitely don’t buy the books or watch the movies for money, including on a streaming site that pays royalties, or buy branded merchandise. But also don’t borrow them from a library (libraries use that as a signal to buy more), promote them by talking about them in any kind of positive light, don’t encourage your kids dress up as a character (builds hype and creates demand), use analogies drawn from the books, or otherwise support them.
As far as books about wizards and educational institutions, Terry Pratchett’s Discworld series is way better anyway - they have more realistic character interactions and social dynamics (despite being a comic fantasy), and it makes for a much better read.
why does that 2005 article reference events from 2009?
People burning books usually burn other people’s books, not their own.
:shrug: Someone bought them.
Not necessarily. They could go to the store and burn all the stock of one particular book.
*citation needed
Citation provided
Not seeing where the books came from in any of the accounts of book burnings, but even if they’re in a bookstore, the publisher’s already got the money, as has the author. It’s all performative nonsense either way.
Performative nazism, lol.
Anyway, just for educational purposes. Bookstores usually not just buy books in bulk and hope not to go bankrupt for a bad purchase. They do not take all the risk. When books are bought by a bookstore contracts are made, usually the store pay the publisher after a set amount of time, and if books are not sold, they return the books to the publisher. Contract between publisher and author tend to imply a percentage of sells, so if that books were not sold author won’t see the money either.
In this case if books are burn by a mob, the bookstore might just not be able to pay the publisher, so the publisher won’t be able to pay the author.
Not to even begin with editions and batches. A bookstore won’t buy all the books they pretend to sell on a single batch, they will be buying by batches. If at some point they get raided they just will stop trying to buy more batches. Same fron publisher perspective with editions. They will print out more editions depending on the sales. If a book is not being sold, because it’s being burned, they won’t print more editions. No more editions = no money to author either.
What about shooting cases of Bud light
And it’s not like the books changed. Just the people reading them.
Persecuting infidels has always been a universally popular occupation. The Christianity etc is only a justification.
