Re: The war on J.K. Rowling

[David Dalton]

On Jan 18, 2023, Julian wrote on alt.buddha.short.fat.guy
(in article <tq9fte$10t7i$1...@dont-email.me>):

> On 18/01/2023 12:40, Karlok B wrote:
> > “Belief in biological sex has been redefined as bigotry. Standing up for
> > women’s sex-based rights has been rebranded as transphobia. So
> > Rowling’s perfectly normal views, which are likely shared by most people
> > out there, can be talked about as hate crimes”. (The Spectator)
>
> The Speccie is pay-walled and most residents of absfg
> have exhausted their free sample so here's the text...
>
> The crusade to erase JK Rowling continues. The latest ruse of the
> Rowlingphobes is to scrub her name from her own books. Yes, they now
> want to make even the Harry Potter universe a Rowling-free zone.
>
> A ‘book artist’ in Toronto by the name of Laur Flom has set himself the
> task of memory-holing Rowling. He is rebinding Harry Potter books,
> giving them new covers that make no mention of the witch’s name, and
> even removing her name from the copyright and title pages inside.
>
> The aim, he says, is to ‘help out’ people who are fans of Harry Potter
> but who have an ethical issue with Ms Rowling. ‘The project is spurred
> by her transphobia’, he says. In short, Rowling believes in biological
> sex, and thus she must be unpersoned. For a cool £140, you can purchase
> one of Flom’s lovingly purged Potter books.
>
> Imagine the kind of people who’ll be buying these morally disinfected
> tomes. Forking out £140 just so you can hold in your hand a Potter novel
> that makes no reference to the woman who invented and wrote that entire
> world – that’s some serious commitment to cancel culture.
>
> We are witnessing the unpersoning of JK Rowling. There is a sinister and
> authoritarian impulse behind all this
>
> This might just be the nadir of the safe-space mentality. It seems some
> people are so emotionally fragile that they’re willing to spend big
> bucks to be forcefielded against any utterance of the name Rowling. She
> really has become Voldemort to the right-on – she who must not be named,
> lest evil spirits, or just bad feelings, be conjured forth.
>
> We are witnessing the unpersoning of JK Rowling. Alongside Flom’s
> cleansed Potter books, we’ve also seen Rowling being ‘left out’ of a
> reunion of the makers and stars of the Harry Potter films. Her
> unutterable name was downplayed in a trailer for a Fantastic Beasts
> movie, another fantasy franchise she is responsible for.
>
> The Boswells School in Essex dropped her name from one of its houses. It
> had six houses ‘represented by British citizens who have excelled’, but
> apparently Rowling’s excelling, her incomparable contribution to modern
> British culture and entertainment, counts for nought now that she has
> expressed verboten views. Her name was ditched because of her ‘comments
> and viewpoints surrounding trans people’.
>
> Even some of the Quidditch leagues have distanced themselves from
> Rowling. Yes, people really do play this Harry Potter sport involving
> broomsticks and balls. And last year they changed the name of the game
> from Quidditch to Quadball, partly for copyright reasons, and partly
> because of Rowling’s ‘anti-trans positions’.
>
> There is a sinister and authoritarian impulse behind all this Rowling
> erasure. It brings to mind Stalin’s airbrushing from photographs of
> party officials who had fallen out of favour. Like those problematic
> commissars, Rowling is judged to have thought and said unacceptable
> things. And so her name and likeness must be deleted.
>
> Some people really do want to see a great forgetting of JK Rowling. Last
> year the New York Times put out an advert that featured one of its
> readers ‘imagining Harry Potter without its creator’. This was the
> actual NYT saying this; engaging in the warped fantasy of keeping Harry
> Potter but erasing JK Rowling.
>
> There’s a dark urge here – to punish Rowling for her wrongthink. To make
> her name mud, to cast this wicked woman from polite society, to save
> poor Harry Potter from her demonic clutch, all because she thinks and
> says things that ‘good people’ disapprove of. It is remarkable that the
> Rowlingphobes seem blissfully unaware of how tyrannical they sound to
> the rest of us.
>
> And just what is it that Rowling has said that deserves such ceaseless
> opprobrium from those who fancy themselves on ‘the right side of
> history’? This is about her ‘transphobia’, says book defacer Laur Flom.
> The problem is her ‘anti-trans’ views, say those Quidditch nerds.
>
> What transphobia? What anti-trans views? Rowling has uttered not one
> hostile word about trans people. Who can forget when the journalist EJ
> Rosetta was commissioned to write a piece on the ‘20 Transphobic JK
> Rowling Quotes We’re Done With’ but then gave up when she couldn’t find
> a single anti-trans comment? ‘You’re burning the wrong witch’, said
> Rosetta.
>
> What has really happened is that belief in biological sex has been
> redefined as bigotry. Standing up for women’s sex-based rights has been
> rebranded as transphobia. So Rowling’s perfectly normal views, which are
> likely shared by most people out there, can be talked about as hate
> crimes when they are nothing of the kind.
>
> This is deeply authoritarian too, this cynical repackaging of dissent as
> ‘phobia’. Let’s not forget what a phobia is — a malady of the mind, an
> irrational way of thinking. This echoes Stalin’s antics too, when
> problematic people were likewise written off as mad and consumed by
> spite. Rowling has nothing to be ashamed of, but her intolerant erasers do.
>
> Brendan O’Neill

From my “various matches” thread on alt.religion.druid , which is
linked to from the Eight Sexual Harmonics subpage of my
Salmon on the Thorns webpage if you want to peruse or search it:

"The Dalai Lama’s Oracle is straight-type-2-M in
my species and is a.s.r. and is thus compatible
e.g. with bif Zhang Ziyi (Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon),
though of course so am I.

Her husband Wang Feng is straight-type-1-M and
compatible e.g, with Santha Faiia, the spouse
of Graham Hancock.

Graham Hancock is bim and compatible e.g.
with straight-type-2-F J.K. Rowling, who had
an old lock that has been dissolved.

Her husband Neil Murray is gay so there
can be a bridged threesome of
J.K.--Graham--Neil. Any age differences
shouldn’t be significant after the evolution.”

New:
However her old lock has not yet been dissolved
but I hope it will be rendered incomplete later
tonight. If not, she would have to get permission
from her old lock bim or bimT to be involved
with Graham. Also the species split has not yet
occurred but may later tonight, as I will
report on alt.religion.druid . Also a.s.r.
do not necessarily have to be involved with
other a.s.r. (assisted shaktipat recipients).

--
David Dalton dal...@nfld.com https://www.nfld.com/~dalton (home page)
https://www.nfld.com/~dalton/dtales.html Salmon on the Thorns (mystic page)
"I gave my love a golden feather/I gave my love a heart of stone/and when you
find a golden feather/it means you'll never lose your way back home." (R.R.)