Hacker News Reader

Comment by mghackerlady | Hacker News Reader

I personally have massive problems with Rowling because of her transphobic views, as I am a transexual woman and she completely misunderstands us and has used her influence to make our lives hell in the UK. The rest of her political views aren't something I give much thought as she isn't nearly as influential in those areas

>Sidenote: If you're referring to the zombie-ant fungus, those go by Ophiocordyceps nowadays

Neat. I should probably explain why I called her that. She started noticeably becoming more unhinged a bit after she posted a picture of herself in a house that very clearly had a mould problem. Thus, as a way of coping, we (as in, the subset of the trans community I partake in) started joking that her views were caused by the mould

View on HN

You are a man and, like all men, need to refrain from imposing yourself on women's spaces. If you, and other men like you, stopped doing that, then there would be no problem. This is an issue that is entirely behaviourally self-inflicted. All you need to do is respect women's boundaries.

I am very much not a man. I don't look like a man, act like a man, from what I've been told I don't think like a man, I don't have the body of a man, very soon I will not have the genitals of a man. I am quite possibly the least threatening person you'd ever meet. All the other women in my life see me as a woman. If you saw me on the street and I didn't tell you the circumstances of my birth you'd have no idea I wasn't born a woman.

Tell me, in what way am I a man? What danger do I pose?

What is a man?

I can see how being personally affected would change the outlook on things like this.

It just seems to me that often people that are politically still "somewhat close" (Rowling) catch more flak than politicians that associate "transgender" with something inbetween "subhuman" and "delusional", but don't talk about it too much (because their whole electorate coulnd't care less about the topic anyway).

I had a similar impression with political fragmentation on the non-Trump side in the last US election.

But maybe the behavior is even net-beneficial in some cases, and you gain more as a movement by pushing against a Rowling instead of a Farage.

It comes down to influence. One politician can only do so much damage, whereas Rowling is very wealthy and can b̶r̶i̶b̶e̶ lobby many politicians

Do you think Rowling has more political effect in the UK than UK politicians, or are you talking global influence here?

My own somewhat cynical take is basically the Planck-principle: Actual progress mostly happens one grave at a time...

I still think from a political effectiveness point-of-view, pushing against Rowling is almost completely futile, because she has no electorate to satisfy and her view (from what I understand, her focus is on "protecting" cisgender women/their spaces from maliciously misdeclared transgender women?) is strawmanny, but difficult to just dismiss/pick apart.

But I can see now how perceived "betrayal" and actual public engagement with personal issues would elicit a much stronger response than an ideologically even more distant politician that just hates you quietly. Thanks for the discussion!

Np.

What I mean about political influence is limited to the UK. While it's mostly futile, a lot of us grew up with her works and don't want others to support her work through merchandise and stuff

It's because JKR is a woman, and men like the one you're replying to have a particularly deranged level of ire for women who say "no".

Men with similar views to JKR receive far less vitriol.

I have similar ire for men who espose her garbage views, and if it weren't for her transphobic views I'd have no problem with her

Reply on news.ycombinator.com