Cancel Culture

J.K. Rowling's Anti-Trans Tweets Have Not Ruined Harry Potter. Please Calm Down.

It's OK to disagree with an author's politics and still like her work.


Alas, once-beloved Harry Potter author J.K. Rowling is now canceled. Her legacy is over. Her books can never again be enjoyed.

That's according to progressive Twitter, which exploded with outrage after Rowling tweeted in defense of Maya Forstater, a British think tank employee who lost her job after she expressed views considered by many to be transphobic. Forstater has said that "Everyone's equality and safety should be protected, but women and girls lose out on privacy, safety and fairness if males are allowed into changing rooms, dormitories, prisons, sports teams." This is, of course, a commonly held view, but Forstater's employees at the Centre for Global Development (CGD) decided it was a good reason not to renew her contract. She filed suit, and recently lost in court.

Rowling has previously drawn suspicion that she is a "Trans Exclusionary Radical Feminist," or TERF: someone who denies that trans people are anything other than their birth sex. On Thursday, she waded into the Forstater controversy, tweeting:

The tweet appears to confirm what many trans activists have long suspected, and progressives are making their displeasure known (just read the replies).

It's fine, of course, to disagree with Rowling and Forstater—I disagree with them, about this issue and probably many others. But Rowling's critics are also claiming that her conservative views on transgender issues has forever ruined the Harry Potter books. Indeed, Vox tweeted the following:

The answer implied by Aja Romano's article is certainly yes. It's subtitle is: "JKR just ruined Harry Potter, Merry Christmas."

Romano writes that "Rowling's tweet reveals itself as a shocking dismissal of transgender identity: its first three lines seem to directly attack trans identity, while its final line mischaracterizes the facts surrounding a court case that involves significant transphobia." As a reminder, the first three lines of Rowling's tweet were "Dress however you please. Call yourself whatever you like. Sleep with any consenting adult who'll have you." How these statements constituted a direct attack on trans identity, I'm not quite sure.

Romano goes on to claim that Rowling has "a long problematic history" on everything from queerbaiting—that is, piquing the interest of queer audiences by hinting at same-sex characters and relationships but never making them explicit—to cultural appropriation. Romano concludes her piece by stating that she wishes she could divorce the books themselves from "the now-tainted voice of its author," but suggests this is unrealistic.

I can't help but feel bad for people who are unable to separate the art from the artist. They have set themselves up for a lifetime of disappointment. Like a room full of monkeys and typewriters, every author, director, comedian, and musician will inevitably commit a transgression against progressivism, which continuously asks people not just to tolerate, but to adopt and espouse beliefs they might not like or want to hold. It's much better to continue liking and appreciating a piece of culture, even if there's something you don't like about its creator.

NEXT: McCain Conservatives Are Rallying Behind Justin Amash

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. It’s okay to not like things.

    1. This hate-mongering will not stand, man.

    2. You are literally history’s worst monster. It is most definitely not okay to not like things, except for the things it is most definitely not okay to like.

      And speaking of things you’re not allowed to not like:

      the first three lines of Rowling’s tweet were “Dress however you please. Call yourself whatever you like. Sleep with any consenting adult who’ll have you.” How these statements constituted a direct attack on trans identity, I’m not quite sure.

      Robby, don’t lie, you know goddamn well how those statements constitute a direct attack on trans identity. The idea of your choosing how you may dress or how you may identify or who you may have sex with implies that you may choose how not to dress or identify or have sex. To make that choice implies that you may have a preference of one thing over another when these things are exactly equal in every conceivable way and there is absolutely no reason whatsoever for you to prefer one over another. Unless you’re some kind of Nazi, of course. How dare you suggest that if you prefer wearing boxer shorts to a lacy thong or that people call you Robby rather than Loretta or you’d rather have sex with a woman with a vagina rather than a woman with a penis that that’s perfectly acceptable?

      I keep trying to tell you, these people are no longer demanding tolerance, they’re demanding you embrace their superiority.

      1. Rightthink is doubleplusgood.

    3. Honestly, I don’t get it. If being a “woman” or a “man” is internal (something you have to announce), then what, pray tell, is a homosexual attracted to? That is, how can you have a genetic attraction to something that cannot be perceived, only announced? If transgenderism is real, then homosexuality isn’t. That is, gender cannot be a social construct that requires an “announcement” if it’s also something to which we are genetically attracted because genes cannot react to things that cannot be perceived. One might as well argue that you’re genetically attracted to Rotarians. I could go on, but the point here is that progressive sexual beliefs cannot be reconciled to each other. There’s just no way that sexual attraction can be genetic & unchanging if gender is fluid. I can’t be sexually attracted to males (or females) if male and female are social constructs that change over time. At best I’d be attracted to what one particular society at one particular time defined as male or female! And, LOL, that’s genetic? How could genes change as quickly as society? This ideology is so stupid is impossible to know where to begin.

      1. Forget it Jake, it’s Chinatown.

        1. Excellent!

      2. Definitely a more complicated issue than some of the most pro-trans people realize. I don’t generally have a problem with trans people out there. But to placate all of the trans people’s feelings means to discriminate against other non-trans people. Maybe there should be another category, or at least an asterisk for trans people. But to say they are exactly the same as people born that sex is completely wrong. There are male to female athletes sweeping their races… There are now trans activists saying that trans people do not need to let partners know of their status when dating, because if they say they are female and pass as female, then that is all people need to know. Now I don’t condone any violence against trans people, but for them to become intimate with a cis person without letting them know could inflict psychological distress on that person. Just as they know who they feel they are deep inside and who they are attracted to, I know who I am and who I’m attracted to, and that goes beyond hormones and plastic surgery and who she says she identifies as. I’m a cis guy who’s attracted to cis females, and that shouldn’t be discriminating aginst trans people.

        1. If Sex and gender are different, sex being biology and genetics, and Gender being the behavioral and physiological characteristics that are traditionally associated with the sexes, then sex is best described as male or female and gender is masculine or feminine.
          If that’s the case, then sure, gender can be fluid. Be as masculine or feminine as you feel at any particular time. But sex is not changing.

          But most trans people arent talking about changing gender. They’re talking about changing sex. Which isn’t really possible. XX or XY are coded into every cell. How one dresses or wears their hair or has sex or conducts themselves can be whatever they want but that’s not what makes male or female, it’s what makes masculine or feminine or something in between.

          It seems to me that trans folks aren’t making a clear distinction between sex and gender, when they are the people who insisted we all treat them as separate ideas in the first place.

      3. “There’s just no way that sexual attraction can be genetic & unchanging if gender is fluid. ”

        An excellent point. Thank you.

    4. Men are men and women are women, and they cannot be changed one into the other. Men who would rather be women and women who think of themselves as men are mentally ill, wishing for what can never be. Some doctors will take your money and try to refashion you as the other gender, but I’m not aware of a whole lot of success stories in doing so.

      I do agree with Rowlings; dress as you like, call yourself by any name you please, and love whoever will have you, but 2nd rate male athletes shouldn’t be allowed to call themselves women and take the gold medals from REAL women athletes. Or just drop the genders, and let humans compete against humans.

  2. Transphilia denies equality to women. If any male can declare themselves female and shove other females out of the room, then what’s the point of equality? We have separate genders in sports so that men don’t dominate. But now we have men taking medals in female divisions. How is that equality?

    Someone being trans does not bother me. But someone who grew up with testosterone and testicles should be denied membership in the sisterhood of those who grew up with estrogen and uterui. How can one claim to be a sister when they never grew up as a girl, never experienced being a girl, never have and never will experience menstruation, never grew up as a second class citizen. How the fuck does Bruce claim to know what it’s like to be a woman when he spend the overwhelming majority of his life as the masculine symbol of masculinity on the cover of Wheaties?!?! Fine, he’s a woman now. But he did not grow up female. He lacks a key element of the sisterhood.

    I don’t have a problem with trans people, I have a problem with hyper-progressive SJWs claiming that the only criteria for being a woman is merely declaring themselves female.

    1. I believe every woman should be proud of her penis.

      1. LOL

      2. But enough about Loreina Bobbit.

        1. At least she put in some work for that penis.

      3. Most are, and demand that it take out the trash and cut the lawn.

    2. The biggest problem I see is that the trans activists are putting the cart before the horse when it comes to any actual understanding of the subject. They want to force through social pressure and legislation something that is still very poorly understood. I don’t think anyone really knows what “trans” even is, scientifically speaking.

      1. Also, high suicide rates among trans…
        Studies: Suicide attempts high among transgender teens, increasing among black teens

        One can argue that it might be because of them being socially rejected. But one may NOT study the topic scientifically, because, says your PhD thesis advisor, if your “scientific” conclusions are PC-WRONG, you might feed the hateful tribes! British PhD candidate had this thesis approved, then yanked. I can’t find the Reason article… Anyway, you may NOT study this!

      2. OK, I found it…
        I am utterly SHOCKED to learn that NOT offending the “tranny brigade” of PC people is WAY more important than the actual happiness of trannies and potential trannies!!!

        Speaking of such things, there are biochemical, often off-label, solutions to your urges towards becoming a tranny, which MIGHT actually lead to better results! To MORE happiness, for many potential trannies! To becoming happy with your body, as it already is! Imagine that!

      3. See for “Off Label” uses of drugs for suppressing “gender dysphoria”… 6 drugs listed in web link above, to include (pretty obviously) testosterone…

        Also use below as search-string…
        “Transgender woman, who claims pills for male hair-loss sparked gender change, opens up about ‘life and death struggle’”

        Concerns male-hair-loss “…drug Propecia, called finasteride, to halt the onset of hereditary baldness”, which feminized his / her body, and brought around the desire for a sex change, according to him-now-her.

        So then Propecia AKA (generic) finasteride sounds like a darned-good choice for an off-label drug use, if you are female, contemplating sex-change to male, and worrying that your marriage might not survive such a sex change… Which is a strong possibility! Try this first, to see if maybe you’d like to stay female, before you make drastic changes…

        1. Wow. You obviously have no medical training or scientific education. First of all, one anecdotal account of finasteride supposedly causing one person to feel transgender is not and will never be sufficient evidence for anything. At all.
          Second of all, you jumped to an insane conclusion from that anecdote that women’ with gender dysphoria could be treated finasteride to make them want to stay women? You made this jump without knowing the pharmacology of finasteride or method of action. Stay in your lane.
          Lastly, you bring up these drugs from (lol) as evidence that gender dysphoria is treated off label. Again, your ignorance here is outstanding. They’re all mostly hormones or hormone blockers (keeping it simple for you) and when we prescribe them to people who are transitioning we have to give a diagnosis and diagnostic code which would be gender dysphoria. And nothing is specifically FDA approved for transitioning so it’s off-label.
          I took my time to write this partially because you seem like you really think you know what you’re talking about but don’t know how wrong you are. Also because I don’t want anyone who reads your asinine comment to think it holds any scientific value.

          1. FDA has no scientific value either… All they are, is power pigs! It is MY body… It does NOT belong to you, doctors, or the FDA! Is it “scientific” when every smug mo-fo on the planet, who has a fancy degree, feels entitled to tell me what I can and cannot do with MY body? We are rapidly approaching the day when I will have to get a prescription from a proctologist before I can scratch my own asshole! There’s LOTS of delicate tissues down there, and I might hurt myself!

            Do NOT be blowing on ANY cheap plastic flutes, w/o the permission of a doctor of doctorology! I’m warnin’ ya!

            To find precise details on what NOT to do, to avoid the flute police, please see … This has been a pubic service, courtesy of the Church of SQRLS!

          2. Do YOU have any excuses for the FDA having determined that I need a doctor’s permission to blow on a cheap plastic flute? (The USA is the ONLY nation on the planet, where I need a prescription for a “lung flute”!) Doctors colluding with the FDA, is just yet another example of greedy rent-seeking! It is as if I have gotten my hard-earned PhD in mechanical engineering, so I am going to go and agitate the politicians, to require the peons to get a prescription from me (or one of my fellow PhD mechanical engineers) to get an oil change! Money-greed above all else, regardless of what the excuses are!

            I bet that you’re just another one of these arrogant rent-seeking bastards, from your comments!

          3. PS, don’t forget to see … The article, and what it links to, I mean.

            The medical-academic community is TERRORIZED by the tranny brigade, into NOT researching happiness v/s unhappiness (culminating in suicide) as is linked to tranny surgery. So, for lack of support from the medical-academic community, cautious people who might want to seek biochemical “fixes” instead of surgery, will be left to sneak around in the dark, trying these, that, and the other herbs, crystal healing powers, “conversion therapy”, or garbage cooked up in some clandestine lab, instead of going to the doctors! Because doctors are too smug and self-righteous to prescribe off-label drug uses, or… OH, the HORRORS! To politically advocate for more medical and speech freedoms for drug manufacturers and users! Drug manufacturers are FORBIDDEN to publish ACTUAL FACTS about off-label uses!

            And then the rent-seekers, who are dropping the ball here, and NOT doing their jobs, have the NERVE to look down of people who are trying to pick up the ball!

          4. Poor Agusaraile thought he was engaging in a conversation with a sane person.

            Was he new here? Hopefully if so he gives it another go later on.

            1. So R the Mac gonna make excuses for the totalitarian Nanny State requiring me to get permission to blow on a cheap plastic flute? I recall you saying that you were a “libertarian”, not a conservative. Do libertarians generally make excuses for the totalitarian Nanny State? What kind of excuses?

            2. Poor Agusaraile sounds like a typical narcissistic doctor.

              My wife, a narcissistic psychologist, tells me that “transitioning” is almost never the answer to psychological distress. At best it’s mere fussing and distraction from addressing the patient’s real problems. At worst it’s compounding those problems by adding an additional one.

              Of course, if she expresses this opinion in public, she will lose her license.

          5. No one who reads Squirrelly’s comments puts the slightest bit of stock in them. Ever.

      4. Since when do they care about ‘specifics’ or ‘details’?

      5. “don’t think anyone really knows what “trans” even is, scientifically speaking.”

        Mental disorder.
        Literally disorder.
        Their brain don’t match their body.
        Like other mental disorders, it is what it is

        1. Finally you say something I agree with sweetheart. Does that mean one of us is wrong?

          1. You’re generally stupid.

      6. I don’t think anyone really knows what “trans” even is, scientifically speaking.

        Sure we do. Scientifically speaking, there’s no such thing. It’s just a very fuzzy psycho-social intellectual fad.

      7. It’s Barbie dress-up. DNA doesn’t lie.

        You can live however you want, but being treated like a woman when you have a Y chromosome? Nope. You’re a dude who wants to look and act like a woman, nothing more.

        1. There are no chicks with dicks, they’re just guys with tits.

        2. DNA does lie. But it lies so so rarely and when it does lie everyone is gobsmacked. Like the Olympic medalist who was born a woman but had her medals taken away because she had a Y chomosome. Gasp! Yes, it happens. Or the extremely rare but actual chimeric persons. Heck, a less than extremely rare percentage of mothers can have chromosomes from their children. Yes, it happens.

          But not enough to change the culture over.

          1. She wasn’t ‘born a woman’.

            She was born with ambiguous genitalia.

            Chimeras are two or more humans fused into one.

            DNA is not ‘lying’ in either case. It is defective.

    3. I’m sure millions of straight men and gay women are sitting at home thinking, “I can’t wait to blow my girlfriend. “

      1. I don’t doubt that there are men who THINK they’re straight who fantasize about that.

        1. And there are people into feet and furries and having their nuts crushed but they are exceptions.

        2. I don’t know about the blowjobs, but at least you’ll be getting anal on the regular.

    4. “Fine, he’s a woman now. ”

      No, he is not.
      He is a man who had his dick cut off.

      1. “Damnit Johnny! There are no chicks with dicks! There are only guys with tits!”

        – Ted, from ‘Ted 2’

  3. “her conservative views on transgender issues”

    The day before yesterday it was standard feminism, now it’s part of the evil right-wing whatchamacallit.

    The monkeys with typewriters are the “progressive Twitter” people.

    1. Her tweet from the first word to the last is an appropriation of alt-right culture.

    2. I was going to say this same thing. The stereotypical conservative wouldn’t even agree with her first three lines (how true that is of actual conservatives, I don’t know).

      The tweet almost seems like the definition of moderate.

  4. I encourage anyone who liked Harry Potter to try this fanfic alternative: Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality.

    Forget the title and its pretensions to a specific philosophy if need be. It corrects a lot of things that annoyed me — the disorganized nature of spells, the lack of curiosity on what happens if you change spells slightly (draw out the vowels, shorten syllable, wiggle the wand just slightly differently) — here Harry and Hermione actually experiment with all the variations they can. Why does Quidditch have such stupid scoring? What happens if you mix quantum mechanics with magic?

    And the ending is far better.

    1. ” Why does Quidditch have such stupid scoring?”

      OK, you just crossed a line there.

      1. Á àß äẞç ãþÇđ âÞ¢Đæ ǎB€Ðëf ảhf has never watched a game of WhackBat.

      2. Oooh, a Quidditch reference! That’ll show me!

        1. You are hereby sentenced to playing multiple rounds of Magic CalvinBall with a five-year-old!

        2. Actually, it isn’t.

    2. We know why Quidditch has that stupid scoring. Its a staple of YA novels.

      1. That’s interesting. I haven’t watched TV at all, let alone game shows, in ages; I find most YA fiction too damned simple-minded and preachy. I guess I have been missing a lot of memes.

    3. Harry Potter was a terrible series written for simpletons. I wouldn’t encourage anyone to read anything associated it. I gave it a try. You could tell it was written by a High Schooler (or equivalent).

      1. Well yes it is written at a lower level vocabulary. They are targeted at children after all. It’s still a charming and highly detailed series of novels.

        1. The latter books explored some deep subject matter too.

          1. Too many deus ex machina endings for me. Otherwise ok.

  5. TIL biology is transphobic.

  6. Transphobia is another word for rationality.

    1. At least as it’s being used in this case.

    2. what if one is not fearful, phobic, of trans, but merely thinks it a mental illness.
      I am then what, trans-rational?

      1. What if you don’t think it’s a mental illness but merely a game people are using as a way to exercise power over other people?

        1. Or a way for lousy male athletes to win medals and stuff?

        2. Several very different conditions have been lumped together as “trans”. I’m sure some “trans” people are such game players.

  7. So feminists are fighting for an interpretation of Title IX that allows all college athletes to have penises, just like the old days? Now that’s funny.

  8. I don’t know what else she has said about her views on the subject, but that tweet doesn’t sound transphobic or conservative. It’s a defense of the right of people to have differing views on things and not be punished for it.
    Do you really disagree, Robby? I mean, I was all good in making some distinction between sex and gender. But now we should believe that calling someone born with a dick and XY chromosomes is not properly referred to as “male”? There is a big leap from saying that sex and gender can be considered as closely related but distinct things and saying that sex isn’t real at all. This is where they really lose me. You’re a man who feels better presenting as a woman? Great. You want to modify your body? I wouldn’t advise it, but it’s up to you. But for fucks sake, reality still is what it is.

    1. The only way we can make rational sense of ‘gender’ vs. ‘sex’ is if we publicly admit that Gender is nothing more than a performative act, but separating the two isn’t particularly helpful– or even useful.

      Ok, I agree that “gender” and “sex” are separate. But no, Ted, you’re still not going into the changing room with my daughter.

      1. I’m not entirely sure I agree that sex and gender are truly distinct things, but at least it’s an attempt to rationalize the phenomenon rather than just forcing a counter-to-reality view on everyone.

      2. The most scientific view is that gender is how biological sex is generally expressed through behavior. That does not mean that all women or men are the same, or that culture does not influence those behaviors. But there are strong enough links between sex and gender that biological sex is a reasonable predictor of sets of behaviors.

        1. It’s the difference between phenotype and genotype. To many proggies don’t understand that difference.

    2. Progressives don’t do reality.

    3. It’s a defense of the right of people to have differing views on things and not be punished for it.
      Seeing as the “punishment” in this case is leaving Rowling to a like-minded audience, while people who disagree with her exit the room, I think the problem is that y’all are defining “punishment” rather low.

      1. The punishment in this case was a woman, Maya Forstater, losing her job. She was fired over her tweets about trans people, and tried to sue her employer based on a UK law that prohibits firings based on philosophical beliefs. The judge in the case ruled that Forstater’s opinions did not have the required legal characteristics of a protected philosophical belief. Specifically, the characteristic it lacked was “5. it must be worthy of respect in a democratic society, not be incompatible with human dignity and not conflict with the fundamental rights of others.” That is the incident Rowling was responding to.

  9. That’s according to progressive Twitter, which exploded with outrage after Rowling tweeted in defense of Maya Forstater, a British think tank employee who lost her job after she expressed views considered by many to be transphobic.

    It’s like we should be investing in push-pins and yarn stock.

    Forstater’s comments are completely reasonable. And so anyone who remarks on someone else’s remarks are now “phobic”. Cancel Twitter.

    1. Twitter is the most aptly named social media service. The vast majority of their users are twits.

      Friends don’t let friends tweet.

  10. and progressives are making their displeasure known (just read the replies).


    It’s fine, of course, to disagree with Rowling and Forstater—I disagree with them, about this issue and probably many others. But Rowling’s critics are also claiming that her conservative views on transgender issues has forever ruined the Harry Potter books. Indeed, Vox tweeted the following:

    What, exactly do you disagree with?

    Further, what’s “conservative” about noting that a dude that throws on a costume before heading out the door is no longer a dude? Presuming he’s not a dude is an entirely sexist position. It presumes that femininity is nothing more than a performative act– and to be a “woman” or a “man” is merely to engage in a series of activities which are preconceived to be “masculine” or “feminine”.

    1. Sorry, should read:

      Further, what’s “conservative” about noting that a dude that throws on a costume before heading out the door is STILL a dude?

    2. It presumes that femininity is nothing more than a performative act– and to be a “woman” or a “man” is merely to engage in a series of activities which are preconceived to be “masculine” or “feminine”.

      Yeah, Robby’s trying to walk on the shifting sand of irrationality and pretend he’s being rational about it here.

      J.K. Rowling hasn’t even made any sort of disparaging comment about trans individuals and really, you have to read a heaping dose of negative or nefarious intent into anything her friend has said or done before you get to a point where it begins to look like someone is clearly/explicitly *anti-*transgendered.

      1. Her remarks are entirely libertarian. Be who you want to be, dress how you like, have sexy time with any consenting adult! But if you tell me you’re St. Jerome, I’m not going to believe that you’re St. Jerome.

        Something’s going very sideways around here and I’m beginning to think it’s not me.

        1. It’s straight out of Orwell’s arithmetic lesson. I wonder if many of the loudest proponents don’t themselves believe it, but enjoy forcing their ideological enemies to repeat the irrational?

          I don’t see it going on much longer. How long did the Weimar Republic last? I hope it doesn’t end the same way.

          1. “Senator Roark: Power don’t come from a badge or a gun. Power comes from lying. Lying big and gettin’ the whole damn world to play along with you. Once you’ve got everybody agreeing with what they know in their hearts ain’t true, you’ve got ’em by the balls.”

            1. “In my study of communist societies, I came to the conclusion that the purpose of communist propaganda was not to persuade or convince, not to inform, but to humiliate; and therefore, the less it corresponded to reality the better. When people are forced to remain silent when they are being told the most obvious lies, or even worse when they are forced to repeat the lies themselves, they lose once and for all their sense of probity. To assent to obvious lies is…in some small way to become evil oneself. One’s standing to resist anything is thus eroded, and even destroyed. A society of emasculated liars is easy to control. I think if you examine political correctness, it has the same effect and is intended to.”

              ― Theodore Dalrymple

          2. They don’t believe it. You can tell by how they want only trans women to play trans roles, but never complain that they don’t play roles as biological females.

            The internet is powerful. We can make the push for this and Hollywood will be fucked.

    3. This is one of the things I find silly about the whole transgender thing – you claim that it’s wrong to pigeonhole and stereotype people over their sex identification and yet if you’re a man identifying as a woman you’re going to engage in stereotypical feminine behavior? Like Bruce/Caitlyn Jenner – gender is just a social construct but I can’t help noticing when you decided you wanted to be a woman, you got some long hair and some tits and some hormone treatments and started wearing dresses and make-up and high heels. Why couldn’t you have declared you were a woman and kept on being the same old Bruce Jenner if the man/woman thing is just purely arbitrary? What’s the difference really between a man who just likes pretending he’s a woman and a man who thinks he really is a woman?

      1. You hit the nail on the head that I struggle with. There seems to be a significant disjunct between progressive positions on this issue. When it comes to trans, the position is that a biological man can identify as a woman by means of gender because gender is acting and behaving a certain way. Outside of the trans situation, claiming that women and men act differently is a significant no no that gets you cancelled by social justice warriors. So, how on one hand can you explicitly claim that gender men and women act differently and then on the other hand tell me that to claim women and men are different from each other is sexist.

        In the end, it feels like the trans issue is the issue that starts to see progressivism jump the shark.

        1. Part of the reason for these contradictions is that several different conditions and belief systems have been lumped together as “trans”. A middle aged man like Jenner who suddenly decides he’s a woman; a teenager in agony because he’s convinced he should have been a girl; and a transvestite who enjoys presenting himself as a woman but has no illusions that he is one; have very different views and conditions, but they’re all “trans”.

          1. Marv Albert agrees.

      2. Good point.

        There have been transvestites and drag queens for a long time, I don’t know that any of them believe themselves to be the other sex, they are basically just playing pretend. And they definitely play up the stereotypes as much as possible.

        It’s like that changed dramatically in just the past decade.

      3. Acting vs. being.

  11. So Robby thinks that women should lose their job for saying sex is real? Seems like an odd position for a libertarian to take.

    1. Maybe for Robbie, “sex” isn’t real, only virtual.

      Poor Robbie.

    2. Isn’t the standard libertarian position that employers should be free to fire you for anything they want so long as it doesn’t violate your contract with them?

      1. The libertarian position is that employers should not be prohibited by the state from doing that. That doesn’t mean that libertarians can’t think an employer is an asshole in a particular case.

  12. Rowling’s twitter feed makes me want to weep for humanity, but Blair White gives me hope that not everyone involved in the trans movement is barking batshit insane.

    1. Blair White gives me hope that not everyone involved in the trans movement is barking batshit insane.

      He’s a guy that goes around insisting he’s a woman. He’s barking, batshit insane.

      1. He’s one of the sickos that gets his rocks off masquerading as a woman. His preoccupation with his tits is obvious.

        He’s all about being titillating.

      2. He’s a guy that goes around insisting he’s a woman. He’s barking, batshit insane.

        You must be thinking of another Blaire White.

        Blaire does NOT insist, and takes what comes. Blaire accepts ‘he’, ‘she’ or anything else within the confines of rational discourse.

        What makes Blaire amazing is that he prefers she, but understands that she’s the outlier, that it’s not her place to try to force everyone to conform to her preferences.

  13. TERF: someone who denies that trans people are anything other than their birth sex.

    You’ve got to swallow a hole lot of narrative to get to that definition. The overwhelming majority of them whole-heartedly agree that you aren’t solely defined by your birth sex. Likely a significant portion even agree that you *can* transition from one sex to the other. What they deny is illusion that a human (or a broad majority of mammals really) with a penis is a female.

    But, since Conservative Christians were largely redefined as ‘people who want to eradicate homosexuals’, I guess we’ve got to keep up bullshit pretenses don’t we?

    1. What they deny is illusion that a human (or a broad majority of mammals really) with a penis is a female.

      Further, they don’t accept that merely performing as a female makes you one.

      What I find interesting is the old-school feminists were smart enough to look past the taillights of the car in front of them on this issue and they realized where this road was going. They were very right to start pumping the brakes.

  14. Rowling’s remarks are “pro-reality”, not “anti-trans”. Crazy people are welcome to their own bizarre fantasies, but don’t try to force me to act like I believe them.

    1. I am with you on that one. It seems like we have gone from people wanting to be free to believe that they are a girl, to a new step where they require that the rest of us at least claim that we believe it as well.
      If you want me to use particular pronouns or whatever, I will certainly try to remember to do it, out of politeness. But I am always going to know that we are playing make-believe. For me, it is the same as being invited to a religious ceremony. I will wear the kippah and say the right words, but belief is hard for me. My mind just does not work that way.

    2. If you’re so sure of things then you have the perfect perspective to understand trans people.

      1. Huh? No one has any perfect perception of another person’s experience. However, having a mental disease should not be viewed as a bad thing but accepted as we would accept any other chronic medical condition. By excoriating anyone who suggests that gender dysphoria is a mental disease you are in fact denigrating everyone who suffers from mental illness. You in fact stating that having a mental illness is so terrible that to label it as such is a deplorable and unacceptable.

  15. I knew it was over when Germaine Greer got canceled from feminism.

    1. I was surprised to read that about Greer. All for saying that cutting off your genitals and dressing as a woman did not actually make you a woman.

      When you’ve lost Germaine Greer from feminism, feminists might want to reconsider the path they’re on.

      Or, as the meme goes, “And just like that, for no reason at all, the people voted Adolf Hitler into power.”

      1. “Or, as the meme goes, “And just like that, for no reason at all, the people voted Adolf Hitler into power.””

        I think the new meme is: “And just like that, for no reason at all, the people voted Donald Trump into power.””

      2. Interestingly enough the Nazi party got only a plurality of votes, but since 12 different parties were running they had the largest voting block.

  16. If anyone wants some sanity on this issue, I strongly recommend Douglas Murray’s latest book, The Madness of Crowds.

  17. J.K. Rowling’s Anti-Trans Tweets Have Not Ruined Harry Potter. Please Calm Down.
    It’s okay to disagree with an author’s politics and still like her work.

    Are you talkin’ to me?

    1. I think most of us here have disagreed with Rowling’s politics at least since said came out and said ‘Dumbledore? Yeah, he gay. No, not gonna put it in the books but – he gay. So gimme my award now’.

    2. This tweet is more likely to make people who read Reason *support* her politics.

    3. That tweet wasn’t ‘anti-trans’ Soave and you should be ashamed of yourself for buying into the coercion. If you don’t know the difference between ‘sex’ and ‘gender role’ – or even that there is a difference – then there’s no help for you. Or are you going to claim that you’d be perfectly OK with having sex with a transwoman? Dating one? Marrying one? After all, they’re fullfilling your preferred *gender role* and isn’t gender role the same thing as sex and sexual preference?

    1. I’m not sure which is worse, agreeing that an innocent person is guilty of a transgression but demurring on their being canceled for it, or falsely accusing someone of said transgression.

      The latter can be taken head on, the other seems more… oily.

      You’re a Nazi, Agammamon, but I support your right to be odious.

    2. I don’t know if I would be okay with it. Tony and Pod would though.

  18. Harriet Potter and the Adventure of the Missing Wand

    (huh-huh, get it?)

    1. You ruined the joke with the parenthetical.

    2. +1 Nearly Headless Nicole

      1. What does O.J. have to do with this?

  19. Feminist are just jealous that men are better at being women than they are. Penis Envy 2.0.

  20. Well there’s ten minutes I’ll never get back

  21. J.K. Rowling’s “Anti-Trans” Tweets Have Not Ruined Harry Potter.

    FIFTFY Robby.

    Gender and biology: Represented as being between subjective interpretation and social construct.

    “Anti-Trans” “Tweets”: Reportable as fact.

    1. J.K. Rowling’s pro-tolerance tweets have not ruined Harry Potter.

      Fixed it better.

  22. “Vox
    Did J.K. Rowling just destroy the legacy of Harry Potter with a single, transphobic tweet? ”

    Vox lays off another bunch of people.

  23. Dress however you please.
    Call yourself whatever you like.
    Sleep with any consenting adult who’ll have you.
    Live your best life in peace and security.
    But force women out of their jobs for stating that sex is real?

    Fuck – next thing you know she’ll come out against athletes with mustaches and cocks competing as women in the olympics.

    1. /Randy Macho Man flex.


  24. J.K. Rowling’s Anti-Trans Tweets Have Not Ruined Harry Potter. Please Calm Down.

    It’s okay to disagree with an author’s politics and still like her work.

    I disagree with a lot of the political things that J.K. Rowling has said. This isn’t one of those things.

    1. Yes.

    2. “It’s okay to disagree with an author’s politics and still like her work.”
      Not for the left it’s not.
      One instance of wrong-think and you’re sent to Coventry.
      Makes you wonder what kind of people are willing to live in such a restrictive part of society that they must be so careful of every utterance.
      Leftists are truly deranged individuals.

  25. The trans activists are turning their beliefs into a pseudo-religion that tolerates no infidels. To the extent that its dogma is based on any sort of medical science, is at best controversial, if not outright quackery.

    What Rowlings wrote in those tweets is neither fearful, nor irrational and therefore characterizing it as “phobic” is libel and slander, meant to shut down any meaningful discussion of these issues. This sort of mob induced ideological conformity must be rejected by our society if it does value free minds.

    Like others, I am interested in just what aspects of it Soave disagrees with and his reasoning for doing so.

    1. Robby leaves little “Get Out of Jail Free” cards in all his stories, just in case the New Yorker has a job opening.

  26. “Like a room full of monkeys and typewriters, every author, director, comedian, and musician will inevitably commit a transgression..”


    Get it?

    Why hasn’t this become a thing to refer to transphobia as?

  27. “I don’t like what you wear.” It sounds as crisp as if a free marketer decrying whatever may be in fashion, today or someplace or somewhere; and start to rally a cry of … competition.

    My take against a dynamo of a jabberwocky noise system … !

    And I don’t like what you wear; I could dress you way better but you prefer wearing those conventional fish down your throat … when you may realize these to be tacit symbols of the hangman’s noose …

  28. If you actually read her tweet and know what she’s referring to, JK Rowling’s “transphobia” comes from the fact that she didn’t think a woman who says that there are biological differences between males and females should be fired.

    She doesn’t even explicitly come down either for or against the idea of biological differences between sex. She simply says a woman shouldn’t lose her job over saying that. But you disagree with that, Robby? Seriously?

  29. Also, the trans movement is being run by utter A-holes. If you so much as speculate about the possibility of anything less than perfect happening in the same neighborhood as “trans”, they want you destroyed. (i.e. what about creeps pretending to be trans to go in the ladies’ room?) Their reaction is so bad it makes you wonder if a lot of them are actually the horrible stereotypes they object to. It’s like the Catholic Church has been with pedophilia. If a group tries way too hard to brush a rumor under the rug, there’s a strong possibility it’s true.

    1. Let’s not forget it was Jezabel I believe that advised a women to ask their boyfriend’s if they would still sleep with them if they became a man, and if they answered no, to break up with them. Oh and who can forget the transwoman who went on YouTube to rant that lesbians refused to date her. And my favorite (though not trans but still LGBTQ+ related) that porn actress who was hounded until she committed suicide because she refused to do scenes with men who had sex with other men. Guess it’s you body your choice right up until you choose not to sleep with one of their preferred classes.

      1. Any sane man would break up with a girlfriend who reads jezebel.

        1. True.

        2. I’m startled that any woman who reads Jezebel has a boyfriend. I suppose if he’s beta enough she might tolerate him.

  30. a shocking dismissal of transgender identity

    That someone would decline to accept a very radical notion that is poorly formulated and articulated and was created very recently by kooky academics is “shocking”? The bubble is thick and opaque around some.

  31. Who cares what JK Rowling, or Vox, or anyone else said on a Twitter? It’s the modern equivalent of graffiti on the wall of a gas station bathroom. It’s a wretched hive of scum and villainy, and every user probably loses at least 20 IQ points the moment they log in, much less start twittering.

    Second, the Vox person immediately discredited themselves when they mentioned “cultural appropriation” as one of the problematic things Rowling has done. Seriously? Cultural appropriation was supposed to be the glorious result of multiculturalism! It’s the reason why we can enjoy Thai food one day, and Brazilian BBQ the next, paired with a red wine from Spain or with a Scottish single malt, as we see fit. All while listening to Jewish Klesmer music and then going to yoga the next morning before your digeridoo playing lesson. Anyone who condemns “cultural appropriation” should immediately be branded an idiot and subsequently ignored.

    Finally, of course you have to separate the art from the artist. Many great artists are kinda assholes in the personal lives. So what? Should we all just learn to appreciate drivel as long as it comes from a pristine but untalented maker?

    1. This is not a new concept in YA literature. It has been happening for a couple years at least. You either toe the line or you get cancelled.

    2. Who cares what JK Rowling, or Vox, or anyone else said on a Twitter?

      Journalists, mostly. They really inflate the importance of it.

  32. i hope.. she do the best for everything she want do..

  33. Rowling, as Bernie Sanders would say is a bullionaire. She can say anything she wants and the twitter rage mob can go fuck itself. Soave, I assume, is not a bullionaire and is engaged in a job where he has to eat lots of shit and reassure everyone “NTTAWWT”.

  34. BTW I hear of some dude demanding to be addressed as Countess Dracula. He is of course a Trans-ylvanian.

  35. Lmao at Robby mansplaining feminism to Rowling. NFW.

    1. Bubba, I love it. Hilarious and accurate!

  36. Good thing there was no Twitter when Tolkien was alive…

    1. BTW, just because she is a YA author, the best YA book ever written is “Where the Red Fern Grows”.

      1. Classic YA lit is far better than any and all modern adult shit.

  37. I don’t know if there is any steam left in this one, but I heard a bit that underscored why this Trans thing is such a loser for the far left.

    Some local radio guy was reading the story about the ACLU taking up the issue of “menstrual justice”. Apparently, men can have periods. And it is a grave social injustice that free menstrual products are not available to all women, everywhere. Even in the men’s room.

    The ACLU was lamenting the fact that although we have not yet achieved the menstrual justice of free feminine hygiene products for all, we don’t even have paid dispensers of tampons and pads in most men’s rooms. And that is a terrible injustice and a burden to men who have periods. (their language, obviously)

    Now…. set aside all of the stuff about free tampons and men with periods. Just think about this from a priorities point of view. If things are good enough that having tampon dispensers in the men’s room made it on to your list… maybe you really don’t have an issue.

    I mean, how often can this possibly come up? Of the vanishingly small percentage of people who use men’s rooms but have their period, you have to also posit that they forgot their feminine products at the moment and also don’t have a friend with some or convenience store handy. I’m sure it is a royal pain if you happen to be caught in that very specific scenario…. but does this really come up enough that it requires the attention of the ACLU and the federal government?

    And that sentiment kinda applies here…. is this tweet really the hill they need to die on? Somehow it isn’t enough to acknowledge that everyone has the right to live out their identity in whatever way they see fit….. you also have to subscribe to every bit of their belief system while you do it?

    Is there any other group that we treat this way? Do we demand that Mormon polygamists not only be allowed to arrange their families as they see fit, but that everyone else must believe that it is as God has ordained it? Do we demand that everyone not only accept that furries can have their kink without the boot of the state stomping them out, but that we also all believe that it is a perfectly normal and healthy lifestyle?

    Of course, now I too have transgressed. Because you cannot make comparisons to their struggle. Analogies are hateful and diminish their experience. But theirs is not the only “I was born this way” out there. Many from the BDSM world feel that their proclivities are an orientation, and maybe even a form of gender too. Yet most of the feminist and progressive world would find some of their lifestyle choices profoundly offensive… Should those activists be forced to not only accept that bdsm folk have every right to live their lifestyle, but that all must also believe that being a masochistic submissive sex slave to a group of misogynistic redneck men is a perfectly normal and wonderful thing. And further, they must actually believe that her truth is healthy, and must be embraced by all?

    No, somehow I think all of that is a bridge too far.

    How about we back it up and hew to the non-aggression principle? Treat each other with respect and decency and keep your nose out of other people’s business unless invited. That should pretty much be enough.

    1. I think it does come from a place of things are good. Too good.

      It’s unfortunate the ACLU has gone woke.

      Come to think of it, I notice Mad Dog sports has gone woke.

      1. What do you expect? Roger Baldwin, founder of the ACLU: “I am for socialism, disarmament, and, ultimately, for abolishing the state itself… I seek the social ownership of property, the abolition of the propertied class, and the sole control of those who produce wealth. Communism is the goal.

    2. you also have to subscribe to every bit of their belief system

      And doing that is very difficult, since what they believe is very fuzzy, poorly articulated, often contradictory, and the fine points, which one must not get wrong, change from week to week. You LITERALLY have to “subscribe” to them and be in constant conversation with their acolytes to have any hope of keeping up well enough to avoid a mistake that could get you branded as a hater.

    3. is this tweet really the hill they need to die on?

      Who’s gonna die on it?

      It’s Twitter. It takes something really extraordinary for it to have a lasting impact. Journalists put way more importance on it that is justified.

    4. I don’t know if there is any steam left in this one, but I heard a bit that underscored why this Trans thing is such a loser for the far left.

      It’s a loser also because while gays and lesbians may or may not be sympathetic to trans issues, those issues are largely unrelated to gay and lesbian issues. They only reason “LGBTQ+” are lumped together is because straight people think of it as “all that deviant sexual stuff”.

  38. It’s hard to ruin shit.

  39. Google pay 350$ reliably my last pay check was $45000 working 9 hours out of consistently on the web. My increasingly youthful kinfolk mate has been averaging 19k all through continuous months and he works around 24 hours reliably. I can’t trust in howdirect it was once I attempted it out.This is my essential concern.for more info visit any tab this site Thanks a lot ………
    Click Open The Site

  40. Just realized something. Isn’t Rowling a SJW? Case of eating their own?

    Fun fact. Never watched Harry Potter. True story.

  41. I thought progtards were all about science. They must be DNA-deniers. I guess genetics doesn’t classify as science. Too bad, who’s going to genetically engineer and grow their fake vegan meats.

    You can pretend all you want, but if you have a Y chromosome, no amount of plastic surgery or makeup will change that.

    Nature doesn’t make mistakes, people do.

    1. Progs are all about ‘science’, much like Lysenko.

  42. It’s fun watching proggies turn on each other but did you have to throw in the gratuitous virtue-signaling that you disagree with her just to keep those cocktail party invitations coming?

  43. Have to lol about that charge of “queerbating.” Sorry gays, but there’s no such thing. It’s just your own delusions wanting to see homosexuality in media so you don’t feel so fucking weird all the time shoving bananas up yourself.

    Western anime fans are insufferable because so many of them try to see actual LGBT+ shit in BL and yuri. They want it to mean something for them instead of recognizing and appreciating what it actually means for the people making it.

    1. How about you apply the same kind of reasoning to the desire of Christian churches to see more Christian content in popular media? You really are a nasty piece of work.

  44. >>Rowling has previously drawn suspicion that she is a “Trans Exclusionary Radical Feminist,”

    previously. drawn. suspicion? because books = can be microscoped is sick and wrong … and how is *that* belief the radical one?

    also on the FB and twitter pile I never read/watched a Harry Potter did I miss anything?

    1. The books are quite good. The movies, not nearly as much.

  45. “It’s okay to disagree with an author’s politics and still like her work.”

    This isn’t politics, it’s science.

  46. “We shall soon be in a world in which a man may be howled down for saying that two and two make four, in which people will persecute the heresy of calling a triangle a three-sided figure, and hang a man for maddening a mob with the news that grass is green.”

    —G. K. Chesterton

  47. Art and ideology certainly influence each other strongly. It’s reasonable to be concerned about literature by an author whose political views you disagree with, in particular when it comes to children’s literature.

    Personally, I view the fact that Rowling acknowledges the reality biological sex as something positive.

  48. Why in the hell does anyone actually care about what J.K. Rowling thinks about anything?

    Reason – please don’t fall into the tired media trap of creating faux drama around celebrities who are, at the end of the day, completely unimportant.

  49. For the last 50 years, feminists have been telling us that the non-biological, non-psychological distinctions between male and female don’t exists, they’re only cultural. If you believe this, how can you say it’s different when the transgendered are involved? By what criteria does a transgender man believe that a person is a woman?

    1. Don’t you know? The second argument a progressive makes always contradicts the first. Then you are supposed to simultaneously believe the conflicting premises.

      This is what progressivism is all about.

  50. Very impressive and unique post
    Visit my website :

  51. This is one more example of progressives not being able to separate everything a person does from some statement they just made. I’ve read and enjoyed a lot of books and seen and enjoyed a lot of movies by people with whom I have some major disagreements on particular issues. I can say that I like this particular piece of work, but don’t like this particular point of view. Why is that so hard?
    Progressives are constantly wrecked by their inability to see partial good and partial bad. That’s the major reason I’m surprised they still present the appearance of a united front. It’s also the reason why they can’t seem to understand why some conservatives support Trump. They think it has to be total agreement or none at all.

    1. It’s called, “fundamentalism”.

    2. Politics as religion, an ancient idea, but demonstrated here. The other side are the misled at best, and demons themselves at worst. Their ideas are forbidden. To listen without a genuflected rejection is evil. Shake the dust off your sandals and walk away. Shun the evil.

      And, as with religion, all for the power brokers atop your own.

  52. “It’s fine, of course, to disagree with Rowling and Forstater—I disagree with them…”

    With what, exactly, do you disagree?
    Are you saying that men, in fact, should be allowed into womens’ bathrooms, locker rooms, sports teams? For what imaginable reason? Men should be allowed into women’s prisons? Why, exactly? Can you spell out the specific reasons? Men should live in womens’ dormitories? What are some of the wonderful things that will accomplish? What specific evils do you contemplate if men are excluded from these places?

    And while you’re explaining, how about a definition of the term “transphobia.” It seems to mean any opposition or disagreement whatsoever with any aspect of transgender ideology, demands, wishes or fantasies. Well now, that’s not a phobia. That’s an opinion. A point of view. An attitude. I don’t like cats. Am I “cat-phobic?” Actually no, I just don’t enjoy being around them. Everything I don’t want, don’t like, don’t agree with, is not a “phobia.”

    Men pretending to be women is not something to be enshrined as an organizing principle of society. It’s just a weird behavior, which we can tolerate or ignore as we please. But to throw someone out of their job, to silence someone, to reject them for expressing a perfectly normal opinion about such pretenses is depraved. It is sick. It is degenerate.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.