a harry potter fan's guide to navigating pride month
-
what are some fun trans-inclusive universes? doesn't have to be fantasy
wrote on last edited by [email protected]Discworld explores gender a few times in a way that I like.
Monstrous Regiment is about a bunch of women who pretend to be men to join their military. For the most part - these aren’t trans characters, they identify as female. The funny is the characters slowly discovering that everyone else in their group is doing the same thing. One character though, explicitly identifies as male after the “reveal” and has male pronouns used for them.
Discworld as a series tends to be irreverent without punching down. Comedy is a weapon in Pratchett’s hands, but his targets are capitalism and oppressive systems.
LeGuin has a lot of interesting takes on gender. The Hainnish cycle is about a race of humans who had previously colonized a bunch of planets and did lots of experimentation on those populations - kinda Vault Tec vibes. The civilization collapses/gets better, and the POV character is usually some type of researcher/anthropologist looking at how those planets develop The Left Hand of Darkness is a sci fi classic: a planet where people stay sexless until they go into “heat” and will develop the opposite genitals of the person who they are attracted to. There’s lots of switching back and forth. It’s a big deal when the king gets pregnant, because only children the king carries can inherit the throne.
Any LeGuin is good. Earthsea is a far superior children’s series compared to Harry Potter. Nothing that really makes it explicitly trans but the process of finding your true name and accepting yourself is something that resonated very much with me. (Also props to LeGuin for being very forceful with insisting that the characters not be depicted as white. None of this pussyfooting retroactive “I never said Hermione was white!”)
Anne Leckie’s Imperial Radch trilogy is also more gender bending sci fi. Everyone is “she.” The first book was part of the Sad Puppies drama, because it won Hugo’s and absolutely pissed a bunch of a bunch of chuds.
-
Books are available secondhand. Games and movies can be pirated. It doesn’t cost anything to talk about a shared interest with friends.
Except it keeps this franchise alive, which in turn causes other people to buy the books, the games. If you want the franchise to die off, so no one buys their shit anymore you have to stop participating in it.
Why is "stop platforming fascists" such a controversial take?
Because you're taking an authoritarian approach over policing other people's hobbies and interests, many of who are trans and queer themselves. The franchise is regarded as a "comfort series" for many people who grew up with it, especially kids in abusive households as those demographics tend to gravitate towards fantasy series like Harry Potter and LOTR the most.
Why is having empathy for people different from you such a controversial concept?
-
Yeah I think that’s a perfectly reasonable sentiment, and I despise frying that as a political purity test. Rowling is probably being platformed by all this by some extent… Any attention is good attention these days.
Shit, I hope JK doesn’t use it to run for some kind of office.
The utter popularity of Harry Potter (and the royalties she rakes in) undoubtedly dwarfs any personal name recognition/brand she ever achieves though. Like, it’s insanely popular.
Yeah, I don’t think that the brand is insanely popular because of her hate. Like, most people don’t care about her or even hear anything about her anymore. It’s just about Harry Potter, because that’s what it’s always been about. I almost feel like the discussion about her is bot farms creating that discussion.
-
Yeah, I don’t think that the brand is insanely popular because of her hate. Like, most people don’t care about her or even hear anything about her anymore. It’s just about Harry Potter, because that’s what it’s always been about. I almost feel like the discussion about her is bot farms creating that discussion.
wrote on last edited by [email protected]Agreed.
I almost feel like the discussion about her is bot farms creating that discussion.
Close. It’s chum. It’s rage bait. It’s an engagement farm that suck people in, which is exactly how influencers like Trump climbed to the top of the world. It’s true, but it doesn’t change that raging against Rowling online helps Rowling, when the best form of protest would be to turn her into “she who shall not be named”
Be wary attributing to bots what can be attributed to the failure of “don’t feed the trolls”
-
Oh, when you brought him up I was worried he had actively done something bad. But no, you just don't like that he's Mormon, that's literally your only gripe.
No different than Rowling in that regard. Giving money for others to actively do something bad is also bad. You don't get to launder your shit politics by paying someone to do the dirty work and it doesn't absolve you of those politics.
-
That it doesn't disgust you to consume the media of an open fascist using her money to attempt a genocide is highly suspect
oh my god. get off your high horse.
they read a fucking book in their own Library
the books dont even feature any of those views
touch grass
-
Oh, when you brought him up I was worried he had actively done something bad. But no, you just don't like that he's Mormon, that's literally your only gripe.
Every time he tithes to that house of abuse and oppression, he IS actively doing something bad. Is that not enough for you?
-
ah, perhaps "influential" is not the best word choice on my part - I guess what I meant by that was not most famous or reaching the most people, but rather the most successful in their anti-trans advocacy, i.e. Rowling hasn't had the same kind of influence on trans rights as other anti-trans activists like Matt Walsh, and even Posie Parker I would argue has been more successful at achieving goals of the anti-trans movement than Rowling. Rowling is more famous as a transphobe and in that sense I agree with you she has a bigger platform and can bring more people into the anti-trans movement.
I don't know, I still don't agree with that simply by the fact she's donated such large sums of money to the cause...
-
Every time he tithes to that house of abuse and oppression, he IS actively doing something bad. Is that not enough for you?
No. And his books are good.
He tithes and hopes those funds go toward the good things the church accomplishes.
He has a lot of explanation on his relationship with the church and his stance on not allowing his religion to negatively affect his writing.
He has consistently advocated for lesser know authors and fought against Amazon to improve conditions for them.
His books are full of LGBTQIA+, neurodiverse people, women passing the bechdel test, and irl cultural inspiration from around the world.
He actually hires people to consult on things like schizophrenia so he doesn't promote misinformation.
The thing you are asking him to do is abandon his community. Instead he works to better it from the inside. He is a lecturer at BYU and is directly exposed to the future leaders of that church. Let him cook.
So yeah I don't like his religion's track record but anyone who has investigated the guy can see he's a fair author and the criticism is hyperbole.
-
This kind of rhetoric rises from what I’ve called the Authoritarian Left, which is an immensely detrimental wing. It’s a group where there is no nuance.
There is no nuance that you are aware of that the trans people that are calling for a ban of HP haven't already thought of. It's their lived experience after all. They know so many more nuances to this, or any other trans issue than you or I do. I don't know how much time you spend in the discussions of the so-called "
Authoritarian Left" but I've found them to be immensely nuanced. Cis people don't get a contradictory opinion on what harms trans people and what doesn't, simple as.You say that if a trans person says it’s hurting them I should stop doing it. OK, but what if a republican says it? Now suddenly I should ignore them?
It's not just one trans person though is it? It's a pretty widely held opinion in the trans community afaict. That bit about some hypothetical republican didn't make sense to me, no idea what you're trying to say here.
I love trans people, and I actively fight for them and their rights.
Maybe a bit more listening is due? A good start would be Trans Liberation: Beyond Pink or Blue.
I’m a durable ally. I’ll stick with it when it’s not cool or trendy, or when it comes at a cost.
Except when that cost is giving up Hahree Pawttah apparently.
To loop all the way back to the premise - if talking about Harry Potter at all hurts Trans people, then this post hurts trans people.
Talk about "no nuance", obviously this post isn't suggesting that the mere mentioning of the name is causing trans people worldwide psychic pain. But not purging Harry Potter from your life, giving space to a franchise that is used to hunt trans people is actively harmful. Wouldn't you be suspicious of someone who is still a huge "The apprentice" fan? Or a huge "Tesla" fan (" Oh I'm not buying their cars, but I still admire them!!")? Similar sentiments apply here.
You have to allow more than one idea in your head at the same time. If you’re making the rule “talking about Harry Potter in any way, at any time, makes you an active enemy of the trans movement”, then that’s not a place I want to be associated with.
More generalizations from the nuance-haver, I think it's addressed above but just to reiterate, its about purging a franchise from your life that is having a toxic effect on the world.
If you want advice - focus on how JK Rowling is harming people.
I'll take my advice on fighting for the trans cause from trans people thanks.
This authoritarian left wing of democrats is what got Trump elected.
Source? I don't believe that the democrats even have a left wing, much less an
authoritarian one, much much less one that is powerful enough to have decisive swing in the presidential election.the real trick is not scolding people into adherence
I'm gonna keep telling people that are platforming fascists that they are platforming fascists. If they continue to do it, I can then know where they stand.
You're actively alienating people from the movement you say you're a part of.
You are doing more damage than I am, and continuing to alienate people over your perception of a strict adherence to what is right is not helping.
You're trying to use childish spelling to say I can't get over not having Harry Potter. I'm not even arguing it's good. I probably bring it up maybe once a year? And pretty much always with a caveat of wishing the author wasn't such an asshole. Yet that isn't enough for your purity test apparently. I would reflect on the fact that you need allies that you don't agree with to build a movement. Right now you're narrowing your scope to a tiny percentage of people, all because you can't imagine that maybe you aren't fully and totally correct on this topic, and you want to try and belittle me into agreeing with you.
I don't think I'll continue the conversation from here. I hope you limit further damage and alienation to people trying to be on your side.
