I'm a straight male, almost cartoonishly 'cis', and totally vanilla in my amatory proclivities. That being said, I support the rights of transpersons to determine how they express their gender. I've long mocked postulates of natural law being used as a 'justification' for bigotry. With that out of the way, I figured that I'd post about J.K. Rowling's opinion about transpersons... for a woman who has written about fabulous shape-shifting beings, Rowling has a not-so-magical attitude towards individuals who seek to transition into identities more consistent with the gender identities that they are comfortable with.
Rowling's particular cruelty is that her fiction offered escapism to young readers with unhappy home lives and hostile families. For adolescents who feel out of place in their own bodies, the story of a young person overcomes abuse and transitions into a new identity, one in which personal growth and exploration is possible, the 'Harry Potter' novels must have had a powerful resonance. Rowling's anti-transperson bigotry is a fishhook embedded in a candy bar, a cruel barb sprung on an unsuspecting fan. It also contravenes Rowling's own statement of the theme of the books: She said she regarded her novels as a “prolonged argument for tolerance” and urged her fans to “question authority”. Rowley has forgotten why her stories had such broad appeal, an appeal the Brad Neely better explained in a three minute cartoon than Rowling has expressed in any interview:
Rowling has been a disappointment, and I am not even a fan (I read the first novel to help out with bar trivia, and quickly figured out that she was mining a vein which Diana Wynne Jones had better exploited). For her LGBTQ fans, I can't even imagine how betrayed they felt. She basically told them to get back into the cupboard under the stairs.
The most charitable interpretation of her views is that in trying to understand transgender, she sought enlightenment from 'feminist' lesbians who are/were rabid TERFs, and being a cis-gendered straight woman like me, thought that such queer women were unimpeachable authorities on LBGTQ+ matters.
ReplyDeleteThe problem with that is that her TERF leanings have been obvious to many for years, and I know people - trans and cis, gay, bi, or straight - have tried extremely hard both privately and publicly to steer her in the less harmful direction. She's apparently only hardened her views.
It's tragic and revolting, and so very hurtful to her fans of all sexualities, gender, and ages.
She's a clever woman and on other topics, very kind, generous, and empathetic. Why she's being such a wanker on this particular subject is beyond my understanding.
The thing that gets me is that she could just keep mum on this issue, knowing that her fans tend to be exactly the young, imaginative people who support trans rights wholeheartedly.
ReplyDelete"she could just keep mum on this issue"
ReplyDeleteYes, but you see, she *knows* she's right, and thinks that broadcasting her true belief that trans women are just men trying to invade women's spaces, is a pro-feminist action, and thus, must be done.
She's not dissimilar from anti-abortion activists who earnestly believe that by standing outside women's health clinics they are literally saving the lives of little babies.
It's all bullshit, but Rowling is vocal on the things she supports, and for our sins, she happens to believe that all trans people are frauds. She claims to have trans friends. I doubt they feel the same way about her.