Targeting / HarassmentThey really hate being exposed don’t they

submitted by ChunkeeguyTeam T*RF Fuck Yeah from i.imgur.com

all 12 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]Virginia_Plain 20 insightful - 10 fun20 insightful - 9 fun21 insightful - 10 fun -  (7 children)

J.K. Rowling's ability to wind people up into a frenzy gives me suspicion that she actually does have magic powers. I was watching some video critique of her series (in addition to transphobia, she is also a pro-slavery fascist, apparently) and as usual the comment section was a fun fair. The fact that Hogwart's didn't have a program that provided free wands for students, forcing Ron to deal with a malfunctioning wand in one of the books, was indicative of the fact that J.K. Rowling believes schools should not provide aid to the poor and she wants the rich and powerful to be able to trod upon them.

[–]MBMayfair 14 insightful - 1 fun14 insightful - 0 fun15 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

It's crazy, isn't it? The lengths they go to paint her as an evil person would be laughable were it not for the rape and death threats she gets regularly. Their theory that she's an anti-Semite because of the goblins at Gringotts was stupid enough, but they just. keep. pulling. more and more feverish and overwrought convictions out of their asses. What a damn shame. JKR does not deserve this.

[–]spanishprofanity 13 insightful - 7 fun13 insightful - 6 fun14 insightful - 7 fun -  (0 children)

Only goblins in JKR's world are anti-Semitic. The ones in other fantasy worlds like Warcraft? Nope!

[–]Athelhilda4Questioning 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Doesn’t the wand choose the wizard in the series? What good would it do to provide wands that may or may not work for most of the students?

[–]TransspeciesUnicornI sexually identify as a mythical sparkly equine 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Yeah, the wand chooses the wizard, but from what I remember you can basically use any other wizard or witch's wand and it'll work alright. The magic might just be less potent?

The whole argument is dumb though, it's obvious Rowling just needed to have Ron's wand be malfunctioning so Gilderoy Lockhart would accidentally blast himself with it later. Ron's wand being broken was just to set up for a plot point, not some evil hidden propaganda against kids from low income families. They're really just grasping at straws now to try to pick apart her work now that she's a "terf".

[–]Virginia_Plain 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I'm sure there's something deeply problematic about that too :-)

[–]HelloMomo 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

The fact that Hogwart's didn't have a program that provided free wands for students, forcing Ron to deal with a malfunctioning wand in one of the books, was indicative of the fact that J.K. Rowling believes schools should not provide aid to the poor

Except they do. This scene is when Dumbledore visiting Tom Riddle at his orphanage to give him his Hogwarts letter:

When he had finished, he [Tom] turned to Dumbledore and said baldly, “I haven’t got any money.”

“That is easily remedied,” said Dumbledore, drawing a leather money-pouch from his pocket. “There is a fund at Hogwarts for those who require assistance to buy books and robes. You might have to buy some of your spellbooks and so on secondhand, but—”

What's going on with Ron is something else. Ron broke his wand in the flying-to-school-in-his-dad's-car episode, something his parents were really angry at him for. He tells Harry that if he asked for a new wand, his mother would say no, because it was his own fault he broke the old one. It's all made a bit weird by the fact that Ron didn't actually ask them, he's just assuming. But still, I think the main way to read this is as a parent making a child live with the consequences of their actions in order to teach them as lesson.

[–]Virginia_Plain 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Yeah, the comments were insane nitpickiness (or subtle trolling). It's been awhile since I've read through the series. I think that was from Prisoner of Azkaban, which was my favorite of the series. It straddled the line between her earlier works and the massive tomes of the latter half, with the right mix of whimsy and darkness that she never quite recaptured.

What I thought was strangest about the whole fandom souring was the expectation that the wizards and witches were expected by fans to have solved All Problems in the World Everywhere Throughout Time, and the fact that Rowling didn't have them do it was considered proof of her evil nature. This was going on even before TERFgate.

HP isn't a literary masterpiece. Yes, there are loose ends she didn't consider. There are storylines she could have cleaned up. Clearly she was having to make stuff up on the fly as she was expanding the worldbuilding aspect of the magical and ordinary worlds, and some things didn;t gel right if you thought of them too much. The ALL CAPS SHOUTING!!!1! was irritating. Cho Chang maybe isn't the best name for a character, but the names for American characters that the Japanese have come up with (Leon S. Kennedy? C'mon) are laughable too. It was a fun adventure series that I enjoyed reading, and that's that.

There is a robust fanfiction community surrounding Harry Potter. Some of the stories are cult classics, such as the infamous My Immortal. It was truly the Plan 9 from Outer Space of fanfiction, with the sardonic Ebony/Enoby Darkness Dementia Raven Way leading her team of gothic witches and wizards against the nefarious Preps, Jocks, and Posers...and then they go shopping at Hot Topic while listening to my Chemical Romance!

I'm sure that some of them have done a great job of exploring aspects of the storyline that Rowling neglected due to need for brevity or poorly thought out logistics on her part. A more nuanced depiction of the Slytherins would be interesting, for example.

[–][deleted] 23 insightful - 3 fun23 insightful - 2 fun24 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

If she quote tweeted there is a 100% chance he would make his twitter private.

[–]RippoffOfLoveSStraight | Overuses quotation marks 20 insightful - 1 fun20 insightful - 0 fun21 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

But she wanted both tweets. Am I missing something here?

[–]MBMayfair 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

That's what I was wondering. It looks like she was simply providing context for his quote. I don't use Twitter though, so I'm not familiar with the options for quoting.

[–]Rosefield 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Thanks JK