One unfortunate aspect is that the existence of TERFs allows people to larp as feminists to justify bigotry. There are many who aren’t radical feminists by any definition (I think even Dworkin would see transition as an attack on sex based oppression), but being a TERF lets you cosplay a leftist ideology while reposting stonetoss comics and Daily Mail articles.
The “larping” is that there are some genuine radical feminist critiques that worry that people transition to align with gender roles. Rhetoric online, which is often shitposting by transgender people, creates ecosystems where only TERFs talk to other TERFs, seeing posts which do seem to boil down to “clothes = gender” and this leads to a false understanding that people transition because of gender roles.
It was a complicated discussion that was happening before 2010 - see arguments over MichFest. But, in the 2010s, trans people started becoming the target du jour, and a combination of weirdos from the sex negative wing of feminism that were delighted to have people start paying attention to them and 4chan /pol/ saboteurs/alt righters delighted that they could dig up feminist critiques (eg, primarily Daly(? too drunk to Google)‘s The Transexual Empire and lesbian feminist essays from the 70’s (lesbian feminism is not lesbian feminists - lesbian feminism understands sexuality as a choice/about male separatism and thus has never been popular with actual lesbians)) and get “SJWs” to team up with them against a minority group…
So that makes all feminists bad? I would argue that JK may have actually been a somewhat good person right up until she stopped being a feminist and started being transphobic.
I’ve seen the acronym “FART” - “feminism appropriating regressive(?) transphobe”
What did JK do that was feminist? Nothing about the Harry Potter series is feminist by any means. Think about how Hermoine’s entirely justified activism is a joke. Think about how Hermoine is hastily paired off with a guy who treats her like shit throughout the series. (Cool, she becomes the Ministry of Magic as a consolation prize - that took as much thought and effort as making Dumbledore gay after the fact.)
JK even chose to go by her initials to falsely appear male (clearly aping JRR Tolkien) because she didn’t think a female author would sell. A teenage boy protagonist, who treats the female characters in his life as non-persons. (Why does he date Cho Chang?)
Compare to an actual feminist author like Ursula LeGuin, whose works think about gender and sex (both the verb and the noun) in interesting critical ways.
As far as activism - I think she fundraises for dv shelters. Good, but I think she also harassed a shelter in Scotland into shutting down for accepting trans women. I don’t consider that feminist.
You are really gonna blame Rowling for strategically marketing herself in a male dominated society? I get what you’re saying, but I’m not sure she should entirely shoulder the blame for that. It’s extremely common for authors to use their initials and surname.
I agree with your assessment of the series’ content though.
By itself, it would mean nothing. But so much of the Rowling story is the kind of “having your cake and eating it too” - sorta how Harry gets to be a poor beleaguered orphan while simultaneously being ridiculously wealthy. Recognizing the way that female authors are often marginalized, strategically marketing oneself, and then doing nothing to really criticize or change the system once one gets on top.
One unfortunate aspect is that the existence of TERFs allows people to larp as feminists to justify bigotry. There are many who aren’t radical feminists by any definition (I think even Dworkin would see transition as an attack on sex based oppression), but being a TERF lets you cosplay a leftist ideology while reposting stonetoss comics and Daily Mail articles.
“One unfortunate aspect of the alt-right movement is that it allows people to larp as libertarians to justify bigotry.”
If this statement doesn’t change how you see what you’re writing, I don’t know what will.
The “larping” is that there are some genuine radical feminist critiques that worry that people transition to align with gender roles. Rhetoric online, which is often shitposting by transgender people, creates ecosystems where only TERFs talk to other TERFs, seeing posts which do seem to boil down to “clothes = gender” and this leads to a false understanding that people transition because of gender roles.
It was a complicated discussion that was happening before 2010 - see arguments over MichFest. But, in the 2010s, trans people started becoming the target du jour, and a combination of weirdos from the sex negative wing of feminism that were delighted to have people start paying attention to them and 4chan /pol/ saboteurs/alt righters delighted that they could dig up feminist critiques (eg, primarily Daly(? too drunk to Google)‘s The Transexual Empire and lesbian feminist essays from the 70’s (lesbian feminism is not lesbian feminists - lesbian feminism understands sexuality as a choice/about male separatism and thus has never been popular with actual lesbians)) and get “SJWs” to team up with them against a minority group…
JK was a feminist once…
So that makes all feminists bad? I would argue that JK may have actually been a somewhat good person right up until she stopped being a feminist and started being transphobic.
I’ve seen the acronym “FART” - “feminism appropriating regressive(?) transphobe”
What did JK do that was feminist? Nothing about the Harry Potter series is feminist by any means. Think about how Hermoine’s entirely justified activism is a joke. Think about how Hermoine is hastily paired off with a guy who treats her like shit throughout the series. (Cool, she becomes the Ministry of Magic as a consolation prize - that took as much thought and effort as making Dumbledore gay after the fact.)
JK even chose to go by her initials to falsely appear male (clearly aping JRR Tolkien) because she didn’t think a female author would sell. A teenage boy protagonist, who treats the female characters in his life as non-persons. (Why does he date Cho Chang?)
Compare to an actual feminist author like Ursula LeGuin, whose works think about gender and sex (both the verb and the noun) in interesting critical ways.
As far as activism - I think she fundraises for dv shelters. Good, but I think she also harassed a shelter in Scotland into shutting down for accepting trans women. I don’t consider that feminist.
You are really gonna blame Rowling for strategically marketing herself in a male dominated society? I get what you’re saying, but I’m not sure she should entirely shoulder the blame for that. It’s extremely common for authors to use their initials and surname.
I agree with your assessment of the series’ content though.
By itself, it would mean nothing. But so much of the Rowling story is the kind of “having your cake and eating it too” - sorta how Harry gets to be a poor beleaguered orphan while simultaneously being ridiculously wealthy. Recognizing the way that female authors are often marginalized, strategically marketing oneself, and then doing nothing to really criticize or change the system once one gets on top.