The internet is already exploding about Katherine Parkinson, John Lithgow and Paapa Essiedu signing up to the new Hogwarts adventures – and it hasn’t even started filming
You get that the only person who controls what JK Rowling does is her, right?
You don’t have to like that someone may choose to continue to consume Harry Potter but trying to claim they are directly promoting transphobia unless the context and/or the intent is there.
Someone with a track record of transphobic behavior, sure. Someone who is posting about it in spaces intended for trans people, especially if that space has already clearly communicated their stance on it, maybe.
By your logic every person in the United States who pays any kind of taxes that go to the federal government is promoting transphobia. If you’ve ever shopped at a store that employs a transphobe, you’re promoting transphobia. If you’ve ever watched a movie or tv show that has a transphobic actor in it, you’re promoting transphobia. Doesn’t matter if you know it because, they directly benefit from your money.
Everyone has choices to make, however the context and intent behind those choices matters.
I love how you chose an example I literally can’t control like taxes.
And your right, I can’t pick and choose every single thing. But you better believe there’s a lot of media I won’t enjoy because of actors either. Tom Cruise being one.
Intent matters. But when a community tells you hey, this action, that you could easily not not do, is harmful to me and my community.
Just not supporting jkr is a lot more clear-cut than all those other examples. It’s easy unless you start justifying it.
Your logic is performatively neutral and comes from a place of callousness and complacency.
All of this counter-discussion on this topic is bad faith and/or political trolling and should be treated as such by mods and future readers.
The minute you step back and realize that somebody is really trying to argue against letting go of Harry Potter from such a weird angle, you realize how bad a take it really is. It’s so bad, that it’s hard to even be taken seriously beyond political strategy and wasting the time of the real people here who believe in standing up for what’s right in such a shitty time in the world.
It’s petty and shitty. You can consume Harry Potter and similar content if you wish, nobody will stop you. But anybody with half a brain realizes that the ethical move is to just let it go. Move on.
The minute you step back and realize that somebody is really trying to argue against letting go of Harry Potter from such a weird angle
I haven’t argued that at all. What I have argued is that context and intent matters when it comes to an individuals actions and, while you’re free to judge away, just because someone lives there their life in a way you don’t like doesn’t automatically make them transphobic or mean they are literally promoting transphobia.
Edit: I had to come back for this bit.
Just not supporting jkr is a lot more clear-cut than all those other examples. It’s easy unless you start justifying it.
I’m guessing this wasn’t your intent but it reads like you should only take a stand when it’s easy.
You know systemic bigotry needs not intent, or context, from the individual, right? You seem to be arguing that your personal lack of hatred towards a group, and lack of direct harm, means your actions can’t be bigoted. And no, being forced to pay taxes is not the same as choosing to buy into something funding bigotry.
Except for the fact that the money spent on the movie directly funds transphobia via JK Rowling…
You get she’s literally doing that right?
No, it indirectly funds her through a convoluted system of ownership and IP law.
The problem isn’t people consuming media. The problem is the system that funnels wealth into the pockets of bigots.
You get that the only person who controls what JK Rowling does is her, right?
You don’t have to like that someone may choose to continue to consume Harry Potter but trying to claim they are directly promoting transphobia unless the context and/or the intent is there.
Someone with a track record of transphobic behavior, sure. Someone who is posting about it in spaces intended for trans people, especially if that space has already clearly communicated their stance on it, maybe.
Context and intent matter.
Excuse me while for not caring about the difference when all the same, the money is still harming my community.
Your money is harming your community.
By your logic every person in the United States who pays any kind of taxes that go to the federal government is promoting transphobia. If you’ve ever shopped at a store that employs a transphobe, you’re promoting transphobia. If you’ve ever watched a movie or tv show that has a transphobic actor in it, you’re promoting transphobia. Doesn’t matter if you know it because, they directly benefit from your money.
Everyone has choices to make, however the context and intent behind those choices matters.
I love how you chose an example I literally can’t control like taxes.
And your right, I can’t pick and choose every single thing. But you better believe there’s a lot of media I won’t enjoy because of actors either. Tom Cruise being one.
Intent matters. But when a community tells you hey, this action, that you could easily not not do, is harmful to me and my community.
Yes I do judge you for that choice.
You do have a choice; you could choose not to and face whatever consequences with your moral conviction intact.
This is you’re right but it still doesn’t make it literally promoting transphobia.
If it quacks like transphobia and it promotes transphobia…
This is about the response I expected. Too bad.
Removed by mod
Just not supporting jkr is a lot more clear-cut than all those other examples. It’s easy unless you start justifying it.
Your logic is performatively neutral and comes from a place of callousness and complacency.
All of this counter-discussion on this topic is bad faith and/or political trolling and should be treated as such by mods and future readers.
The minute you step back and realize that somebody is really trying to argue against letting go of Harry Potter from such a weird angle, you realize how bad a take it really is. It’s so bad, that it’s hard to even be taken seriously beyond political strategy and wasting the time of the real people here who believe in standing up for what’s right in such a shitty time in the world.
It’s petty and shitty. You can consume Harry Potter and similar content if you wish, nobody will stop you. But anybody with half a brain realizes that the ethical move is to just let it go. Move on.
I haven’t argued that at all. What I have argued is that context and intent matters when it comes to an individuals actions and, while you’re free to judge away, just because someone lives
theretheir life in a way you don’t like doesn’t automatically make them transphobic or mean they are literally promoting transphobia.Edit: I had to come back for this bit.
I’m guessing this wasn’t your intent but it reads like you should only take a stand when it’s easy.
You know systemic bigotry needs not intent, or context, from the individual, right? You seem to be arguing that your personal lack of hatred towards a group, and lack of direct harm, means your actions can’t be bigoted. And no, being forced to pay taxes is not the same as choosing to buy into something funding bigotry.