this post was submitted on 15 Mar 2024
456 points (86.1% liked)

News

23368 readers
4991 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

The most famous forms of Holocaust denial and revisionism tend to focus on Jews, casting doubt, for example, on how many were exterminated in the camps. But denying the impact the Nazis had on the other groups they targeted, including queer and trans people, disabled people and Romani people, is still Holocaust denial. Maybe someone should tell J.K. Rowling.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] lennybird 13 points 8 months ago (4 children)

I gotta say, I'm dealing with cognitive dissonance right now. I remember having bookmarked her Harvard commencement speech and listening to it from time to time, admiring the principles and standing up for the good of all people. I felt someone who wrote those books would HAVE to have a keen understanding of right from wrong and fighting the good fight.

So these recent years with her position on this have been confusing and sad for me. I hope she grows and learns from this.

Also unpopular opinion but I stumbled across this article from OP's source which I largely agree with: https://forward.com/culture/480388/please-shut-up-about-the-harry-potter-jew-goblins-antisemitism-jk-rowling/

[–] [email protected] 17 points 8 months ago (2 children)

In her mind she IS fighting for "right vs wrong". She's just REALLY fucking wrong about which side is "right". One of the biggest things I've learned in life is that EVERYONE thinks that they're the hero. That they're doing good and the "others" are the bad guys. Rowling is a piece of a shit but she THINKS she's the good guy and that's the most dangerous part of all.

[–] afraid_of_zombies 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I disagree. I have felt like crap many times when I did what I consider the wrong thing. She knows what she is doing which pretty much only leaves sociopath or sadistic. Either way time to stop apologizing for her.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 8 months ago (1 children)

No one is apologizing for her. You felt like crap when you did something wrong because you realized it was wrong. Good people make mistakes and learn from them. People should be like you. She thinks she's doing right and is a pig headed bigot. People should not be like her.

[–] afraid_of_zombies 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

She thinks she’s doing right

How did you determine that? Not trying to be snarky and I think it is important to give everyone the assumption of good faith (once) but I really don't see any effort on her part that confirms this.

She hasnt even done the fake non-apology celebrity thing where she pays a charity and says she has to learn more. she has repeatedly doubled down.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I'm heavily confused by this. If she thought she was doing wrong she'd do the whole apology tour. Which she hasn't, as you said. Your two paragraphs don't play well with each other. She has exactly doubled down, which means she thinks she's right so I have no idea what point you're trying to argue.

[–] afraid_of_zombies 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I do something wrong, I know it's wrong. Someone calls me out on it.

  1. Yeah you are right = lose face admit that I wasnt being a good person.

  2. No, I am right = don't lose face and say it enough no longer feel guilty. Because now you get to feel like you are the real victim here. And a victim can never be wrong.

This is why you keep getting these well liked rich fucks bitch about how much harm has been done to them by being cancelled. That woman quite literally has a net worth equal to what I will earn if I worked for over 10,000 years. And yet she is the victim in this? Hell I bet every single trans person combined net worth in the UK isn't equal to her own.

She knows she is wrong but she thinks if she keeps saying 2 + 2 = 5 she will win.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Yes, that's...that's what I'm saying lol. Which is why your argumentative nature of the post confused me. And still does. Well, sorta. She DOESNT know she's wrong because she 100% believes she's right and everyone else are the "bad guys". That's my whole point. She DOESNT GET that she's wrong. It's everyone ELSE who is wrong.

[–] afraid_of_zombies 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago

Why do you say that? There's heaps and heaps of evidence of her believing she's right, I'd honestly like to hear this take.

[–] lennybird -3 points 8 months ago (2 children)

It's weird to me because I don't view her in the same way I do, say, Republicans or Trump or Bannon or Miller or Putin, etc. For all intents she is a bleeding-heart leftist who vehemently opposes the narrative of the right's fearmongering in respect to most other issues. If she was just another greedy sociopathic republican-type then I wouldn't be the least-bit surprised.

So I'm not convinced she's a psychopath sociopath on par with the aforementioned; from what I can tell I do think she's deeply confused and has some personal trauma that feeds a puritannical belief in feminism.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 8 months ago (1 children)

If she was a leftist, Harry wouldn't have become a cop. Hermione wouldn't have been ridiculed about SPEW until she gave up. And so on.

Unless she is the most pessimistic leftist who can't even dream of a world where things change for the better when she creates that world all by her own.

[–] lennybird -5 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

What gate-keeping philosophy suggests all leftists must oppose cops -- did I not get the memo? I didn't realize she's a Thatcher plant because Harry went to work for the Ministry and overhaul it for a place of good lol.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

In a capitalist society, cops are mostly busy with protecting rich people. I don't think a material analysis of what cops are and do will result in anything that redeems the institution as it is now.

[–] lennybird 0 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Hot take but I think that probably over-generalizes the role of police and is particularly centered specifically around American cop culture and not, say, European or Scandinavian ones.

Thus I remain unconvinced that this is what they are destined to do. If good cops exist, then it's a matter of altering the system and model to promote good instead of bad seeds no differently than paying teachers better, or giving nurses more training.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 8 months ago

That's not how it works. Not in America and not here in Germany. Good cops only exist until one of their comrades fucks up, then they're bullied out of their job unless they cover for them.

It's a self purifying system.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 8 months ago

Trans-exclusionary radical feminists (TERFs) are a thing. I'm not sure why but it is. There are many. From what I've seen it's mainly women who are SO heavily misandrist and hateful of men they think any trans woman is still a man and therefore out to rape and kill them by design, but I haven't looked that deep into the bigotry.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 8 months ago

On your link there, I'm sorry to say the author is making a very silly argument. It boils down to 'if you see a specific race in this racist caricature then you're the real racist'. This would only be true if racist caricatures were a new thing never seen before. It's akin to saying 'oh i didn't mean black people when i screamed the n- word. You're the racist for thinking the n- word refers to black people'.

That's an extreme example but you see my point that there's a history that's being ignored.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

I disagree. The Potter goblins are diminutive, hooknosed, saurian creatures, with creepy long fingers and crafty natures. They have exceptional financial skills and stop at nothing to acquire or protect money and precious objects. It is antisemitic that anyone would encounter such a character and think: “Aha, a Jew!”

No, ~~John~~ Jon Stewart looked at the Harry Potter goblins and saw an offensive Jewish caricature. As an ethnically Jewish trans woman I agree with him. Rowling's goblins and her Holocaust denial are harmful. I'm a huge Harry Potter fan too, so I don't begrudge anyone for enjoying her content or even paying for content. I of course appreciate when people avoid those things. Profits from her games, books and movies go to funding anti-trans causes which make her content harmful. All I ask is that when Rowling does something harmful, like Holocaust denial or fund anti-trans causes people agree that what she is doing and her content is harmful.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/harry-potter-author-jk-rowling-faces-backlash-over-donations-to-group-challenging-transgender-rights/ar-BB1iw90J

The author once again attracted attention after donating $97,000 to For Women Scotland. The funds are earmarked for a legal challenge set to be heard in the UK Supreme Court. The objective of the lawsuit is to redefine the word "woman" such that it applies exclusively to cisgender women. The proposed redefinition stands to harm transgender women who have undergone gender-affirming procedures. Rowling publicly supported her donation, stating: "You know how proud I am to know you. Thank you for all your hard work and tenacity. This truly is a historic case."

LGBTQ+ activists are warning that redefining the word "woman" paves the way for discrimination and prejudice against transgender or non-binary individuals.

edit: Jon not John

[–] lennybird 4 points 8 months ago (1 children)

To be clear, Jon Stewart later clarified:

I do not think J.K. Rowling is anti-Semitic. I did not accuse her of being anti-Semitic. I do not think that the Harry Potter movies are anti-Semitic.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

To be clear, Jon Stewart later clarified:

I do not think J.K. Rowling is anti-Semitic. I did not accuse her of being anti-Semitic. I do not think that the Harry Potter movies are anti-Semitic.

~~John~~ Jon Stewart said the goblins are an offensive Jewish caricature. None of these statements contradict each other. The point is, no one looked at the goblins and thought they were Jews as the author of Please shut up about the Harry Potter Jew-goblins suggests. It is not antisemitic to point out that the goblins are collectively an offensive Jewish caricature. edit: typo, https://www.adl.org/spelling-antisemitism-vs-anti-semitism, typo, Jon not John

[–] lennybird 1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

None of these statements contradict each other.

I didn't say they were, but I do think it's an important distinction because the entire purpose of highlighting this in context of J.K. Rowling is to accuse her of explicit antisemitism. Whereas Jon (not John) continued to write:

“tropes [like the goblins bankers] are so embedded in society that they're basically invisible.”

This means, indeed, that two things can be true at the same time: Rowling subconsciously used a Jewish caricature (as did Tolkien before her), and (2) Rowling is not Antisemitic.

Many people -- not you, necessarily -- equate the two.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Nowhere in my argument did I say Rowling was antisemitic. I said her goblins are harmful.

Rowling’s goblins and her Holocaust denial are harmful.

It really doesn't matter if she did it intentionally or not, it's harmful regardless.

[–] lennybird 1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (2 children)

Perhaps; though that's not a reflection of her -- but as Stewart points out society as a whole and the power we give to racist stereotypical tropes in the first place -- it's a convenient target for those who are already looking to hate on her for other more substantive reasons.

On a separate note, do you not think it's a stretch to lump her in with holocaust deniers this quickly? Isn't it a little too soon to categorize her lack of understanding that the concept of trans or books being burned occurred under nazis versus those who deny millions were murdered in general? If anything, doesn't that water-down the category of Holocaust Deniers?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

Doesn't anyone who actively tries to defend literal Nazis by saying "wait wait guys the Nazis weren't THAT bad" https://www.thedailybeast.com/jk-rowling-adds-holocaust-denialism-to-her-transphobia warrent like....an immediate "this fucker is insane" thing? I mean if you're trying to defend someone who is trying to defend WW2 Nazis I think you're in the wrong camp is all

[–] lennybird 0 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)
  • I think there is a considerable logical leap if not an outright non-sequitur between being misinformed on nazi atrocities / history, and "defending nazis"
  • I don't think we can strawman what Rowling did with, "Nazis weren't THAT bad."
  • I think it's too early to put considerable weight on her intent or beliefs surrounding nazis on this singular tweet.
  • But yes, I do agree people who legitimately defend nazis are insane.
  • Categorically calling it holocaust denial to me diminishes the scale of damage caused by legitimate holocaust deniers.
  • I suspect there are many individuals who already hate Rowling personally for comments related to Trans rights are looking for things to an irrational degree.

That being said I don't think I can add any more to this conversation that I haven't already and so thank you for the discussion and oblige you with the final word.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Doesn't she, as a public figure, whose tweets (xhits?) will reach millions, have more of an onus of responsibility on her to fact check herself? I do agree with you on the fact that she's not ENTIRELLY denying the holocaust and to put her in the same camp as those who do DOES weaken what that means, 100% agreed on that. She's not a holocaust denier, she just denies some specific things that happened in the holocaust. It's still SUPER shitty and SUPER wrong but yes, agreed, she's not going around spouting "it never happened!" shit. I just came into this conversation but I appreciate your input all the same

PS Rowling is a hateful bigot

[–] [email protected] 3 points 8 months ago (1 children)

society as a whole and the power we give to racist stereotypical tropes in the first place

Ignoring racist stereotypes in fiction isn't the solution. We should want to do better.

On a separate note, do you not think it’s a stretch to lump her in with holocaust deniers this quickly?

No. Holocaust denial is holocaust denial. It's never too early to call it out.

Isn’t it a little too soon to categorize her lack of understanding that the concept of trans or books being burned occurred under nazis versus those who deny millions were murdered in general?

No. Valuable research was lost that could have benefited millions of people. Not to mention trans people were killed by the Nazis. The fact millions of Jews were killed does not diminish the harm in denying that other groups were targeted by the Nazis.

If anything, doesn’t that water-down the category of Holocaust Deniers?

Although Jews were the group who had the most causalities, the Holocaust affected many different groups of people. Denying any part of the Holocaust is harmful and calling that out in no way diminishes the seriousness of Holocaust denial.

https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/mosaic-of-victims-an-overview

https://www.britannica.com/topic/The-Holocaust-Facts-and-Figures

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/new-research-reveals-how-the-nazis-targeted-transgender-people-180982931/

[–] lennybird 1 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

I appreciate the sources and acknowledge everyone from Jews to Communists to Gypsies, LGBTQ, to the Handicapped and so forth were ostracized, discriminated upon, and murdered by the Nazis. What I note does not detract from that; merely to say that someone not recognizing what is frankly not a mainstream fact about the Holocaust does not make them a holocaust denier; it may make them holocaust illiterate. So I mean it's good to be proactive with this stuff but it's also important to give people the chance to take a step back and give people a way out instead of compelling them to become what you repeatedly label them as. Reading too much into a single tweet when there -- to my knowledge -- hasn't been a response or clarification from Rowling -- is jumping the gun. I admire the confidence in your convictions but I don't agree with your conclusions.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago)

Despite your argument's insistence to the contrary nowhere in my argument do I accuse Rowling of being anything. Whether or not Rowling is ignorant is irrelevant. Her actions are what matter. When presented with new information about the Holocaust her response was not to become more informed, but to deny the information. That is Holocaust denial and it is harmful. edit: typos

[–] Zahille7 3 points 8 months ago

Reading the article after playing Hogwarts Legacy gives me a slightly different feeling about that last paragraph...

Still a good article though.