Harry Potter actors turn against J.K Rowling

Laurence Fox calls Harry Potter stars ‘spoiled millionaires’ for turning against JK Rowling in trans row.

Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Watson and Rupert Grint all publicly disagreed with Rowling’s recent comments on transgender issues.

Laurence Fox has criticised stars of the Harry Potter franchise who turned against JK Rowling for her comments about transgender issues.

Rowling has caused a great deal of controversy in recent days, after appearing to take issue with a headline about “people who menstruate”.

Following a backlash in which she was accused of being transphobic, Rowling then wrote a 3,700-word article on her website explaining that she was a survivor of sexual assault, which is what helped convince her of the need to maintain women-only spaces.

She also argued that biological sex is meaningful and claimed sections of the trans community are “seeking to erode women as a political and biological class”

Her essay was not supported by Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Watson or Rupert Grint, who all rose to fame through their roles in the Harry Potter films.

Personally, I believe they were wrong to turn their backs on her, as without Harry Potter, they wouldn't even be famous.

(edited 3 years ago)

Reply 1

josie71202

21

their not being spoilt they're standing up for kindness and acceptance

Reply 2

Wōden

15

My only thoughts are, **** all of them, I hope they keep tearing each other to shreds.

Reply 3

Braces

OP

13

Original post by josie71202

their not being spoilt they're standing up for kindness and acceptance

Acceptance is vital, but they should remember never to bite the hand that fed them. Without Harry Potter, they'd be normal civilians. Although Daniel Radcliffe did star in a few different titles before stepping in the role of Harry Potter.

Reply 4

josie71202

21

Original post by Braces

Acceptance is vital, but they should remember never to bite the hand that fed them. Without Harry Potter, they'd be normal civilians. Although Daniel Radcliffe did star in a few different titles before stepping in the role of Harry Potter.

true

Reply 5

the bear

20

if they are genuinely rejecting JKR they should donate all their earnings from her work to deserving charities.

Reply 6

Hudds999

16

Jk Rowling cancelled for for... for having a different opinion 😳. How ****ing dare she, let’s cancel her and call her a ****, a TERF and other insults. How dare she dare utter a different opinion, instead of discussing it let’s call her transphobic and cry and vow never to read her books again. I respect her more for giving her honest opinion, not one of these bull**** ones that big celebrities spout so they don’t get cancelled, so they don’t get abused by the far-left twitter mobs.

Fair play for speaking your mind, as I said I respect her more but unfortunately this is what celebrities have to deal with now. Go with the flow, go with the mob opinion, or you’re done for. What a ****ing state of a world we live in, I like Laurence Fox too, he’s got a good point.

Reply 7

Sorcerer's Storm

20

Disagreeing with someone’s comments isn’t necessarily turning your back on someone, they don’t have to agree on everything. Rowling is very good friends with Radcliffe, Watson and Grint, I doubt this has irreparably broken their friendship, and it’s something that’ll be forgotten about in a few months time.

(edited 3 years ago)

Reply 8

z-hog

13

It's the central theme to public life and even these forums these days, people wanting to suppress other people's opinions. Ban them, defund them, gag them, silence them, intern them, they're the new gulags. It's terrible to see people bite the hand that fed them only because they are so terrorised at the consequences of not doing so, the extent this has reached has even surprised me. It was always there but this is even worse than previously thought, there's no corner in society left immune to this leftist virus that will use anybody as an excuse to destroy the democratic world.

Reply 9

JWatch

10

Original post by z-hog

It's the central theme to public life and even these forums these days, people wanting to suppress other people's opinions. Ban them, defund them, gag them, silence them, intern them, they're the new gulags. It's terrible to see people bite the hand that fed them only because they are so terrorised at the consequences of not doing so, the extent this has reached has even surprised me. It was always there but this is even worse than previously thought, there's no corner in society left immune to this leftist virus that will use anybody as an excuse to destroy the democratic world.

And all this silencing, gagging, and no platforming is ironically done in the name of tolerance and acceptance. But as I keep telling people, tolerance and acceptance also means the acceptance that other people might have different opinions about stuff than you do. The fact that JKR is outspoken on trans issues doesn't make her a bad person. If you don't agree with what she says, by all means challenge her argument, but there's absolutely no need for the vile abuse she's getting right now. Would those people be happy for the same abuse to be levelled at them?

Reply 10

Napp

22

Original post by josie71202

their not being spoilt they're standing up for kindness and acceptance

By saying she shouldnt be allowed to hold an opinion? Seems they're being rather spoilt from where one is sitting.

Reply 11

the beer

14

Original post by Napp

By saying she shouldnt be allowed to hold an opinion?

Where'd they do that? Are they not allowed an opinion on her opinion?

(edited 3 years ago)

Reply 12

JWatch

10

Original post by the beer

Where'd they do that? Are they not allowed an opinion on her opinion?

They are. but some of the abuse she's been getting goes way beyond people just "having an opinion" on what she's said. People need to realize that in a country of 66 million people, and a planet of about 8 billion, you're often going to come across people who have different views than you. It doesn't make them wrong, or bad people. I think people are losing sight of that.

Reply 13

josie71202

21

Original post by Napp

By saying she shouldnt be allowed to hold an opinion? Seems they're being rather spoilt from where one is sitting.

she's allowed her opinion however she can be called an arse for that opinion

Reply 14

JWatch

10

Original post by josie71202

she's allowed her opinion however she can be called an arse for that opinion

Name calling isn't a very nice way to behave to others though, is it? If you don't like her argument then you can challenge it, but I don't see why the need to get personal?

Reply 15

josie71202

21

Original post by JWatch

Name calling isn't a very nice way to behave to others though, is it? If you don't like her argument then you can challenge it, but I don't see why the need to get personal?

it's not me calling her names and I believe in structured arguments

Reply 16

imlikeahermit

14

Just more virtue signalling to see here. Nothing out of the ordinary. Heaven forbid anyone have a different view. Might as well have tweeted ‘insert here what ever makes me seem tolerant’