Victoriaearle (talk | contribs) →Discussion of first draft: add; out now |
Adam Cuerden (talk | contribs) Tag: Reply |
||
(729 intermediate revisions by 32 users not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Skip to talk}} |
{{Skip to talk}} |
||
{{Talk header|age= 30|bot= lowercase sigmabot III|units= days|minthreadsleft= 3}} |
{{Talk header|age= 30|bot= lowercase sigmabot III|units= days|minthreadsleft= 3}} |
||
{{British English}} |
|||
{{Article history |
{{Article history |
||
|action1=GAN |
|action1=GAN |
||
Line 39: | Line 38: | ||
|otd3date=2022-07-31|otd3oldid=1101432981 |
|otd3date=2022-07-31|otd3oldid=1101432981 |
||
}} |
}} |
||
{{section sizes}} |
|||
{{WikiProject banner shell|collapsed=yes|vital=yes|class=FA|blp=yes|living=yes|listas=Rowling, J. K.|1= |
{{WikiProject banner shell|collapsed=yes|vital=yes|class=FA|blp=yes|living=yes|listas=Rowling, J. K.|1= |
||
{{WikiProject Biography|a&e-priority=Mid |a&e-work-group=yes }} |
{{WikiProject Biography|a&e-priority=Mid |a&e-work-group=yes }} |
||
Line 51: | Line 51: | ||
{{Contentious topics/talk notice|blp|brief}} |
{{Contentious topics/talk notice|blp|brief}} |
||
{{Talk:J. K. Rowling/FAQ}} |
{{Talk:J. K. Rowling/FAQ}} |
||
{{Press|author=Stephen Foley |date=2009-02-03 |url=http://www.independent.ie/business/technology/is-wikipedia-cracking-up-1625816.html|title=Is Wikipedia cracking up?|org=[[Irish Independent]] |section=February 2009 |
{{Press|author=Stephen Foley |date=2009-02-03 |url=http://www.independent.ie/business/technology/is-wikipedia-cracking-up-1625816.html|title=Is Wikipedia cracking up?|org=[[Irish Independent]] |section=February 2009 |
||
{{Banner holder|collapsed=yes| |
|||
|author2 = Hava Mendelle |
|||
|title2 = JK Rowling puts Wikipedia’s neutrality to the test |
|||
|date2 = April 22, 2024 |
|||
|org2 = [[The Spectator Australia]] |
|||
|url2 = https://www.spectator.com.au/2024/04/jk-rowling-puts-wikipedias-neutrality-to-the-test/ |
|||
|lang2 = |
|||
|quote2 = |
|||
|archiveurl2 = |
|||
|archivedate2 = <!-- do not wikilink --> |
|||
|accessdate2 = April 22, 2024 |
|||
}} |
|||
{{Backwards copy |
{{Backwards copy |
||
| title = JK Rowling Net Worth |
| title = JK Rowling Net Worth |
||
Line 70: | Line 81: | ||
| monthday2 = |
| monthday2 = |
||
| id2 = --> |
| id2 = --> |
||
}} |
|||
}} |
}} |
||
{{User:MiszaBot/config |
{{User:MiszaBot/config |
||
|archiveheader = {{Aan}} |
|archiveheader = {{Aan}} |
||
|maxarchivesize = 200K |
|maxarchivesize = 200K |
||
|counter = |
|counter = 20 |
||
|minthreadsleft = 1 |
|minthreadsleft = 1 |
||
|minthreadstoarchive = 1 |
|minthreadstoarchive = 1 |
||
Line 82: | Line 92: | ||
}} |
}} |
||
__TOC__ |
__TOC__ |
||
== The POV-pushing last paragraph == |
|||
I mean, that's my opinion of this, but I think it's justified. I mentioned my dislike for this paragraph above, but it's bad enough that I feel comfortable pulling it here for discussion, because it's not really adding anything but bias. |
|||
{{cquote|1= |
|||
== Death threat == |
|||
As Rowling's views on the [[legal status of transgender people]] came under scrutiny,{{sfn|Suissa|Sullivan|2021|pp=66–69}} she received insults and death threats{{sfn|Suissa|Sullivan|2021|p=69}}{{sfn|Qiao|2022|p=1323}} and discussion moved beyond the Twitter community.{{sfn|Schwirblat|Freberg|Freberg|2022|p=368}} Some performers and feminists have supported her.{{sfn|Schwirblat|Freberg|Freberg|2022|p=368}}<ref> Supporting Rowling: |
|||
* [[Ayaan Hirsi Ali]]: {{cite news |first=Katie |last=Law |date= 15 October 2020|title= JK Rowling and the bitter battle of the book world |url=https://www.standard.co.uk/culture/books/trans-battle-book-world-jk-rowling-a4571221.html |work= [[Evening Standard]] |access-date=27 March 2022|ref=none}} |
|||
* [[Allison Bailey]]: {{cite news |url= https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/maya-forstater-transgender-twitter-jk-rowling-b1838151.html |title= Maya Forstater: who is woman in employment tribunal over transgender comments? |first= Sam |last= Hancock |date= 27 April 2021 |work= [[The Independent]] |access-date= 27 March 2022|archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20210427131430/https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/maya-forstater-transgender-twitter-jk-rowling-b1838151.html |archive-date= 27 April 2021 |quote= criminal defence barrister Allison Bailey – known for launching legal action against LGBT+ rights charity Stonewall over its attempt to have her investigated for setting up the anti-trans rights group LGB Alliance – has also been a vocal supporter of Ms Forstater.|ref=none}} |
|||
* [[Julie Bindel]]: {{cite news |last1=Thorpe |first1=Vanessa |title=JK Rowling: from magic to the heart of a Twitter storm |url=https://www.theguardian.com/books/2020/jun/14/jk-rowling-from-magic-to-the-heart-of-a-twitter-storm |work=[[The Guardian]] |date=14 June 2020 |quote=Arrayed on Rowling's side are some of the veteran voices of feminism, including the radical Julie Bindel, who spoke out in support this weekend |access-date=6 July 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200704200412/https://www.theguardian.com/books/2020/jun/14/jk-rowling-from-magic-to-the-heart-of-a-twitter-storm |archive-date=4 July 2020 |url-status=live|ref=none}} |
|||
* [[Dave Chappelle]]: {{Cite news |first= Maya |last=Yang|date=7 October 2021|title='I'm team Terf': Dave Chappelle under fire over pro-JK Rowling trans stance|url=https://www.theguardian.com/stage/2021/oct/07/dave-chappelle-transgender-netflix-special-backlash|access-date=27 March 2022|work=[[The Guardian]]|ref=none}} |
|||
* [[Dana International]]: {{cite news |last1=Shirbon |first1=Estelle |title=J.K. Rowling reveals past abuse and defends right to speak on trans issues |url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-rowling/j-k-rowling-reveals-past-abuse-and-defends-right-to-speak-on-trans-issues-idUSKBN23H2XI |publisher=[[Reuters]] |date=10 June 2020 |access-date=13 June 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200611200348/https://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-rowling/j-k-rowling-reveals-past-abuse-and-defends-right-to-speak-on-trans-issues-idUSKBN23H2XI |archive-date=11 June 2020 |url-status=live|ref=none}} |
|||
* [[Eddie Izzard]]: {{cite news |title='I don't think JK Rowling is transphobic,' says gender-fluid comedian Eddie Izzard |url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/comedy/what-to-see/dont-think-jk-rowling-transphobic-says-gender-fluid-comedian/ |archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20220110/https://www.telegraph.co.uk/comedy/what-to-see/dont-think-jk-rowling-transphobic-says-gender-fluid-comedian/ |archive-date=10 January 2022 |url-access=subscription |url-status=live |access-date=27 November 2021 |work=[[The Daily Telegraph]]|date=1 January 2021|ref=none}}{{cbignore}} |
|||
* [[Kathleen Stock]], [[Alison Moyet]]: {{cite news |url= https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-53002557 |publisher= [[BBC News]] |title= JK Rowling responds to trans tweets criticism |date= 11 June 2020 |access-date= 29 March 2022}}</ref> Figures from the arts world criticised "hate speech directed against her".<ref name= Flockhart2020>{{cite news |last= Flockhart |first= Gary |date= 28 September 2020 |access-date= 2 April 2022 |work = [[The Scotsman]] |title= JK Rowling receives support from Ian McEwan and Frances Barber amid 'transphobia' row|url= https://www.scotsman.com/news/people/jk-rowling-receives-support-from-ian-mcewan-and-frances-barber-amid-transphobia-row-2986268|ref=none}}</ref> |
|||
}} |
|||
A man has been sentenced for making death threats against J K Rowling and [[Rosie Duffield]]. [https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c044vevjyd7o ] I think this should be added to this article, but I don’t want to interfere with any redrafting, etc. [[User:Sweet6970|Sweet6970]] ([[User talk:Sweet6970|talk]]) 20:17, 5 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
The latest sources in this section are the books from 2022 that are only used to say she got insults and death threats (which is vague to the point of useless). Everything else is from 2020 or 2021. ''Everything'' is kept to vagueness, the sort of thing that sounds meaningful but really says nothing. |
|||
*I agree. Incorporated in draft #7, below.—[[User:S Marshall|<b style="font-family: Verdana; color: Maroon;">S Marshall</b>]] <small>[[User talk:S Marshall|T]]/[[Special:Contributions/S Marshall|C]]</small> 10:54, 9 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
==Draft 7== |
|||
Also, it's one of those things where there could easily be counterexamples, but they're left out. It mentions people supporting her, but not the people of the same categories who oppose her and condemned her views. "She received insults" is so vague to be meaningless, and Rowling... Well, a glance through her Twitter will show she's hardly innocent of throwing insults at trans people. The death threats might be relevant if this isn't just a reporting of an unverified claim by Rowling, but whether it's particularly notable she got any in today's internet culture... that's hard to say without a lot more details. Probably not the point to end the section on, in any case, especially when the section is already a bit heavily leaning towards her framing of the incidents, the only quotes from her opponents being that her statements were "'cruel' and 'inaccurate'" and her getting lengthy quotes responding to every point. And then we use the framing of her opponents arguments as insults and death threats toend the section? <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.118em 0.118em 0.118em; class=texhtml">'''[[User:Adam Cuerden|Adam Cuerden]]''' <sup>([[User talk:Adam Cuerden|talk]])</sup><sub>Has about 8.9% of all [[WP:FP|FPs]].</sub></span> 13:41, 30 March 2024 (UTC) <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.118em 0.118em 0.118em; class=texhtml">'''[[User:Adam Cuerden|Adam Cuerden]]''' <sup>([[User talk:Adam Cuerden|talk]])</sup><sub>Has about 8.9% of all [[WP:FP|FPs]].</sub></span> 13:41, 30 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
Suissa and Sullivan are out, and Glenn Mullen is in. As there's no good faith dispute at all over whether J. K. Rowling was insulted and threatened for her views, I've left that in.—[[User:S Marshall|<b style="font-family: Verdana; color: Maroon;">S Marshall</b>]] <small>[[User talk:S Marshall|T]]/[[Special:Contributions/S Marshall|C]]</small> 10:54, 9 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
{| class="wikitable" |
|||
:@[[User:Adam Cuerden|Adam Cuerden]] '''Agree'''. It's hard not to see it as biased that stuff like the open letter defending her is included with just one source, while the India Willoughby, Holocaust remarks have the same level of sourcing, are more directly related to the topic of the section, and keep getting deleted. If the consensus really is "every source should be high-quality", fine, but then that means we need to rewrite much of this section. [[User:WikiFouf|WikiFouf]] ([[User talk:WikiFouf|talk]]) 17:39, 31 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
! style="width: 30em;" | Draft 7.1: 403 words |
|||
*It does seem a bit one-sided; and the whole section could definitely stand to be updated to and rewritten using more current sources. In general we're probably relying too much on contemporary news reports and quotes pulled from them to characterize views and reactions, which isn't really necessary when there's more and more academic coverage of this - so I'd try and move away from news sources and towards scholarly ones. --[[User:Aquillion|Aquillion]] ([[User talk:Aquillion|talk]]) 22:18, 31 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
! style="width: 30em;" | Historical: [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=J._K._Rowling&oldid=1202117364#Transgender_people 429 words] |
|||
|- |
|||
|| {{Main|Political views of J. K. Rowling#Transgender rights}} |
|||
I've now read the Suissa and Sullivan paper ( [https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10125585/1/Suissa_1467-9752.12549.pdf]) and... well, A. it doesn't source the material it claims to - there's no mention of death threats, barely mention of insults, and B. this is a very, very odd paper. Page 69 of it claims... well, let me quote the exact words: "Yet, we have been shocked by the outpouring of hatred directed at women, typically accompanied by the |
|||
term ‘TERF’, effectively used as a replacement for epithets such as ‘witch’, ‘bitch’ or ‘cunt’" |
|||
<!-- Overview --> |
|||
Part of neutrality is surely throwing out garbage sources, right? <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.118em 0.118em 0.118em; class=texhtml">'''[[User:Adam Cuerden|Adam Cuerden]]''' <sup>([[User talk:Adam Cuerden|talk]])</sup><sub>Has about 8.9% of all [[WP:FP|FPs]].</sub></span> 03:07, 1 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
Rowling has ''[some contributors want to add a qualifier here]'' [[Feminist views on transgender topics#Gender-critical feminism and trans-exclusionary radical feminism|gender-critical]] views.{{sfn|Whited|2024|loc= p. 7. "But in June 2020, Rowling's manifesto led some people to label her as a trans-exclusionary radical feminist (TERF), a term first used in 2008 that has more recently evolved as 'gender critical'."}}{{sfn|Steinfeld|2020|loc= pp. 34–35. "Just ask JK Rowling and other women who have been labelled as Terfs"}}{{sfn|Schwirblat|Freberg|Freberg|2022|loc= pp. 367–368. "This sparked a heated discussion within the Twitter community, one side buttressing Rowling's statements, and the other espousing her as a trans-exclusionary radical feminist (TERF)"}} She resists proposed changes to UK law that would make it simpler to transition without a medical diagnosis. Rowling is concerned that easier transitions could affect access to female-only spaces and legal protections for women.<ref name= Milne2020>{{cite web|first1= Amber |last1=Milne|first2 = Rachel| last2 =Savage | url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-lgbt-rowling-explainer-trfn-idUSKBN23I3AI | title=Explainer: J. K. Rowling and trans women in single-sex spaces: what's the furore? | publisher=[[Reuters]] | date=11 June 2020 | access-date=6 April 2021 }}</ref><ref name= Brooks2020>{{Cite news|last=Brooks|first=Libby|date=11 June 2020|title=Why is JK Rowling speaking out now on sex and gender debate? |url= http://www.theguardian.com/books/2020/jun/11/why-is-jk-rowling-speaking-out-now-on-sex-and-gender-debate|access-date=14 January 2022 |work= [[The Guardian]] }}</ref><ref name=Kottasova2019>{{cite news |title= J.K. Rowling's 'transphobia' tweet row spotlights a fight between equality campaigners and radical feminists |first1= Ivana |last1= Kottasová |first2= Scottie |last2= Andrew |publisher= [[CNN]] |date= 20 December 2019|url= https://edition.cnn.com/2019/12/20/uk/jk-rowling-transgender-explainer-intl-gbr/index.html |access-date= 5 May 2024}}</ref>{{efn|The laws and proposed changes are the UK [[Gender Recognition Act 2004]] and the Scotland [[Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill|Gender Recognition Reform Bill]]; related also are the UK [[Equality Act 2010]]{{sfn|Pedersen|2022|loc=Abstract}}{{sfn|Suissa|Sullivan|2021|pp=66–69}}{{sfn|Duggan|2021|loc=PDF pp. 14–15 (160–161)}} and the Scotland Gender Representation on Public Boards Act of 2018.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Watson |first1=Jeremy |title=JK Rowling donates £70k for legal challenge on defining a woman |date=18 February 2024 |url=https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/jk-rowling-donates-70k-for-legal-challenge-on-defining-a-woman-73tkvwq0b |work=[[The Times]] |access-date=5 May 2024|archive-url=https://archive.today/20240217200104/https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/jk-rowling-donates-70k-for-legal-challenge-on-defining-a-woman-73tkvwq0b |archive-date=17 February 2024 |url-status=live |url-access=subscription}}</ref>}} She opposes gender self-recognition{{sfn|Whited|2024|p=7}}<ref name=BacksProtest>{{cite news |title= JK Rowling backs protest over Scottish gender bill |date= 6 October 2022|url= https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-63162533 |publisher= [[BBC News]] |access-date= 5 May 2024}}</ref>{{efn|Rowling wrote in 2020: "The current explosion of trans activism is urging a removal of almost all the robust systems through which candidates for sex reassignment were once required to pass. A man who intends to have no surgery and take no hormones may now secure himself a Gender Recognition Certificate and be a woman in the sight of the law."<ref name=RowlingReasons/>}} and suggests that children and [[cisgender]] women are threatened by trans women and trans-positive messages.{{sfn|Duggan|2021|p=161}} In April 2024, responding to [[Hate Crime and Public Order (Scotland) Act 2021|Scotland's Hate Crime and Public Order Act]], she tweeted a list of trans women, writing that they are "men, every last one of them".<ref name=Brooks2024>{{cite news |last1=Brooks |first1=Libby |title=JK Rowling’s posts on X will not be recorded as non-crime hate incident |url=https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/apr/03/jk-rowling-comments-scotland-non-crime-hate-incident |work=[[The Guardian]] |date=3 April 2024 |access-date= 3 May 2024}}</ref> |
|||
<!-- History --> |
|||
:I share concern with that paragraph and most of those sources, but I'm unwilling to get too far into the weeds on this issue. I struggle to read any useful meaning into all but the last sentence. [[User:Vanamonde93|Vanamonde93]] ([[User talk:Vanamonde93|talk]]) 15:01, 1 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
Friction over Rowling's gender-critical writings surged in 2019 when she defended [[Maya Forstater]].{{sfn|Whited|2024|pp=6-8}} When [[Forstater v Centre for Global Development Europe|Forstater's employment contract was not renewed]] after Forstater shared gender-critical views,{{sfn|Pugh|2020|p=7}} Rowling wrote that trans people should live in "peace and security", but questioned women being "force[d] out of their jobs for stating that sex is real".<ref name=Stack2019/>{{efn|A tribunal ruled in 2021 that Forstater's gender-critical views were protected under the 2010 UK [[Equality Act 2010|Equality Act]].<ref name=Faulkner2021>{{cite news |first= Doug |last= Faulkner |url= https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-57426579 |title= Maya Forstater: woman wins tribunal appeal over transgender tweets |publisher= [[BBC News]] |date= 10 June 2021 |access-date= 26 March 2022}}</ref><ref name=Siddique2021>{{cite news |first= Haroon |last= Siddique |date= 10 June 2021 |title= Gender-critical views are a protected belief, appeal tribunal rules|url= https://www.theguardian.com/law/2021/jun/10/gender-critical-views-protected-belief-appeal-tribunal-rules-maya-forstater |work= [[The Guardian]] |access-date= 26 March 2022}}</ref>{{sfn|Pape|2022|p=230}} In July 2022, a new tribunal decision was published (''[[Forstater v Center for Global Development Europe]]'') ruling that Forstater had suffered direct discrimination from her employer.<ref>{{cite news |title=Maya Forstater: Woman discriminated against over trans tweets, tribunal rules|date=6 July 2022 |url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-62061929 |publisher=[[BBC News]] |access-date=6 July 2022}}</ref>}} According to ''Harry Potter'' scholar Lana Whited, in the next six months "Rowling herself fanned the flames as she became increasingly vocal".{{sfn|Whited|2024|p=6}} In June 2020,{{sfn|Whited|2024|p=6}} Rowling mocked the phrase "[[people who menstruate]]",<ref name=Gross2020>{{Cite news|last=Gross|first=Jenny|date=7 June 2020|title=Daniel Radcliffe criticizes J.K. Rowling's anti-transgender tweets|work=[[The New York Times]]|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/07/arts/Jk-Rowling-controversy.html |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200607221400/https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/07/arts/Jk-Rowling-controversy.html |archive-date=7 June 2020 |url-access=subscription |url-status=live|access-date=6 January 2022 }}</ref> and tweeted that [[women's rights]] and "lived reality" would be "erased" if "sex isn't real".{{sfn|Duggan|2021|pp=14–15}}{{sfn|Pugh|2020|p=7}} |
|||
<!-- Reaction --> |
|||
:Agreed that the last paragraph is biased/doesn't have balance. What improvements would you propose? [[User:Bastun|<span style="font-family:Verdana, sans-serif">Bastun</span>]]<sup>[[User_talk:Bastun|Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!]]</sup> 09:56, 2 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
Rowling's views have affected her reputation.{{sfn|Whited|2024|p=8}} She has been the target of widespread condemnation,{{sfn|Duggan|2021|loc=PDF pp. 14–15 (160–161)}}{{sfn|Schwirblat|Freberg|Freberg|2022|pp=367–369}}{{sfn|Pape|2022|pp=229–230, 238}} insults, and threats, including death threats.{{sfn|Whited|2024|p=9}}<ref name=Burnell4June>{{Cite news|last=Burnell|first=Paul|date=4 June 2024|title= Internet troll threatened to kill JK Rowling and MP|publisher=[[BBC News]]|url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c044vevjyd7o |access-date= 9 June 2024}}</ref> Despite the controversy, sales of ''Harry Potter'' books grew during the [[COVID-19]] lockdown.{{sfn|Pape|2022|p=238}}<ref>{{cite news |first=Mark |last= Sweney |title= Harry Potter books prove UK lockdown hit despite JK Rowling trans rights row |work= [[The Guardian]] |date= 21 July 2020 |url= https://www.theguardian.com/business/2020/jul/21/jk-rowling-book-sales-unaffected-by-transgender-views-row |access-date= 3 May 2024}}</ref> Criticism came from Harry Potter fansites, LGBT charities, and leading actors of the Wizarding World.{{sfn|Henderson|2022|p=224}}<ref name=Petter2020>{{Cite web|last= Petter|first=Olivia|date=17 September 2020|title=Mermaids writes open letter to JK Rowling following her recent comments on trans people|url=https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/mermaids-jk-rowling-transphobia-transgender-sexual-abuse-domestic-letter-a9565176.html|access-date=26 March 2022|work=[[The Independent]] |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200615235531/https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/mermaids-jk-rowling-transphobia-transgender-sexual-abuse-domestic-letter-a9565176.html |archive-date=15 June 2020}}</ref><ref>{{cite news | url=https://www.newstatesman.com/long-reads/2021/11/the-battle-for-stonewall-the-lgbt-charity-and-the-uks-gender-wars | title=The battle for Stonewall: the LGBT charity and the UK's gender wars | work=[[New Statesman]]|first=Gaby |last=Hinsliff|date=3 November 2021 | access-date=24 November 2021}}</ref> and [[Human Rights Campaign]].<ref name= Milne2020/><ref name=AP7June2020>{{cite news |title= JK Rowling's tweets on transgender people spark outrage |date= 7 June 2020 |url= https://apnews.com/article/entertainment-jk-rowling-us-news-media-7338b2b262090c00f04deafe2e6689c2 |publisher= [[Associated Press]] |access-date= 4 May 2024}}</ref><ref name=Waterson2020>{{Cite news|last= Waterson |first= Jim|title= Children's news website apologises to JK Rowling over trans tweet row|url= https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/jul/23/childrens-news-website-apologises-jk-rowling-trans-tweet-day|date= 23 July 2020 |access-date=26 March 2022|work=[[The Guardian]] |quote= Rowling's comments on gender were condemned by LGBT charities and the leading stars of her Harry Potter film franchise.}}</ref><ref name=Lang2020>{{cite magazine |last=Lang |first=Brent |title= Eddie Redmayne criticizes J.K. Rowling's anti-trans tweets |date= 10 June 2020 |url= https://variety.com/2020/film/news/eddie-redmayne-jk-rowling-anti-trans-tweets-harry-potter-fantastic-beasts-1234630226/ |magazine= [[Variety (magazine)|Variety]]|access-date=28 March 2022 |quote= Eddie Redmayne, star of the ''Fantastic Beasts'' franchise, is speaking out against J.K. Rowling's anti-trans tweets, as the controversy surrounding the author and her beliefs continues to swirl.}}</ref> After [[Kerry Kennedy]] expressed "profound disappointment" in her views, Rowling returned the [[Ripple of Hope Award]] given to her by the Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights organisation.<ref name=RFKAward>{{cite news |last=Flood|first=Alison |url= https://amp.theguardian.com/books/2020/aug/28/jk-rowling-robert-f-kennedy-human-rights-award-trans-views|title=JK Rowling returns human rights award to group that denounces her trans views |work=[[The Guardian]]|date=28 August 2020|access-date=28 August 2020}}</ref> |
|||
::Honestly, as it stands, I don't see much use to anything in that paragraph given the other discussion is on a much more general level. There might be a point - in the more detailed sub-article - to going into the list of people who supported her very early in the incident, but, presuming we agree that she's escalated (and this week's news articles about her sure seem to indicate that), quoting support from very early on seems misleading, unless it's put into the timeline. |
|||
::But there's a risk of having a situation where every comment on how her transphobia is bad is met with a comment about how it isn't so bad, and [https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c51j64lk2l8o it's not like there's much doubt about her transphobia anymore]. As an example of possible false balance: No LGBT charity, to my knowledge, supports her (ignoring explicitly anti-trans charities like the [[LGB Alliance]]), so there's the strong risk of falsely balancing Mermaids and GLAAD with a couple quotes by actors from before Rowling escalated. <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.118em 0.118em 0.118em; class=texhtml">'''[[User:Adam Cuerden|Adam Cuerden]]''' <sup>([[User talk:Adam Cuerden|talk]])</sup><sub>Has about 8.9% of all [[WP:FP|FPs]].</sub></span> 13:59, 2 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:If it failed verification then it shouldn't be in the article until / unless we can find an actual high-quality source supporting it. --[[User:Aquillion|Aquillion]] ([[User talk:Aquillion|talk]]) 20:41, 2 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
<!-- Denial --> |
|||
I have reverted the removal of this content, for a second time, as it was subject to extensive workshopping during a FAR process [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Featured_article_review/J._K._Rowling/archive1#Workshopping_the_transgender_section] to reach a consensus version [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=J._K._Rowling&diff=1081521028&oldid=1081520212]. It should not be removed until a consensus is reached as to how it should be changed or removed. Please avoid edit warring, and reach consensus before implementing any further changes. [[User:Daff22|Daff22]] ([[User talk:Daff22|talk]]) 14:05, 2 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
Rowling rejects these characterisations and denies being transphobic.<ref name=RowlingReasons>{{cite web|title=J.K. Rowling writes about her reasons for speaking out on sex and gender issues |url=https://www.jkrowling.com/opinions/j-k-rowling-writes-about-her-reasons-for-speaking-out-on-sex-and-gender-issues/ |publisher=JK Rowling |date=10 June 2020 |access-date=10 June 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200610182056/https://www.jkrowling.com/opinions/j-k-rowling-writes-about-her-reasons-for-speaking-out-on-sex-and-gender-issues/ |archive-date=10 June 2020 |url-status=live}}</ref><ref name= Dismisses>{{cite news |title= JK Rowling dismisses backlash over trans comments: 'I don't care about my legacy' |date= 22 February 2023|url= https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-64729304 |publisher= [[BBC News]] |access-date= 3 May 2024}}</ref> In an essay posted on her website in June 2020 – which left trans people feeling betrayed{{sfn|Whited|2024|p=7}}{{sfn|Henderson|2022|p=224}} – Rowling said her views on women's rights sprang from survivorship of domestic abuse and [[sexual assault]].{{sfn|Duggan|2021|pp=160–161)}}<ref name=Shirbon2020>{{cite news |last1=Shirbon |first1=Estelle |title=J.K. Rowling reveals past abuse and defends right to speak on trans issues |url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-rowling/j-k-rowling-reveals-past-abuse-and-defends-right-to-speak-on-trans-issues-idUSKBN23H2XI |publisher=[[Reuters]] |date=10 June 2020 |access-date=13 June 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200611200348/https://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-rowling/j-k-rowling-reveals-past-abuse-and-defends-right-to-speak-on-trans-issues-idUSKBN23H2XI |archive-date=11 June 2020 |url-status=live}}</ref> While affirming that "the majority of trans-identified people not only pose zero threat to others, but are vulnerable ... Trans people need and deserve protection", she wrote that it would be unsafe to allow "any man who believes or feels he's a woman" into bathrooms or changing rooms.<ref name= Shirbon2020/><ref>{{cite news |last1=Gonzalez |first1=Sandra |title=J.K. Rowling explains her gender identity views in essay amid backlash |url=https://edition.cnn.com/2020/06/10/entertainment/jk-rowling/index.html |access-date=16 September 2023 |publisher=[[CNN]] |date=10 June 2020}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |last1=Garrand |first1=Danielle |title=J.K. Rowling defends herself after accusations of making 'anti-trans' comments on Twitter |url=https://www.cbsnews.com/news/j-k-rowling-defends-anti-trans-comments-twitter/ |access-date=16 September 2023 |publisher=[[CBS News]] |date=11 June 2020}}</ref> Whited asserted in 2024 that Rowling's sometimes "flippant" and "simplistic understanding of gender identity" had permanently changed her "relationship not only with fans, readers, and scholars ... but also with her works themselves".{{sfn|Whited|2024|pp=6, 8–9}} |
|||
|| {{Main|Political views of J. K. Rowling#Transgender rights}} |
|||
:: That being said it would really seem like this content needs revisiting in light of her subsequent actions and in light of the comment above from {{U|Adam_Cuerden}}. [[User:Simonm223|Simonm223]] ([[User talk:Simonm223|talk]]) 14:30, 2 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
Rowling's responses to proposed changes to UK gender recognition laws,<ref name= Milne2020>{{cite web|first1= Amber |last1=Milne|first2 = Rachel| last2 =Savage | url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-lgbt-rowling-explainer-trfn-idUSKBN23I3AI | title=Explainer: J. K. Rowling and trans women in single-sex spaces: what's the furore? | publisher=[[Reuters]] | date=11 June 2020 | access-date=6 April 2021 }}</ref><ref name= Brooks2020>{{Cite news|last=Brooks|first=Libby|date=11 June 2020|title=Why is JK Rowling speaking out now on sex and gender debate? |url= http://www.theguardian.com/books/2020/jun/11/why-is-jk-rowling-speaking-out-now-on-sex-and-gender-debate|access-date=14 January 2022 |work= [[The Guardian]] }}</ref>{{efn|The UK laws and proposed changes are the [[Gender Recognition Act 2004]], the [[Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill]] and the related [[Equality Act 2010]].{{sfn|Pedersen|2022|loc=Abstract}}{{sfn|Suissa|Sullivan|2021|pp=66–69}}{{sfn|Duggan|2021|loc=PDF pp. 14–15 (160–161)}} }} and her views on [[sexual identity|sex]] and [[gender identity|gender]], have provoked controversy.{{sfn|Duggan|2021|loc=PDF pp. 14–15 (160–161)}} Her statements have divided [[Feminist views on transgender topics|feminists]];<ref name=Kottasova2019>{{cite news |first1= Ivana |last1= Kottasová |first2= Scottie | last2= Andrew|title= J.K. Rowling's 'transphobia' tweet row spotlights a fight between equality campaigners and radical feminists |publisher= [[CNN]] |date= 20 December 2019 |access-date= 29 March 2022 | url= https://www.cnn.com/2019/12/20/uk/jk-rowling-transgender-explainer-intl-gbr/index.html}}</ref><ref name=BBC2020JKRResponds>{{cite news |url= https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-53002557 |publisher= [[BBC News]] |title= JK Rowling responds to trans tweets criticism |date= 11 June 2020 |access-date= 29 March 2022}}</ref><ref>{{cite news | url=https://www.newstatesman.com/international/2020/09/judith-butler-culture-wars-jk-rowling-and-living-anti-intellectual-times | title=Judith Butler on the culture wars, JK Rowling and living in 'anti-intellectual times'|first=Alona |last=Ferber | work=[[New Statesman]] | date=22 September 2020 | access-date=26 March 2021}}</ref> fuelled<!-- This article uses British spelling --> debates on [[freedom of speech]],{{sfn|Pape|2022|pp=229–230}}<ref>{{cite web|title=BBC nominates J.K.Rowling's controversial essay of trans rights for award|url=https://www.dw.com/en/bbc-nominates-jk-rowlings-controversial-essay-on-trans-rights-for-award/a-56014673|website=[[DW News]]|date=22 December 2020|access-date=22 December 2020}}</ref> [[academic freedom]]{{sfn|Suissa|Sullivan|2021|pp=66–69}} and [[cancel culture]];{{sfn|Schwirblat|Freberg|Freberg|2022|pp=367–369}} and prompted declarations of [[Transgender rights movement|support for transgender people]] from the literary,<ref>UK, US, Canada, Ireland: {{cite news |last= Flood |first= Alison |date=9 October 2020|title= Stephen King, Margaret Atwood and Roxane Gay champion trans rights in open letter|url= https://www.theguardian.com/books/2020/oct/09/stephen-king-margaret-atwood-roxane-gay-champion-trans-rights-open-letter-jk-rowling |work= [[The Guardian]] |access-date= 2 April 2022}}</ref> arts<ref>{{cite magazine|last= Rowley |first= Glenn |title= Artists fire back at J.K. Rowling's anti-trans remarks, share messages in support of the community|url= https://www.billboard.com/culture/pride/artists-fire-back-jk-rowling-anti-trans-remarks-9400386/|magazine= [[Billboard (magazine)|Billboard]]|date= 11 June 2020 |access-date= 7 April 2022}}</ref> and culture sectors.<ref>Culture sector: |
|||
:::After all, it's progressed to this: [https://www.salon.com/2024/03/15/jk-rowling-trans-nazis-holocaust-denial/] [[User:Simonm223|Simonm223]] ([[User talk:Simonm223|talk]]) 16:41, 2 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:I really don't see how 100% consensus now is trumped by an FAR review from two years ago. I think yoyu're editwarring, {{ping|Daff22}}, given ''no-one'' has said this paragraph should remain. <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.118em 0.118em 0.118em; class=texhtml">'''[[User:Adam Cuerden|Adam Cuerden]]''' <sup>([[User talk:Adam Cuerden|talk]])</sup><sub>Has about 8.9% of all [[WP:FP|FPs]].</sub></span> 16:37, 2 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::Throwing my hat in here, I also think we should remove from the BLP a paragraph that failed source verification, and the consensus is overwhelming [[User:Snokalok|Snokalok]] ([[User talk:Snokalok|talk]]) 18:50, 2 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::Also throwing my hat in here that we should remove that paragraph. [[WP:CCC|Consensus can change]]. [[User:LokiTheLiar|Loki]] ([[User talk:LokiTheLiar|talk]]) 18:54, 2 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::Also '''agree''': it should be removed until we take the time to fully address all the valid concerns that have been raised with this section. Consensus seems to have noticeably evolved in the last few months, as did Rowling's views on transgender people [[User:WikiFouf|WikiFouf]] ([[User talk:WikiFouf|talk]]) 19:07, 2 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:Even aside from the fact that discussion here currently shows a clear consensus, that isn't how consensus or FARs work. They're not privileged in any way and was just a discussion among a relatively small number of editors; the usual [[WP:EDITCONSENSUS]] applies. And [[WP:DNRNC|Do Not Revert Due to No Consensus]] applies; you must articulate a specific reason why you object to an edit. Simply saying "this article went through FAR" isn't sufficient because that would bar effectively all edits without prior discussion going forwards, which is not how featured articles ''or'' consensus-building works (and, by my reading, the specific text in question was ''not'' discussed in any depth at the FAR; certainly I am not seeing anything close to the overwhelming consensus you imply.) If you have specific content-based objections to the edit, you have to articulate them so people can attempt to answer them; if not then you must stop reverting. EDIT: Also, looking over the article's history, it looks like this has been an ongoing problem here. Generally speaking, editors are not required to obtain consensus for edits, even on things that have been discussed - in some cases (where there was an actual ''RFC'' with a clear-cut result) it might be appropriate, but even then, it's usually unhelpful and inappropriate to revert ''solely'' with an edit summary like "this was discussed" or "get consensus on talk" or the like unless some specific issue has been discussed so many times that there's no point, which isn't really the case here. Reverts should be accompanied by a specific objection that can be discussed on talk, otherwise there's a risk of [[WP:STONEWALL]]ing because you're effectively asking people to "answer" objections that you haven't articulated. --[[User:Aquillion|Aquillion]] ([[User talk:Aquillion|talk]]) 20:41, 2 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
=== Edit warring, untrue claims, and moving forward collaboratively === |
|||
# 13:34 March 30 Adam Cuerden (AC) [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=J._K._Rowling&diff=prev&oldid=1216347031 removes sourced text] that has been in the article <s>for at least two years, and was {{em|quite well}} vetted in the FAR</s> '''Corrected''' for almost two years based on [[Talk:J._K._Rowling/Archive_13#%22and_she_has_been_referred_to_as_a_TERF%22|this discussion]] |
|||
# 10:46 March 31 [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=J._K._Rowling&diff=next&oldid=1216367144 restored by Daff22] |
|||
# 20:20 March 31 [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=J._K._Rowling&diff=next&oldid=1216500110 removed a second time by Adam Cuerden] |
|||
# 13:59 April 2 [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=J._K._Rowling&diff=next&oldid=1216572278 restored again by Daff22] |
|||
# 16:36 April 2 [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=J._K._Rowling&diff=next&oldid=1216873122 removed for the third time by Adam Cuerden] |
|||
At 13:41, 30 March, Adam Cuerden started this talk page section (yay) which contains errors (boo), and at 03:07 1 April, stated that "the Suissa and Sullivan paper ... doesn't source the material it claims to". Subsequent responses repeated the error that the text failed verification; it does not. Cuerden appears to have based that claim on having read only one of the two sources. The citations are bundled to the end of the clause, but the insults are sourced to one scholarly source and the death threats are sourced to Qiao. AC, did you read Qiao? {{pb}} AC also states that "insults and death threats" are "vague to the point of useless". Death threats are death threats; they don't need further definition. If one academic source isn't enough, there are scores of other sources that can be used (during the FAR, we substituted in academic or scholarly sources whenever we could, but there are plenty of high-quality news sources available); that Rowling has received death threats is not [[WP:UNDUE]] in this article. If "choke on a bag of dicks" isn't an insult, what is; must we really add that level of detail to a broad overview article ? Cuerden criticizes the vagueness, which was employed to use [[WP:SS|summary style]] from the sub-article which is linked in the hat note, and to avoid increasing word count with things like "choke on a bag of dicks" and more, which are explored in the sub-article and to which many more sources can be added. {{pb}} AC says the section "mentions people supporting her, but not the people of the same categories who oppose her and condemned her views". This is untrue; the content was the subject of extensive discussion, resulting in this content in the first paragraph of that section: |
|||
: ... and prompted declarations of [[Transgender rights movement|support for transgender people]] from the literary,<ref>UK, US, Canada, Ireland: {{cite news |last= Flood |first= Alison |date=9 October 2020|title= Stephen King, Margaret Atwood and Roxane Gay champion trans rights in open letter|url= https://www.theguardian.com/books/2020/oct/09/stephen-king-margaret-atwood-roxane-gay-champion-trans-rights-open-letter-jk-rowling |work= [[The Guardian]] |access-date= 2 April 2022}}</ref> arts<ref>{{cite magazine|last= Rowley |first= Glenn |title= Artists fire back at J.K. Rowling's anti-trans remarks, share messages in support of the community|url= https://www.billboard.com/culture/pride/artists-fire-back-jk-rowling-anti-trans-remarks-9400386/|magazine= [[Billboard (magazine)|Billboard]]|date= 11 June 2020 |access-date= 7 April 2022}}</ref> and culture sectors.<ref>Culture sector: |
|||
* [[Universal Destinations & Experiences]], [[Warner Bros.]] and [[Scholastic Corporation]]: {{cite news |last1= Siegel |first1= Tatiana |last2= Abramovitch |first2= Seth |date= 10 June 2020 |title= Universal Parks responds to J.K. Rowling tweets: 'Our core values include diversity, inclusion and respect' |work= [[The Hollywood Reporter]] |url= https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/lifestyle/lifestyle-news/universal-parks-responds-jk-rowling-tweets-core-values-include-diversity-inclusion-respect-1297845/ |access-date= 3 April 2022|ref=none}} |
* [[Universal Destinations & Experiences]], [[Warner Bros.]] and [[Scholastic Corporation]]: {{cite news |last1= Siegel |first1= Tatiana |last2= Abramovitch |first2= Seth |date= 10 June 2020 |title= Universal Parks responds to J.K. Rowling tweets: 'Our core values include diversity, inclusion and respect' |work= [[The Hollywood Reporter]] |url= https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/lifestyle/lifestyle-news/universal-parks-responds-jk-rowling-tweets-core-values-include-diversity-inclusion-respect-1297845/ |access-date= 3 April 2022|ref=none}} |
||
* [[Warner Bros. Interactive Entertainment]] president: {{cite news |last= Skrebels |first= Joe |title= WB Interactive president responds to ongoing debate over supporting JK Rowling |date=1 October 2020 |url= https://www.ign.com/articles/wb-interactive-president-responds-to-ongoing-debate-over-supporting-jk-rowling |publisher= [[IGN]] |access-date= 2 April 2022|ref=none}}</ref> |
* [[Warner Bros. Interactive Entertainment]] president: {{cite news |last= Skrebels |first= Joe |title= WB Interactive president responds to ongoing debate over supporting JK Rowling |date=1 October 2020 |url= https://www.ign.com/articles/wb-interactive-president-responds-to-ongoing-debate-over-supporting-jk-rowling |publisher= [[IGN]] |access-date= 2 April 2022|ref=none}}</ref> |
||
That is quite explicit and broad; to say the article leaves out this side is false-- it includes it in the first paragraph, and anyone can see at [[Wikipedia talk:Featured article review/J. K. Rowling/archive1]] the hows and whys the text was written as is. Editors who are (to say the least) not fond of Rowling asked for the text to be written that way rather than naming the who's who list of personalities and organizations, which was where we started. There is a sub-article where greater detail can be explored, which is the same for other sections of the article besides the transgender section. With more sources available now than two years ago, rewriting text to improve it ''after discussing better sourcing'' is one thing, but completely removing accurately cited text that was well vetted by many experienced editors, and more editors than are now weighing in here, isn't the way to improve this content. {{pb}} Separately, it would be ideal to resume the collaborative environment in which the FAR was conducted; edit warring is not the way to write content, and false hyperbolic charges of POV are not helpful. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 22:57, 3 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:To be clear, Qiao ''attributes'' that statement to Rowling and mentions it only in passing ({{tq|Then on June 10 JK Rowling published an article then forwarded it on Twitter in early November 2021, she revealed that she had received a flood of death threats after her family's address was posted online.}}) We can't use it for statements in the article voice; with only that source, we would have to attribute it to Rowling in the same way. And if that is genuinely the only source, then I do think it's [[WP:UNDUE]]; it's a passing mention in a paper that has only been cited once, attributed to Rowling. Giving it weight is [[WP:EXCEPTIONAL]] in context and requires correspondingly serious coverage that can give it proper context. Also, unless I misunderstand the timeline, I don't think it was actually part of the FAR version - you added it [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=1095474349&oldid=1095474090 here]; in the [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:J._K._Rowling/Archive_13#Draft_B discussion linked], the only comments other than yours that I can see talking about it were opposed to adding it, which may explain how it ended up with such weak sourcing. I admit I may have missed something because the discussion was complex and spread across several pages. If you do feel you have better sources you can present them and make your case, but even if it ends up in the article we do actually ''need'' those sources because they will provide vital context that might affect how we cover it. --[[User:Aquillion|Aquillion]] ([[User talk:Aquillion|talk]]) 23:21, 3 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::Will catch up on this tomorrow or next ... was editing from car, now home, and out of time. I don't understand your final clause, beginning with "but even if" ... ? [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 00:49, 4 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::Timeline corrected (thank you and apologies!) and there were then/still are plenty of other sources on death threats ... at least one scholarly but I don't have journal access right now, and other news sources like [https://deadline.com/2022/08/rowling-death-threat-twitter-supporter-salman-rushdie-attacker-1235091660/ Deadline on the Rushdie incident]. It's an odd thing to leave out completely. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 03:49, 4 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::{{ping|SandyGeorgia}} Interesting little attack piece on me. I think it's undeniably true that Suissa and Sullivan is A. a pretty odd and very biased source, and B. Does not support the language about death threats, and B. It's hard to even use it to unambiguously say "insults" when it explicitly defines "TERF" as a synonym for - bitch and cunt, I think, and calling her a TERF is hardly what a reader is going to expect when you mention insults. There is a comment about people telling Rowling to eat a bag of dicks, but it's oddly written as well. That's near the issue, but it's not very close, is it? If it doesn't support "death threats" and it's exact wording doesn't do a good job at supporting "insults", then it doesn't matter if the other source does. '''It''' failed source verification, both in whether it's a source for the material '''and on being a very bad source to use since it literally claims "TERF" is a meaningless, anti-woman insult like "bitch" or "cunt". |
|||
:::Nextly, receiving insults on the internet is hardly news. I don't think I need to defend that to anyone who ever read a comments sectio n. So how, exactly, is |
|||
::: some public figure revealing controversial vieand then ws receiving insulnotn't exactly what's expected on the internet? |
|||
:::As for the death threats, give me one source for death threats that isn't "Rowling says". Because do you remember the incident where she claimed fixing because drag queens protested outside her house, which at the time was listed as a tourist attraction on multiple websites uncontroversially, until she suddenly feared for her life because someone protested there briefly and she tried to get them arrested and did get several of them drummed off the internet. '''I do not trust Rowling's characterisation of her critics and neither should Wikipedia explicitly do so.''' <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.118em 0.118em 0.118em; class=texhtml">'''[[User:Adam Cuerden|Adam Cuerden]]''' <sup>([[User talk:Adam Cuerden|talk]])</sup><sub>Has about 8.9% of all [[WP:FP|FPs]].</sub></span> 16:05, 4 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::{{ping|SandyGeorgia}} Also, the claim is death threats '''in response to her transphobia'''. You link https://deadline.com/2022/08/rowling-death-threat-twitter-supporter-salman-rushdie-attacker-1235091660/ in response. Which is explicitly, unambiguously about her receiving death threats for supporting Salman Rushdie. So your defense of the claim fails source verification in a pretty major way, as it's about something completely unrelated. <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.118em 0.118em 0.118em; class=texhtml">'''[[User:Adam Cuerden|Adam Cuerden]]''' <sup>([[User talk:Adam Cuerden|talk]])</sup><sub>Has about 8.9% of all [[WP:FP|FPs]].</sub></span> 16:12, 4 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::So, it appears we disagree on this matter. Suissa and Sullivan was never intended to back the death threats; it sourced the insults. You think that vague, and you think Qiao a poor source for the death threats; other sources can be used (the aim was to stick with content mentioned by scholarly sources). {{pb}} But now, we have a [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=J._K._Rowling&diff=prev&oldid=1216347031 significant part of the chronology missing rather than tagged for better sourcing], even as {{u|SMcCandlish}} notes that [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:J._K._Rowling&diff=prev&oldid=1217296542 "Due to Rowling's public prominence, it led rapidly to everything from public condemnation by people who had worked with her, to former-fan boycots, to actual threats against her safety and life."] If the efforts on this page should turn to constructively drafting updated content based on highest quality sources, mention of the insults and death threats should not be deleted. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 08:45, 5 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::I mean... if it is a significant part of the chronology then it would be easier than this to find high-quality sources for it. I think that it the fact that she said she received threats is extremely important to some of her supporters, and is something that some tabloid coverage in particular has used as a framing device... but I don't think that it is actually treated as a major part of the chronology in higher-quality or more impartial coverage; most coverage doesn't mention it at all. Compared to the massive amount of coverage that the topic as a whole has received, most higher-quality coverage does not treat it as a major part of the topic or its timeline. I think that the disparity in focus (and the disparity in the perception of how important it is) is partially explained by the fact that a few sources - again, largely lower-quality tabloid ones, often opinion-pieces or friendly blow-by-blow news coverage - treats her description of it as representative of the people she is dispute with, and therefore emblematic of the entire issue and central to understanding it... but I don't think that this is really how most high-quality mainstream coverage treats it, when it is mentioned at all (and, again, it usually simply ''isn't.'') --[[User:Aquillion|Aquillion]] ([[User talk:Aquillion|talk]]) 09:31, 5 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::::It's not hard to find;[https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/2046147X231180501#con] rather, I'm mostly waiting for and hoping that this talk page will move beyond the long lists of dumps from news sources, towards a focus on scholarly sources, before exploring further, as the page is now overwhelmed by less-than-useful source lists. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 09:35, 5 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::::::I mean, I'm not sure - the paragraph is vague - that that's for the right chronology, though: It's for a death threat in 2021; the majority of the discussion revolved around early events in 2019-2020. I'm also a little worried that the only reason to mention the threat in such a brief summary of events is to make the other side look bad. Great source for her being transphobic, though. <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.118em 0.118em 0.118em; class=texhtml">'''[[User:Adam Cuerden|Adam Cuerden]]''' <sup>([[User talk:Adam Cuerden|talk]])</sup><sub>Has about 8.9% of all [[WP:FP|FPs]].</sub></span> 13:10, 5 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
=== Editing a Featured article subject to ''double'' discretionary sanctions === |
|||
When [[Maya Forstater]]'s employment contract with the London branch of the [[Center for Global Development]] was not renewed after she tweeted [[Feminist views on transgender topics#Gender-critical feminism and trans-exclusionary radical feminism|gender-critical views]],{{sfn|Pugh|2020|p=7}}<ref name=Stack2019>{{Cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/19/world/europe/jk-rowling-maya-forstater-transgender.html|title=J.K. Rowling criticized after tweeting support for anti-transgender researcher|last=Stack|first=Liam|date=19 December 2019|work=[[The New York Times]]|access-date=13 June 2020| url-access=registration|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200613012737/https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/19/world/europe/jk-rowling-maya-forstater-transgender.html|archive-date=13 June 2020|url-status=live}}</ref> Rowling responded in December 2019 with a tweet that [[transgender]] people should live their lives as they pleased in "peace and security", but questioned women being "force[d] out of their jobs for stating that sex is real".<ref name=Stack2019/>{{efn|A tribunal ruled in 2021 that Forstater's gender-critical views were protected under the 2010 UK [[Equality Act 2010|Equality Act]].<ref name=Faulkner2021>{{cite news |first= Doug |last= Faulkner |url= https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-57426579 |title= Maya Forstater: woman wins tribunal appeal over transgender tweets |publisher= [[BBC News]] |date= 10 June 2021 |access-date= 26 March 2022}}</ref><ref name=Siddique2021>{{cite news |first= Haroon |last= Siddique |date= 10 June 2021 |title= Gender-critical views are a protected belief, appeal tribunal rules|url= https://www.theguardian.com/law/2021/jun/10/gender-critical-views-protected-belief-appeal-tribunal-rules-maya-forstater |work= [[The Guardian]] |access-date= 26 March 2022}}</ref> In July 2022, a new tribunal decision was published (''[[Forstater v Center for Global Development Europe]]'') ruling that Forstater had suffered direct discrimination from her employer.<ref>{{cite news |title=Maya Forstater: Woman discriminated against over trans tweets, tribunal rules|date=6 July 2022 |url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-62061929 |publisher=[[BBC News]] |access-date=6 July 2022}}</ref>}} In another controversial tweet in June 2020,<ref name=Petter2020>{{Cite web|last= Petter|first=Olivia|date=17 September 2020|title=Mermaids writes open letter to JK Rowling following her recent comments on trans people|url=https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/mermaids-jk-rowling-transphobia-transgender-sexual-abuse-domestic-letter-a9565176.html|access-date=26 March 2022|work=[[The Independent]] |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200615235531/https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/mermaids-jk-rowling-transphobia-transgender-sexual-abuse-domestic-letter-a9565176.html |archive-date=15 June 2020}}</ref> Rowling mocked an article for using the phrase "[[people who menstruate]]",<ref name=Gross2020>{{Cite news|last=Gross|first=Jenny|date=7 June 2020|title=Daniel Radcliffe criticizes J.K. Rowling's anti-transgender tweets|work=[[The New York Times]]|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/07/arts/Jk-Rowling-controversy.html |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200607221400/https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/07/arts/Jk-Rowling-controversy.html |archive-date=7 June 2020 |url-access=subscription |url-status=live|access-date=6 January 2022 }}</ref> and tweeted that [[women's rights]] and "lived reality" would be "erased" if "sex isn't real".{{sfn|Duggan|2021|loc=PDF pp. 14–15}}<ref>{{cite magazine|url=https://variety.com/2020/film/news/jk-rowling-transphobic-tweets-controversy-1234627081/|title=J.K. Rowling gets backlash over anti-trans tweets|last=Moreau|first=Jordan|magazine=[[Variety (magazine)|Variety]]|date=6 June 2020|access-date=13 June 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200607005447/https://variety.com/2020/film/news/jk-rowling-transphobic-tweets-controversy-1234627081/|archive-date=7 June 2020|url-status=live}}</ref> |
|||
Please 1) read and understand [[WP:SS|summary style]], [[WP:WIAFA]], and [[WP:SIZE]]; 2) don't believe everything you read (the failed verification charge above was untrue); and 3) stop building content by edit warring. See the model at the FAR, and above on this page, that has successfully resulted in consensus. We always knew the transgender text would need to be revisited; doing that without hyperbole, false claims, editing that is not bold (as stated in edit summaries) rather reckless, and [[WP:BATTLEGROUND|battleground language]] is the fastest route to where we all want to be. Slow and steady wins the race. The article is again growing with excess detail that has not gained consensus, to where it will surpass [[WP:SIZE]] guidelines, when detail should ''first'' be explored at [[Political views of J. K. Rowling]] and then summarized to here based on collaborative discussion based on the highest quality sources rather than opinions unbacked by source listings. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 23:04, 3 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:I think that it would be best to avoid focusing too much on process over content. If you think that there are people who have violated the numerous restrictions on this page, the appropriate venue is [[WP:AE]], not here. --[[User:Aquillion|Aquillion]] ([[User talk:Aquillion|talk]]) 23:24, 3 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::[[WP:FAOWN]] is a policy page: "Editors are asked to take particular care when editing a Featured article; it is considerate to discuss significant changes of text or images on the talk page first." Doing so will help avoid the back-and-forth, borderline edit warring already occurring, and help all collaborate via talk. Eg, see your section above ... suppose I had just added the text back in without discussing? [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 00:52, 4 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
[[LGBT]] charities and leading actors of the [[Wizarding World]] franchise condemned Rowling's comments;<ref name=Waterson2020>{{Cite news|last= Waterson |first= Jim|title= Children's news website apologises to JK Rowling over trans tweet row|url= https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/jul/23/childrens-news-website-apologises-jk-rowling-trans-tweet-day|date= 23 July 2020 |access-date=26 March 2022|work=[[The Guardian]] |quote= Rowling's comments on gender were condemned by LGBT charities and the leading stars of her Harry Potter film franchise.}}</ref><ref name=Lang2020>{{cite magazine |last=Lang |first=Brent |title= Eddie Redmayne criticizes J.K. Rowling's anti-trans tweets |date= 10 June 2020 |url= https://variety.com/2020/film/news/eddie-redmayne-jk-rowling-anti-trans-tweets-harry-potter-fantastic-beasts-1234630226/ |magazine= [[Variety (magazine)|Variety]]|access-date=28 March 2022 |quote= Eddie Redmayne, star of the ''Fantastic Beasts'' franchise, is speaking out against J.K. Rowling's anti-trans tweets, as the controversy surrounding the author and her beliefs continues to swirl.}}</ref>{{efn| [[Daniel Radcliffe]], [[Emma Watson]], [[Rupert Grint]],<ref name= Hibberd2021/> [[Eddie Redmayne]]<ref name=Lang2020/> and others expressed support for the transgender community in reaction to Rowling's comments;<ref>{{cite magazine |first= Maureen |last= Lenker|title= Every Harry Potter actor who's spoken out against J.K. Rowling's controversial trans comments |date= 10 June 2020 |access-date= 1 April 2022 |magazine= [[Entertainment Weekly]]|url=https://ew.com/movies/every-harry-potter-actor-whos-spoken-out-against-j-k-rowlings-controversial-transgender-comments/ }}</ref><ref>{{cite news |first= Maggie |last= Baska|title= Stephen Fry defends 'friendship' with JK Rowling: 'I'm sorry that people are upset' |date= 20 May 2021 |url= https://www.pinknews.co.uk/2021/05/20/stephen-fry-jk-rowling-friend-harry-potter-jordan-b-peterson-podcast-trans/ |publisher= [[PinkNews]] |access-date= 29 March 2022}}</ref> [[Helena Bonham Carter]],<ref name=Evans2022> {{cite news |first= Greg |last= Evans |url= https://deadline.com/2022/11/helena-bonham-carter-johnny-depp-j-k-rowling-1235182523/ |title= Helena Bonham Carter says Johnny Depp 'completely vindicated' in defamation trial, and J.K. Rowling 'hounded' for transgender stance |work= [[Deadline Hollywood]] |access-date= 18 December 2022}}</ref> [[Robbie Coltrane]],<ref>{{cite news |last= Yasharoff |first= Hannah |title= How the 'Harry Potter' reunion addresses author J.K. Rowling's anti-trans controversy |date= 30 December 2021|url= https://www.usatoday.com/story/entertainment/movies/2021/12/30/harry-potter-return-hogwarts-20th-reunion-emma-watson-jk-rowling-controversy/9042955002/ |work= [[USA Today]] |access-date= 2 April 2022}}</ref> and [[Ralph Fiennes]] supported Rowling.<ref name= Hibberd2021>{{cite news |first= James |last= Hibberd |url= https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-news/ralph-fiennes-defends-j-k-rowling-amid-trans-controversy-says-backlash-is-disturbing-4151944/ |title= Ralph Fiennes defends J.K. rowling amid trans controversy, says backlash is 'disturbing' |date= 17 March 2021 |access-date=26 March 2022 |work= [[The Hollywood Reporter]]}}</ref>}} [[GLAAD]] called them "cruel" and "inaccurate".<ref name= Yasharoff2020> {{cite news |last= Yasharoff |first=Hannah|url= https://www.usatoday.com/story/entertainment/celebrities/2020/06/07/j-k-rowling-harry-potter-author-slammed-transphobic-comments/3169833001/ |title= J.K. Rowling reveals she's a sexual assault survivor; Emma Watson reacts to trans comments |work= [[USA Today]] |date= 10 June 2020 |access-date= 27 March 2022}}</ref> Rowling responded with an essay on her website<ref name=RowlingReasons>{{cite web|title=J.K. Rowling writes about her reasons for speaking out on sex and gender issues |url=https://www.jkrowling.com/opinions/j-k-rowling-writes-about-her-reasons-for-speaking-out-on-sex-and-gender-issues/ |publisher=JK Rowling |date=10 June 2020 |access-date=10 June 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200610182056/https://www.jkrowling.com/opinions/j-k-rowling-writes-about-her-reasons-for-speaking-out-on-sex-and-gender-issues/ |archive-date=10 June 2020 |url-status=live}}</ref> in which she revealed that her views on women's rights were informed by her experience as a survivor of domestic abuse and [[sexual assault]].<ref name=Shirbon2020>{{cite news |last1=Shirbon |first1=Estelle |title=J.K. Rowling reveals past abuse and defends right to speak on trans issues |url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-rowling/j-k-rowling-reveals-past-abuse-and-defends-right-to-speak-on-trans-issues-idUSKBN23H2XI |publisher=[[Reuters]] |date=10 June 2020 |access-date=13 June 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200611200348/https://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-rowling/j-k-rowling-reveals-past-abuse-and-defends-right-to-speak-on-trans-issues-idUSKBN23H2XI |archive-date=11 June 2020 |url-status=live}}</ref> While affirming that "the majority of trans-identified people not only pose zero threat to others, but are vulnerable ... Trans people need and deserve protection", she believed that it would be unsafe to allow "any man who believes or feels he's a woman" into bathrooms or changing rooms.<ref name= Shirbon2020/><ref>{{cite news |last1=Gonzalez |first1=Sandra |title=J.K. Rowling explains her gender identity views in essay amid backlash |url=https://edition.cnn.com/2020/06/10/entertainment/jk-rowling/index.html |access-date=16 September 2023 |work=[[CNN]] |date=10 June 2020}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |last1=Garrand |first1=Danielle |title= J.K. Rowling defends herself after accusations of making "anti-trans" comments on Twitter |url=https://www.cbsnews.com/news/j-k-rowling-defends-anti-trans-comments-twitter/ |access-date=16 September 2023 |work=[[CBS News]] |date=11 June 2020}}</ref> Writing of her own experiences with [[sexism]] and [[misogyny]],<ref>{{cite news |first= Sian |last= Cain |date= 11 June 2020 |title= JK Rowling reveals she is survivor of domestic abuse and sexual assault |url= https://www.theguardian.com/books/2020/jun/10/jk-rowling-says-survivor-of-domestic-abuse-sexual-assault |work= [[The Guardian]] |access-date= 29 March 2022}}</ref> she wondered if the "allure of escaping womanhood" would have led her to [[Gender transitioning|transition]] if she had been born later, and said that trans activism was "seeking to erode 'woman' as a political and biological class".<ref name=DAlessandro2020>{{cite news |last=D'Alessandro |first=Anthony |title=J.K. Rowling defends trans statements in lengthy essay, reveals she's a sexual assault survivor & says 'trans people need and deserve protection' |url=https://deadline.com/2020/06/j-k-rowling-defends-trans-statements-essay-1202955524/ |access-date=5 January 2022 |work=[[Deadline Hollywood]] |date=10 June 2020}}</ref> |
|||
===References for above quotes=== |
|||
{{cot|title= References}} |
|||
{{reflist-talk}} |
|||
* {{cite book |first1=Tatiana |last1=Schwirblat|first2=Karen |last2=Freberg |first3=Laura |last3=Freberg |year=2022 |chapter= Chapter 21: Cancel culture: a career vulture amongst influencers on social media |editor1-last=Lipschultz |editor1-first= Jeremy Harris |editor2-last=Freberg |editor2-first= Karen |editor3-last=Luttrell |editor3-first= Regina|title= The Emerald Handbook of Computer-Mediated Communication and Social Media |publisher= [[Emerald Group Publishing|Emerald Publishing Limited]] |doi=10.1108/978-1-80071-597-420221021|isbn=978-1800715981}} |
|||
* {{cite conference |last=Qiao |first=Leshui |title=Mainland China's TERFs' Misogyny Under JK Rowling's Anti-trans Incident |book-title=Proceedings of the 2022 8th International Conference on Humanities and Social Science Research (ICHSSR 2022) |publisher=Atlantis Press |date=1 June 2022 |pages=1322–1326 |isbn=978-94-6239-580-0 |doi=10.2991/assehr.k.220504.238|doi-access=free }} |
|||
{{cob}} |
|||
Rowling's continual statements – beginning in 2017{{sfn|Duggan|2021|loc=PDF pp. 14–15 (160–161)}}<ref name= Jacobs2023>{{cite news |last= Jacobs |first= Julia |title= Hogwarts legacy can't cast aside debate over J. K. Rowling |url= https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/09/arts/hogwarts-legacy-jk-rowling.html |date= 9 February 2023 |work = [[The New York Times]] |access-date= 14 July 2023}}</ref><ref name= Spangler2023>{{cite news |last= Spangler|first= Todd |title= J.K. Rowling addresses backlash to her anti-trans comments in new podcast: 'I never set out to upset anyone' |url= https://variety.com/2023/digital/news/jk-rowling-anti-trans-comments-podcast-witch-trials-1235522301/ |date= 14 February 2023|work= [[Variety (magazine)|Variety]]|access-date= 14 July 2023}}</ref> – have been called transphobic by critics<ref name= Breznican2023>{{cite news |last= Breznican |first= Anthony |title= J.K. Rowling will oversee a new streaming ''Harry Potter'' series |url= https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2023/04/jk-rowling-harry-potter-series|date= 12 April 2023 |work= [[Vanity Fair (magazine)|Vanity Fair]] |access-date= 14 July 2023}}</ref><ref name=Rosenblatt2020>{{Cite web|last = Rosenblatt| first =Kalhan |title=J.K. Rowling doubles down in what some critics call a 'transphobic manifesto' |url= https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/j-k-rowling-doubles-down-what-some-critics-call-transphobic-n1229351|date= 10 June 2020 |access-date=19 January 2022|publisher=[[NBC News]] }}</ref> and she has been referred to as a [[TERF (acronym)|TERF]].<ref name= Rosenblatt2020/>{{sfn|Steinfeld|2020|pp=34–35}}{{sfn|Schwirblat|Freberg|Freberg|2022|pp=367–368}} She rejects these characterisations and the notion that she holds animosity towards transgender people, saying that her viewpoint has been misunderstood.<ref name=RowlingReasons/><ref name= Breznican2023/><ref name= Spangler2023/> Criticism of Rowling's views has come from the ''Harry Potter'' fansites [[MuggleNet]] and [[The Leaky Cauldron (website)|The Leaky Cauldron]];<ref name=FanSites>{{cite news|url=https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jul/03/harry-potter-fan-sites-distance-themselves-from-jk-rowling-over-transgender-rights|title=Harry Potter fan sites distance themselves from JK Rowling over transgender rights|publisher=[[Reuters]]|work=[[The Guardian]]|date=3 July 2020|access-date=3 July 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200703011204/https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jul/03/harry-potter-fan-sites-distance-themselves-from-jk-rowling-over-transgender-rights|archive-date=3 July 2020|url-status=live}}</ref> and the charities [[Mermaids (charity)|Mermaids]],<ref name=Petter2020/> [[Stonewall (charity)|Stonewall]],<ref>{{cite news | url=https://www.newstatesman.com/long-reads/2021/11/the-battle-for-stonewall-the-lgbt-charity-and-the-uks-gender-wars | title=The battle for Stonewall: the LGBT charity and the UK's gender wars | work=[[New Statesman]]|first=Gaby |last=Hinsliff|date=3 November 2021 | access-date=24 November 2021}}</ref> and [[Human Rights Campaign]].<ref>{{cite news |first= Elise |last= Brisco |title=Dave Chappelle says he's 'Team TERF,' defends J.K. Rowling in new Netflix comedy special|url= https://www.usatoday.com/story/entertainment/tv/2021/10/05/dave-chappelle-terf-defends-j-k-rowling-netflix-special/6002017001/ |work= [[USA Today]] |date= 8 October 2021|access-date= 29 March 2022}}</ref> After [[Kerry Kennedy]] expressed "profound disappointment" in her views, Rowling returned the [[Ripple of Hope Award]] given to her by the Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights organisation.<ref name=RFKAward>{{cite news |last=Flood|first=Alison |url= https://amp.theguardian.com/books/2020/aug/28/jk-rowling-robert-f-kennedy-human-rights-award-trans-views|title=JK Rowling returns human rights award to group that denounces her trans views |work=[[The Guardian]]|date=28 August 2020|access-date=28 August 2020}}</ref> |
|||
== Featured article review == |
|||
As Rowling's views on the [[legal status of transgender people]] came under scrutiny,{{sfn|Suissa|Sullivan|2021|pp=66–69}} she received insults and death threats{{sfn|Suissa|Sullivan|2021|p=69}}{{sfn|Qiao|2022|p=1323}} and discussion moved beyond the Twitter community.{{sfn|Schwirblat|Freberg|Freberg|2022|p=368}} Some performers and feminists have supported her.{{sfn|Schwirblat|Freberg|Freberg|2022|p=368}}<ref> Supporting Rowling: |
|||
I think that this talk page raises a lot of questions about the featured status of this article. As such, I've raised the point at [[Wikipedia:Featured article review/J. K. Rowling/archive2]] <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.118em 0.118em 0.118em; class=texhtml">'''[[User:Adam Cuerden|Adam Cuerden]]''' <sup>([[User talk:Adam Cuerden|talk]])</sup><sub>Has about 8.9% of all [[WP:FP|FPs]].</sub></span> 17:27, 2 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
* [[Ayaan Hirsi Ali]]: {{cite news |first=Katie |last=Law |date= 15 October 2020|title= JK Rowling and the bitter battle of the book world |url=https://www.standard.co.uk/culture/books/trans-battle-book-world-jk-rowling-a4571221.html |work= [[Evening Standard]] |access-date=27 March 2022|ref=none}} |
|||
* [[Allison Bailey]]: {{cite news |url= https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/maya-forstater-transgender-twitter-jk-rowling-b1838151.html |title= Maya Forstater: who is woman in employment tribunal over transgender comments? |first= Sam |last= Hancock |date= 27 April 2021 |work= [[The Independent]] |access-date= 27 March 2022|archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20210427131430/https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/maya-forstater-transgender-twitter-jk-rowling-b1838151.html |archive-date= 27 April 2021 |quote= criminal defence barrister Allison Bailey – known for launching legal action against LGBT+ rights charity Stonewall over its attempt to have her investigated for setting up the anti-trans rights group LGB Alliance – has also been a vocal supporter of Ms Forstater.|ref=none}} |
|||
* [[Julie Bindel]]: {{cite news |last1=Thorpe |first1=Vanessa |title=JK Rowling: from magic to the heart of a Twitter storm |url=https://www.theguardian.com/books/2020/jun/14/jk-rowling-from-magic-to-the-heart-of-a-twitter-storm |work=[[The Guardian]] |date=14 June 2020 |quote=Arrayed on Rowling's side are some of the veteran voices of feminism, including the radical Julie Bindel, who spoke out in support this weekend |access-date=6 July 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200704200412/https://www.theguardian.com/books/2020/jun/14/jk-rowling-from-magic-to-the-heart-of-a-twitter-storm |archive-date=4 July 2020 |url-status=live|ref=none}} |
|||
* [[Dave Chappelle]]: {{Cite news |first= Maya |last=Yang|date=7 October 2021|title='I'm team Terf': Dave Chappelle under fire over pro-JK Rowling trans stance|url=https://www.theguardian.com/stage/2021/oct/07/dave-chappelle-transgender-netflix-special-backlash|access-date=27 March 2022|work=[[The Guardian]]|ref=none}} |
|||
* [[Dana International]]: {{cite news |last1=Shirbon |first1=Estelle |title=J.K. Rowling reveals past abuse and defends right to speak on trans issues |url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-rowling/j-k-rowling-reveals-past-abuse-and-defends-right-to-speak-on-trans-issues-idUSKBN23H2XI |publisher=[[Reuters]] |date=10 June 2020 |access-date=13 June 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200611200348/https://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-rowling/j-k-rowling-reveals-past-abuse-and-defends-right-to-speak-on-trans-issues-idUSKBN23H2XI |archive-date=11 June 2020 |url-status=live|ref=none}} |
|||
* [[Eddie Izzard]]: {{cite news |title='I don't think JK Rowling is transphobic,' says gender-fluid comedian Eddie Izzard |url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/comedy/what-to-see/dont-think-jk-rowling-transphobic-says-gender-fluid-comedian/ |archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20220110/https://www.telegraph.co.uk/comedy/what-to-see/dont-think-jk-rowling-transphobic-says-gender-fluid-comedian/ |archive-date=10 January 2022 |url-access=subscription |url-status=live |access-date=27 November 2021 |work=[[The Daily Telegraph]]|date=1 January 2021|ref=none}}{{cbignore}} |
|||
* [[Kathleen Stock]], [[Alison Moyet]]: {{cite news |url= https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-53002557 |publisher= [[BBC News]] |title= JK Rowling responds to trans tweets criticism |date= 11 June 2020 |access-date= 29 March 2022}}</ref> Figures from the arts world criticised "hate speech directed against her".<ref name= Flockhart2020>{{cite news |last= Flockhart |first= Gary |date= 28 September 2020 |access-date= 2 April 2022 |work = [[The Scotsman]] |title= JK Rowling receives support from Ian McEwan and Frances Barber amid 'transphobia' row|url= https://www.scotsman.com/news/people/jk-rowling-receives-support-from-ian-mcewan-and-frances-barber-amid-transphobia-row-2986268|ref=none}}</ref> |
|||
|} |
|||
'''Sources''' |
|||
:Yeah... [[User:LegalSmeagolian|LegalSmeagolian]] ([[User talk:LegalSmeagolian|talk]]) 19:14, 2 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
{{cot|Sources}} |
|||
::Please read the instructions at [[WP:FAR]]; you should have stated that weeks before you lodged the FAR. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 23:41, 2 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
{{reflist-talk}} |
|||
<small>Moved from FAR. [[User:Nikkimaria|Nikkimaria]] ([[User talk:Nikkimaria|talk]]) 23:40, 2 April 2024 (UTC)</small> |
|||
{{notelist-talk}} |
|||
{{cob}} |
|||
===Discussion=== |
|||
I am nominating this featured article for review because I think there are severe, severe issues with its handling of her transphobic views. Literally every section of the talk page is on this article's problems with handling them. |
|||
:Is that meant to be titled as Draft 6.3, or is it a mistake? [[User:Alpha2 5232|Alpha2 5232]] ([[User talk:Alpha2 5232|talk]]) 16:49, 9 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
The article focuses on the situation in 2020, when she's had ample coverage in the last year for ever-increasing anti-trans activity. The [[India Willoughby]] incident earlier this year, the [https://www.salon.com/2024/03/15/jk-rowling-trans-nazis-holocaust-denial/ Holocaust denial], and the widely-reported stunt attacking trans people's existence and Scottish hate speech rules this week (e.g. [https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c51j64lk2l8o]) and many other things have resulted in a situation where pretty much all coverage of late is on her attacks on trans people, and yet, we have a kind of wishy-washy coverage of it, buried deep in the article. |
|||
::Fixed.—[[User:S Marshall|<b style="font-family: Verdana; color: Maroon;">S Marshall</b>]] <small>[[User talk:S Marshall|T]]/[[Special:Contributions/S Marshall|C]]</small> 17:42, 9 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::Busy for the rest of today, but I should be able to enter my commentary (as promised weeks ago), by tomorrow. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 19:41, 9 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::PS, [https://www.thebookseller.com/rights/constable-to-publish-essays-on-scottish-womens-campaign-featuring-j-k-rowling this might provide an updated source] to replace her website essay. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 19:56, 9 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:{{u|S Marshall}}, thanks for doing this & huge apologies for being awol (there's another article where I'm in over my head & my time for Wikipedia keeps shrinking). A couple of comments to get started: |
|||
Editing can fix that, but the sources that came up while going into this are very odd. Take [https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10125585/1/Suissa_1467-9752.12549.pdf Suissa and Sullivan], an odd paper that A. does not actually support some of the text it was meant to support - it was meant to support Rowling receiving death threats, but there is no comment on that in the article - and secondly, is a very strange paper. Page 69 of it, in the text primarily used from the source to justify claims, reads: |
|||
:*I have some as-yet-very-muddy-thoughts about the first sentence & the phrase [[Gender-critical feminism|gender-critical]] so I'll try to flesh those out later. |
|||
:*Minor point, but there's some repetition of "She, she, she" in the first para that needs wordsmithing. |
|||
:*For people with no clue, have been wondering whether we should try working in a link to [[Forstater v Centre for Global Development Europe]] |
|||
:*"affected her reputation" should be cited to Whited page 8 |
|||
:*Good to see the draft less wordy; I'm wondering how others feel about putting back the sentence "Her statements have divided feminists... etc., etc." that's in the historical draft? The end of that sentence mentions includes " "lived reality" would be "erased" if "sex isn't real", which is another way of saying sex is immutable. Should that be clarified? |
|||
:That's it for now. [[User:Victoriaearle|Victoria]] ([[User talk:Victoriaearle|tk]]) 20:57, 14 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*In draft 7.1, I've attempted to address points #2, #3 and #4 that you raise, and I await further input on #1 and #5.—[[User:S Marshall|<b style="font-family: Verdana; color: Maroon;">S Marshall</b>]] <small>[[User talk:S Marshall|T]]/[[Special:Contributions/S Marshall|C]]</small> 21:55, 14 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
{{cquote|Yet, we have been shocked by the outpouring of hatred directed at women, typically accompanied by the term ‘TERF’, effectively used as a replacement for epithets such as ‘witch’, ‘bitch’ or ‘cunt’ see Cameron, 2016). The treatment of J.K. Rowling, subjected to a tidal wave of requests to ‘choke on a basket of dicks’ and similar, in response to a strikingly thoughtful and empathetic essay, is simply the highest profile case of a commonplace phenomenon (Leng, 2020; Rowling, 2020). Rowling’s intervention was prompted by the fact that women who speak publicly on these issues face campaigns of harassment, including attempts to get them fired.}} |
|||
**Much appreciated! Agreed that input from others is needed. <s>Just to spin my thoughts out a bit more. Re the first sentence, I've realized that one reason it's been bugging me is that the term [[Gender-critical feminism|gender-critical]] may mean something very different in the US than in the UK. Recently I read an article about someone running for congress whose opinions about women are, shall we say, a bit archaic. Beyond that this person claims the LGBQT+ movement was created by radical feminists. So we need to be clear in terms of where links are going & what exactly we mean for a global audience.</s>{{pb}}Regarding the sentence in the historical draft, which begins with ""Her statements have divided feminists... etc., etc." ... it occurred to me the newish literature address these debates & so those points should be made. Also I've not had time for a full examination of the essays in Whited ({{Project Muse|111748|type=book}}} or Konchar Farr {{{Project MUSE|99615|type=book}}), which in my view needs to be done. Anyway, let's see what the others say. [[User:Victoriaearle|Victoria]] ([[User talk:Victoriaearle|tk]]) 23:36, 15 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
***Yes. On the wildest, most far-flung fringes of the US right, there lurk certain characters who do indeed like to burst out of their swamps, yell things like "the LGBTQ+ movement was created by radical feminists!" and then slide back into the mire, waiting for the next gloriously unhinged thought to turn up. Like you, I'm often refreshed and challenged by their {{abbr|unique perspectives|delusions}} and their {{abbr|idiosyncratic ways of putting things|lies}}. I think my personal favourite is "blame the gun". Presumably someone who thinks you shouldn't be allowed to drive without a driving licence is "blaming the car".{{pb}}I don't think we can use language the way those people do, and I also don't think we should be trying. Conservapedia is thataway ----->. I feel that as encyclopaedists, it's our task to summarize things in simple and clear terms, even (especially!) when the things we're trying to summarize are complex and difficult; and we should use normal, natural language in its usual meaning; and, despite what the US right might think, it's quite possible to be supportive and tolerant of gay and lesbian people, but intolerant of trans people; and that J.K. Rowling ''is''; and that "gender-critical" is succinct, accurate, and neutral. It's not a pejorative.{{pb}}But I can see that "gender-critical" is an uncomfortable thing to say about someone. Even though it's not a pejorative, it's a pungent term. It reeks of repression and segregation and prejudice. It's scrupulously accurate, though.—[[User:S Marshall|<b style="font-family: Verdana; color: Maroon;">S Marshall</b>]] <small>[[User talk:S Marshall|T]]/[[Special:Contributions/S Marshall|C]]</small> 09:09, 16 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
****I knew I wouldn't be able to make myself clear & that's why I have trouble engaging here. Being told to go off to Conservapedia doesn't want me to engage. To try to clarify: can we not just say she's a [[Gender-critical feminism|Gender-critical feminist]] whose views align with Maya Forstater (i.e the #IStandWithMaya tweet) & then tell readers who don't know (or who do know) those views are x, y and z (including that they believe sex is immutable). I think we're close. So just ignore me. [[User:Victoriaearle|Victoria]] ([[User talk:Victoriaearle|tk]]) 14:15, 16 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
****:[[User:Victoriaearle|@Victoriaearle]] If we call J.K. Rowling a gender-critical feminist in the article, do we need to clarify what that means? Surely the page it would link to would give people an idea of what those views are without having to reclarify here? [[User:Alpha2 5232|Alpha2 5232]] ([[User talk:Alpha2 5232|talk]]) 14:42, 16 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
****::Yes, I think we should because this is her biography & the article is about her. But I need to step away to refamiliarize myself with the sources & don't have time for that at the moment. [[User:Victoriaearle|Victoria]] ([[User talk:Victoriaearle|tk]]) 16:45, 16 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
****:::My thought is this: J.K. Rowling uses the term herself, e.g. [https://www.jkrowling.com/opinions/j-k-rowling-writes-about-her-reasons-for-speaking-out-on-sex-and-gender-issues/ here]. I think we can safely call her gender critical - ideally with an explanation - because it's language she seems to accept as a description of the group she belongs to anyway. <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.118em 0.118em 0.118em; class=texhtml">'''[[User:Adam Cuerden|Adam Cuerden]]''' <sup>([[User talk:Adam Cuerden|talk]])</sup><sub>Has about 8.8% of all [[WP:FP|FPs]].</sub></span> 13:46, 20 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
****::::Basically I was only wondering if we needed to gloss the term & failed to explain myself at all well. Stricken a bunch above. [[User:Victoriaearle|Victoria]] ([[User talk:Victoriaearle|tk]]) 15:58, 20 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
****:::::I have been stalled by real life matters on coming back to this, but I'm concerned that the process is not engaging [[WP:WIAFA]] 1c; yes, we're updating to Whited, which is a good thing, but that's only one high quality recent source, and it's not apparent whether we're working towards a "thorough and representative survey of the relevant literature". Instead, we seem to be working towards preferences of individual editors, which won't render this in compliance with FA standards. {{pb}} I don't have easy/full journal access, so can only access that which is freely available, but that (limited) survey continues to support the most NOT-NEWSY, NOT-RECENTISM, and likely to endure statement that was once in the article, and is mentioned by Victoriaearle at 23:56 June 15: {{tq|"Regarding the sentence in the historical draft, which begins with 'Her statements have divided feminists... etc., etc.' ... it occurred to me the newish literature address these debates & so those points should be made." }} {{pb}} I've been hoping the other FA writers of the FAR version would find time and inclination to weigh in here so we could address the WIAFA issues, including any updates needed to the literary portions of the article based on Whited and more, but I don't feel like I should ping them again. {{pb}} I have other (more minor) concerns about the draft, but if we aren't working towards meeting WIAFA, I'm unsure what the value of time spent here is ... so I haven't yet spelled those out. Ideas ?? Most certainly, that one deleted sentence is warranted by what I can access as a survey of the relevant literature (scholarly articles restricted to 2024), and is likely the most enduring of the section, so I hope it comes back with updated citations. Regards, [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 18:52, 20 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
****::::::With all respect, you seem to be objecting to change by holding standards that ''are not apparent in the original version of the section'', which, if anything, is far worse. If this fails WIAFA after the changes, it fails it without the changes. <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.118em 0.118em 0.118em; class=texhtml">'''[[User:Adam Cuerden|Adam Cuerden]]''' <sup>([[User talk:Adam Cuerden|talk]])</sup><sub>Has about 8.8% of all [[WP:FP|FPs]].</sub></span> 21:53, 20 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
****:::::::I (and others) have explained several times that the FAR was constrained by the results of a very recent, and very well attended, RFC, and that all acknowledged we would have to revisit after some time had elapsed from that RFC ... so I won't repeat all of that again. Please do reread the archives of discussions already had with you. Now that we ''are'' revisiting, we should be keeping WIAFA in mind. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 22:32, 20 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
****::::::::From a high quality sourcing point-of-view, I'm not convinced there's enough yet to revisit. The search function at the top of the page of [https://wikipedialibrary.wmflabs.org/users/my_library/ The Wikipedia Library] goes to Ebscohost. If sorted by newest the first page shows results only from ''Daily Mail'', ''Daily Telegraph'', ''Hollywood Reporter'', ''Business Wire'', ''USA Today'', and so forth. Sorting by "peer reviewed" does show much and nothing I'm seeing that can be used, on a quick perusal. That said, anyone can search there. Whited is a start, but not much of a start & only published a few months ago. Waiting is not the worst option; agree that the understanding was that the section would be rewritten when high quality sources come available. [[User:Victoriaearle|Victoria]] ([[User talk:Victoriaearle|tk]]) 23:33, 20 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*I believe the draft as written constitutes a considerable improvement on the current text. I'm certain it can be improved further, but we ought not to let the perfect be the enemy of the good. I do think the sentence beginning "Rowling rejects these characterizations..." needs some reworking specifically because we've lost the reader on what those characterizations might be. I'm also not certain the statement is broadly true; she denies being transphobic, and rejects the "TERF" label (though nobody really embraces it, do they?), but if there's evidence she rejects "gender critical", I've yet to see it. I'm also noting I don't have time to engage deeply here. [[User:Vanamonde93|Vanamonde93]] ([[User talk:Vanamonde93|talk]]) 01:55, 22 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
====Her statements have divided feminists...==== |
|||
I mean, that might have somehow gotten published in an academic journal, but is this really a source we should even fathom using for a neutral summary of a situation? Also, every single source on this used in the article is out of date, the ''most recent'' sources are from 2022, but they mostly date to the very early period in 2020-21 of the situation. One can't very well cite people defending relatively mild comments in 2020 as an ongoing defense as her rhetoric increases. |
|||
This sentence was cut because: |
|||
*It's not about J.K. Rowling's views; and |
|||
*There was pressure to cut the word count. |
|||
I don't object to restoring it if we feel the extra words are justified in the circumstances.—[[User:S Marshall|<b style="font-family: Verdana; color: Maroon;">S Marshall</b>]] <small>[[User talk:S Marshall|T]]/[[Special:Contributions/S Marshall|C]]</small> 07:09, 21 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
: The proposed word count now (400-ish) is approaching 10% less than what was in the article historically (430-ish); IIRC, any pressure to reduce the word count was when the section on transgender rights was hovering around or at times above 475 words (eg [[Talk:J._K._Rowling/Archive_19#Third_draft_(3.2)|here]], although I think at one point we were near 500). I propose we have room to bring back one sentence, but that if we did, it could be updated and cited to newer scholarly sources. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 12:23, 21 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
It's possible that Wikipedia can't currently cover Rowling well. Perhaps the sources aren't there, or the situation is developing too fast. But if that's true, we can't have [[J.K. Rowling]] as a featured article until they do. And at the very least, this article needs a very thorough source review. <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.118em 0.118em 0.118em; class=texhtml">'''[[User:Adam Cuerden|Adam Cuerden]]''' <sup>([[User talk:Adam Cuerden|talk]])</sup><sub>Has about 8.9% of all [[WP:FP|FPs]].</sub></span> 16:57, 2 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
: {{u|Bastun}} re [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:J._K._Rowling&diff=prev&oldid=1230207962 this edit], [[WP:WIAFA]] is linked in the discussion just above this one. It stands for What Is A Featured Article, also abbreviated as [[WP:FACR]], Featured Article Criteria. It is separate from [[WP:FAR|Featured Article Review]]; it is not clear to me that {{u|S Marshall}} was suggesting (yet) that we need a trip to FAR. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 12:23, 21 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::Given the sources for the "divided feminists" sentence are 2019 and 2020, I don't think this should be used without very explicitly putting some context as to WHEN feminists were divided. Though the sourcing then adds additional problems: |
|||
::* [https://edition.cnn.com/2019/12/20/uk/jk-rowling-transgender-explainer-intl-gbr/index.html one source] is ''explicitly'' about her comments on Maya Forstater. It'd be a great source to use in the context of Forstater, but not to use as if it applied to anything else Rowling said. It's also pretty clearly the main source for the statement; neither of the other two have "feminists divided" as a clear reading. |
|||
::* One source is [https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-53002557 just probably not very good]: A single tweet by (non-academic) blogger Claire Heuchan is literally the only evidence of feminists supporting Rowling presented. |
|||
::* The third source is... [https://www.newstatesman.com/long-reads/2020/09/judith-butler-culture-wars-jk-rowling-living-anti-intellectual-times honestly a great article by Judith Butler], but she explicitly says "...I find it worrisome that suddenly the trans-exclusionary radical feminist position is understood as commonly accepted or even mainstream. I think it is actually a fringe movement that is seeking to speak in the name of the mainstream, and that our responsibility is to refuse to let that happen." A source that says gender critical is [[WP:FRINGE]] is a poor source to use for a statement that presents the views as equal within feminism. |
|||
::---- |
|||
::So... aye. I'd probably say that, without modern, mainstream sources talking about a division in feminism, that sentence is dead in the water. And, let's face it: Even if we did find sources, if we kept the text exactly the same, then we wouldn't be summarising modern sources, we'd be using a summary of a source about the reaction to her commentary on Maya Forstater, treating it as if it covered all Rowling's comments since then, and retrofitting sources onto it) <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.118em 0.118em 0.118em; class=texhtml">'''[[User:Adam Cuerden|Adam Cuerden]]''' <sup>([[User talk:Adam Cuerden|talk]])</sup><sub>Has about 8.8% of all [[WP:FP|FPs]].</sub></span> 05:28, 22 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::Well, this is straightforward. Her statements haven't so much divided feminists, but rather, feminists were ''already'' divided on trans issues, and they've split on Rowling according to tribal lines. Those feminists who're gender-critical like Rowling and those who're gender-inclusive dislike her. Her statements have certainly prompted debate about cancel culture and freedom of speech, and they've certainly given rise to declarations of support for trans people from various actors and pressure groups. Nobody who's read the sources could possibly deny any of that, could they?—[[User:S Marshall|<b style="font-family: Verdana; color: Maroon;">S Marshall</b>]] <small>[[User talk:S Marshall|T]]/[[Special:Contributions/S Marshall|C]]</small> 23:53, 22 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::I mean, I'm only commenting on that one sentence (as written) and its poor sourcing. I don't disagree with what you just said, but what you just said explicitly rejects the statement I'm commenting on, and what you said, that already gender critical / TERF people supported her, is sky-is-blue stuff that probably doesn't need said. <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.118em 0.118em 0.118em; class=texhtml">'''[[User:Adam Cuerden|Adam Cuerden]]''' <sup>([[User talk:Adam Cuerden|talk]])</sup><sub>Has about 8.8% of all [[WP:FP|FPs]].</sub></span> 00:50, 23 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::Probably does need to be said, though, doesn't it. We're an encyclopaedia. Imagine we're writing for an intelligent and curious, but totally uninformed, teenager from a village in rural India. If you want reliable/recent sources for this stuff, you don't need to look further than the BBC, which has published so many pieces about J.K. Rowling that she has her own dedicated topic page, at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/topics/c50znx8v82dt.—[[User:S Marshall|<b style="font-family: Verdana; color: Maroon;">S Marshall</b>]] <small>[[User talk:S Marshall|T]]/[[Special:Contributions/S Marshall|C]]</small> 01:08, 23 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
====Wikipedia Featured article criteria (WIAFA)==== |
|||
:'''Support FAR''' - article as a whole needs a serious rework, lots of stuff on there is not [[WP:DUE]]. [[User:LegalSmeagolian|LegalSmeagolian]] ([[User talk:LegalSmeagolian|talk]]) 19:15, 2 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
Without changes to this section the article is outdated. Without the proposed changes it represents a historical version of what J.K. Rowling is famous for, and it's consequently drawing attention from people who want to update it piecemeal. A wholesale rewrite from the best sources available is the least bad option.—[[User:S Marshall|<b style="font-family: Verdana; color: Maroon;">S Marshall</b>]] <small>[[User talk:S Marshall|T]]/[[Special:Contributions/S Marshall|C]]</small> 07:09, 21 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
<span style="text-shadow:grey 0.118em 0.118em 0.118em; class=texhtml">'''[[User:Adam Cuerden|Adam Cuerden]]''' <sup>([[User talk:Adam Cuerden|talk]])</sup><sub>Has about 8. |
:Agreed. Choosing to not update it is basically saying this article should not be an FA. If we're not going to do the best job we can with it, then it's not featurable. <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.118em 0.118em 0.118em; class=texhtml">'''[[User:Adam Cuerden|Adam Cuerden]]''' <sup>([[User talk:Adam Cuerden|talk]])</sup><sub>Has about 8.8% of all [[WP:FP|FPs]].</sub></span> 22:12, 21 June 2024 (UTC) |
||
::As it happens, I agree with S Marshall. But I also understand the urge to swap newer sources for those the FA writers used some years ago. I wasn't one of the contributors (except maybe a little around the edges) and tapped out with Wikipedia atm. To keep the process on track, do you have any comments to make regarding S Marshall's most recent draft, {{u|Adam Cuerden}}? That's how we keep going. [[User:Victoriaearle|Victoria]] ([[User talk:Victoriaearle|tk]]) 22:54, 21 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::I'm fairly happy with it. I'm just not happy with - and forgive me if I'm misunderstanding - SandyGeorgia's suggestion that we change nothing, and go back to the section as is. |
|||
:::There's bits to argue. I think "She resists proposed changes to UK law that would make it simpler to transition without a medical diagnosis. Rowling is concerned that easier transitions could affect access to female-only spaces and legal protections for women" is absolutely redundant to the clearer and simpler sentences after it, but less coherently phrased. But that's not the worst objection, is it? <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.118em 0.118em 0.118em; class=texhtml">'''[[User:Adam Cuerden|Adam Cuerden]]''' <sup>([[User talk:Adam Cuerden|talk]])</sup><sub>Has about 8.8% of all [[WP:FP|FPs]].</sub></span> 01:45, 22 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::I guess the bit about female-only spaces might be worth including, but I'd just add it later. Maybe "She opposes gender self-recognition and suggests that children, cisgender women, and female-only spaces are threatened by trans women and trans-positive messages[refs]. Think the "legal protections for women" bit is pretty unclear as to what it means, so - presuming it's not redundant to all the bits on "women's rights" in paragraphs two and four - I'd expand on what legal rights she claims are infringed, and put it in a later paragraph. <small>(It may be that Rowling's never very explicit as to what she means on that; if so... I'd probably be inclined to classify it as mere puffery/sloganing and just leave it out, but if she does say something concrete, then we should say the concrete thing, not summarise to the point of meaninglessness.)</small> |
|||
::::We're losing two sentences of redundancy to do this, after all, so if we need to put one sentence back to cover the subject well, we still have a sentence spare to use for whatever we want. <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.118em 0.118em 0.118em; class=texhtml">'''[[User:Adam Cuerden|Adam Cuerden]]''' <sup>([[User talk:Adam Cuerden|talk]])</sup><sub>Has about 8.8% of all [[WP:FP|FPs]].</sub></span> 04:31, 22 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::Re {{tq|and forgive me if I'm misunderstanding - SandyGeorgia's suggestion that we change nothing, and go back to the section as is}}, yes you are misunderstanding -- I've not said (or meant) that at all. As I stated above, this process has not (yet) fully engaged 1c of [[WP:WIAFA]] by engaging in a "thorough and representative survey of the relevant literature", and as I've mentioned, there are newer and better sources for redrafting that sentence, which I believe to be one of the most FA-worthy parts of the section (that is, what is the lasting effect, beyond JKR triggering every news cycle, and editors then wanting to insert that [[WP:NOTNEWS|NEWS]] here rather than in the sub-article). My apologies for not having time to delineate them, but repeating, if we aren't engaging the FA criteria, and as most of the FA writers who did engage it originally can no longer engage, I'm [[WP:FAR|unsure where we are headed]] if we are going to keep filling the talk page discussions with NEWS and RECENTISM. {{pb}} {{u|Victoriaearle}}, when you stated yesterday that you find little new from your scholarly search to incorporate, were you referring to updating the literary portions of the article, or only the transgender rights section? When I browsed the other day (from the car, so couldn't save the sources), I found indications there is plenty for re-drafting that sentence, although I could only access those that were freely available. I'm relieved to have now heard from VM93, but remain concerned we may not be engaging in an overall way that will lead to retaining FA status. I'm not ready to throw in the towel yet, but it's possible we could get more FA-knowledgeable writers to engage the criteria by in fact going back to FAR, where the off-topic RECENTISM is less likely to overtake the discussions. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 12:47, 22 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::: This characterization of using material from post-2020 as "off-topic RECENTISM" is disputed.—[[User:S Marshall|<b style="font-family: Verdana; color: Maroon;">S Marshall</b>]] <small>[[User talk:S Marshall|T]]/[[Special:Contributions/S Marshall|C]]</small> 13:27, 22 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::Sandy, I probably misunderstood. I wouldn't call my quick dip-stick search at Ebscohost a scholarly search. I thought you were referring to high-quality scholarly vs. news sources re the transgender section - and no, I didn't see anything that we aren't already using (but I didn't go beyond the first page). Even if you can't save, is it possible to capture links? In terms of updating the rest of the article, there's plenty, but as I mentioned Whited is new & generally lit. articles don't get updated within months of a new publication - at least not the ones I steward. It's always good to wait a bit.{{pb}}As far as the sentence in question, I'm not wedded to it. It would be better to keep the process moving, imo.{{pb}}As for as going back to FAR, don't see the need. The only immediate is need an overhaul of the transgender section & given the suggestions overnight think S Marshall's current version is fine. But ... today's article in the Times will need to get incorporated at some point because of the election.[[User:Victoriaearle|Victoria]] ([[User talk:Victoriaearle|tk]]) 14:45, 22 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*'''Close, out of process and unnecessary FAR''', {{ping|Nikkimaria}}. There was no talk page notification, nor is there any need (yet) for a new FAR. FAR is not dispute resolution, and there isn't even yet a serious dispute. There appears to be some content disagreements that are being conducted via esssentially edit warring rather than talk page discussion, but that can be handled via arb enforcement on a contentious topic. I have not been active, but it doesn't appear clear that contentious topic warnings have been consistently issued, or that arb enforcement has been used for the sub-optimal editing. Talk page discussion is the way to resolve the issues in '''one paragraph''' with some content we were stuck with after a very large and well-attended RFC before the last FAR. It may be time to revisit that paragraph, but a FAR is not the way to do that; the article remains very largely at featured standards, and we don't need to re-examine that for one paragraph. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 17:03, 2 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::I'm glad to be wrong. Thanks, Sandy. I think there's a major tension between recentism and outdated here. We need to include some amount of recent content as Rowling's views have pretty clearly moved to more extreme ones, but we also don't want to merely document the most recent three incidents. <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.118em 0.118em 0.118em; class=texhtml">'''[[User:Adam Cuerden|Adam Cuerden]]''' <sup>([[User talk:Adam Cuerden|talk]])</sup><sub>Has about 8.8% of all [[WP:FP|FPs]].</sub></span> 20:09, 22 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::::RE, "the most recent three incidents", that is the tricky part of working on this article (she triggers the news cycle weekly, so how to decide which to include). Re Victoria and S Marshall, when I was browsing from the car, what I meant was that I found plenty of scholar.google sources that could be used to update that sentence and that we don't need to go to news sources -- enough so that the still-relevance of the sentence was shown, which is why I think it the most enduring. The reason I didn't save those I found is that I considered my search (without journal access) incomplete. I could find them again, subject to same constraints, if my real life issues {{em|would ever settle down}} and give me a long-enough break to refocus here (sorry :( . [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 01:16, 23 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*::Please read the instructions at [[WP:FAR]]; there was not a talk page notification or a two- to three-week wait. This is not how FAR is used, and the nomination is out of process. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 23:16, 2 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::To some extent, we don't need to be perfect, as long as we cover fairly typical and/or illuminating events. We're trying to give a flavour of her sort of activity. Ideally, analysis that makes the choices for us would be better, but in the absence of that, we have a little editorial perogative to pick and choose. <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.118em 0.118em 0.118em; class=texhtml">'''[[User:Adam Cuerden|Adam Cuerden]]''' <sup>([[User talk:Adam Cuerden|talk]])</sup><sub>Has about 8.8% of all [[WP:FP|FPs]].</sub></span> 04:06, 23 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*I agree with Adam that there are serious issues with that paragraph, possibly with the rest of the section: and with Sandy that FAR isn't helpful right now. FAR can't sort out the dispute at all, we're still going to need to build consensus on that. The most we can do here is remove the FA designation; but that still won't fix the issue. [[User:Vanamonde93|Vanamonde93]] ([[User talk:Vanamonde93|talk]]) 17:20, 2 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*:I agree removing FA status won't fix the issue, but holding the article up as the pinnacle of articles when it's not very good at covering what Rowling has made a huge part of her subject isn't appropriate. All I see on the talk page is everyone agreeing the whole coverage of the issue has problems. That's literally every section there. <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.118em 0.118em 0.118em; class=texhtml">'''[[User:Adam Cuerden|Adam Cuerden]]''' <sup>([[User talk:Adam Cuerden|talk]])</sup><sub>Has about 8.9% of all [[WP:FP|FPs]].</sub></span> 17:34, 2 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*::While I agree the section has problems, the extent to which people are yelling about it is a bad metric. A contentious topic attracts complaint no matter how it's written. Some of the best examples of NPOV writing I've seen on Wikipedia attract complaint on a daily basis. A lot of the complaint tends to be people who have no clue as to how we conceptualize NPOV. I recommend closing this and opening a talk page discussion as to which sources to use to frame the topic. [[User:Vanamonde93|Vanamonde93]] ([[User talk:Vanamonde93|talk]]) 18:05, 2 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*:::Concur. This is the best solution here. [[User:Simonm223|Simonm223]] ([[User talk:Simonm223|talk]]) 18:08, 2 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
Concur with {{U|Vanamonde93}} effectively entirely. I think the reason that the FAR review was raised is because one editor has been arguing that the prior FAR supersedes contemporary changes to consensus on contentious topics within this BLP's page. I certainly think the review request was made in good faith but, frankly, I think that it's overkill going all the way here just to say, "we can change workshopped details of past featured articles when consensus also changes." [[User:Simonm223|Simonm223]] ([[User talk:Simonm223|talk]]) 17:38, 2 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
* '''Premature''': I would prefer to give talk page discussion more time. The FAR process recommends at least two to three weeks, and I think it would help to have a talk page post that's explicit about the ways in which the article fails to meet the FA criteria. It would not surprise me to see the article back here again in a month, but FAR is such a long process that it would be counter-productive to rush the early stages. I see editors are already at work collecting new sources, and I do think it's fair to expect that the strongest among them will result in changes to the article. [[User:Firefangledfeathers|Firefangledfeathers]] ([[User talk:Firefangledfeathers|talk]] / [[Special:Contributions/Firefangledfeathers|contribs]]) 17:42, 2 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*:It is also/further premature if contentious topic alerts have not been given and dispute resolution has not been used. I am traveling; can anyone check whether CT alerts have been given to all parties? If so, the revisions via edit warring need to be dealt with via arb enforcement. There is an excellent history of talk page discussion to decide on issues on this article; all I see in recent edits is revert warring. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 23:18, 2 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
====This morning's article in The Times==== |
|||
<small>End moved content. [[User:Nikkimaria|Nikkimaria]] ([[User talk:Nikkimaria|talk]]) 23:40, 2 April 2024 (UTC)</small> |
|||
is extraordinarily timely and helpful. I propose that we suspend updating this section for the moment because Rowling's latest little rant will provoke a reaction and, hopefully, some analysis by third parties.—[[User:S Marshall|<b style="font-family: Verdana; color: Maroon;">S Marshall</b>]] <small>[[User talk:S Marshall|T]]/[[Special:Contributions/S Marshall|C]]</small> 08:13, 22 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:...could you please post a link to this article? Or at least the title? [[User:LokiTheLiar|Loki]] ([[User talk:LokiTheLiar|talk]]) 17:49, 22 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
I've moved the above content back here to allow time for further discussion before a potential FAR. Please also keep in mind that FAR is not [[WP:DR|dispute resolution]]; those avenues should be considered as a potential means of addressing disagreements. [[User:Nikkimaria|Nikkimaria]] ([[User talk:Nikkimaria|talk]]) 23:40, 2 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::[https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/jk-rowling-labour-has-dismissed-women-like-me-ill-struggle-to-vote-for-it-rrgbcrkd6 Sure.]—[[User:S Marshall|<b style="font-family: Verdana; color: Maroon;">S Marshall</b>]] <small>[[User talk:S Marshall|T]]/[[Special:Contributions/S Marshall|C]]</small> 18:11, 22 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:I may have caught up now on the contentious topic alerts, but someone else might check and start keeping up with them, as I won't be editing frequently. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 01:05, 3 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::@[[User:LokiTheLiar|LokiTheLiar]], @[[User:S Marshall|S Marshall]]: There's a summary and context at [https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cndd65k06x8o this BBC article]. [[User:Bazza_7|Bazza <span style="color:grey">7</span>]] ([[User_talk:Bazza_7|talk]]) 18:57, 22 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*Since this is solely about the article's coverage of transgender-related issues, and since discussion here is currently ''so'' overwhelmingly in agreement on the broad strokes of what needs to be done, I don't think a FAR is needed just yet - all that's needed at the moment is an acknowledgement that whatever consensus was reached in it regarding trans coverage no longer applies. I think that that is self-evident just by looking at discussions, but if necessary that can be done via a more normal RFC. If, after that, we repeatedly fail to agree on improvements or there are people who believe resulting changes have damaged the article's FA quality and there's no easy agreement on how to get it back, ''then'' we might end up back at FAR. But right now the problems and solutions seem relatively straightforward, with only one or two editors objecting. --[[User:Aquillion|Aquillion]] ([[User talk:Aquillion|talk]]) 16:10, 3 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::Everyone agrees the current draft is much better, and nothing says we have to stop work on drafts once we put something up. If we're going to suspend, let's implement the current draft. <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.118em 0.118em 0.118em; class=texhtml">'''[[User:Adam Cuerden|Adam Cuerden]]''' <sup>([[User talk:Adam Cuerden|talk]])</sup><sub>Has about 8.8% of all [[WP:FP|FPs]].</sub></span> 04:12, 23 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*:Yes, yours is an apt description of how FAR would be used if needed. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 16:40, 3 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::I agree, and would like to point out that while I haven't been a big fan of the allegations of [[WP:RECENTISM]] so far, relying heavily on breaking news about Rowling's comments about a currently happening election really ''would'' be RECENTISM. [[User:LokiTheLiar|Loki]] ([[User talk:LokiTheLiar|talk]]) 04:59, 23 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::Rowling is in the public eye on this matter. Coverage isn't going to miraculously stabilize at any point. It is likely that we will need to periodically revisit this, especially as scholarly sources come out. That isn't a reason not to adjust the present wording, which is sub-optimal and considerably worse than the draft above. I support implementing it, my quibbles above notwithstanding. [[User:Vanamonde93|Vanamonde93]] ([[User talk:Vanamonde93|talk]]) 05:51, 23 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== |
== For easy discussion. == |
||
I mentioned this above, but: |
|||
Since there's been a lot of discussion about reaching consensus before editing the transgender views section, let's do just that and first and foremost collect all of our basic stances in one spot. Please voice your thoughts succinctly about whether or not you perceive issues with the section, and if so which ones. We could then proceed to a more detailed approach based on what, if anything, we agree should be reworked. I'll ping everyone who seems to have recently participated in the talk page: @[[User:Sideswipe9th|Sideswipe9th]] @[[User:Adam Cuerden|Adam Cuerden]] @[[User:Snokalok|Snokalok]] @[[User:Daff22|Daff22]] @[[User:Aquillion|Aquillion]] @[[User:Vanamonde93|Vanamonde93]] @[[User:Simonm223|Simonm223]] @[[User:SandyGeorgia|SandyGeorgia]] @[[User:Victoriaearle|Victoriaearle]] @[[User:Firefangledfeathers|Firefangledfeathers]] @[[User:Colin|Colin]] @[[User:LokiTheLiar|LokiTheLiar]] @[[User:Bastun|Bastun]] @[[User:Czello|Czello]] @[[User:Dimadick|Dimadick]] @[[User:Bazza 7|Bazza 7]] @[[User:Dtobias|Dtobias]] @[[User:Amanda A. Brant|Amanda A. Brant]] @[[User:PenelopePlesiosaur|PenelopePlesiosaur]] @[[User:LegalSmeagolian|LegalSmeagolian]] @[[User:BilledMammal|BilledMammal]] @[[User:13tez|13tez]] @[[User:Kmhkmh|Kmhkmh]] @[[User:Johnbod|Johnbod]] @[[User:Umdlye|Umdlye]] |
|||
"She resists proposed changes to UK law that would make it simpler to transition without a medical diagnosis. Rowling is concerned that easier transitions could affect access to female-only spaces and legal protections for women" is absolutely redundant to the clearer and simpler sentences after it, but less coherently phrased. |
|||
I'll go first. Thanks for your input, hope this is the right way to do this! [[User:WikiFouf|WikiFouf]] ([[User talk:WikiFouf|talk]]) 19:52, 2 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
I guess the bit about female-only spaces might be worth including, but I'd just add it later. Maybe "She opposes gender self-recognition and suggests that children, cisgender women, and female-only spaces are threatened by trans women and trans-positive messages[refs]. Think the "legal protections for women" bit is pretty unclear as to what it means, so - presuming it's not redundant to all the bits on "women's rights" in paragraphs two and four - I'd expand on what legal rights she claims are infringed, and put it in a later paragraph. (It may be that Rowling's never very explicit as to what she means on that; if so... I'd probably be inclined to classify it as mere puffery/sloganing and just leave it out, but if she does say something concrete, then we should say the concrete thing, not summarise to the point of meaninglessness.) |
|||
::: Adding the editors from the FAR not already pinged, already present or topic banned. {{ping|4meter4|Aza24|Barkeep49|Bodney|Buidhe|Crossroads|Ealdgyth|Endwise|Extraordinary Writ|FormalDude|Guerillero|Hog Farm|Hurricane Noah|Innisfree987|Ipigott |Ixtal|RandomCanadian|Sdkb|Silver seren|SMcCandlish|Xxanthippe|Zmbro|Z1720}} there is interest in reworking the transgender content now that we are two years past the FAR. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 23:46, 3 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
We're losing two sentences of redundancy to do this, after all, so if we need to put one sentence back to cover the subject well, we still have a sentence spare to use for whatever we want. |
|||
:::: I'm very swamped IRL right now - it'll be awhile before I can get back up to speed with this matter. [[User:Hog Farm|Hog Farm]] <sub> ''[[User talk:Hog Farm|Talk]]''</sub> 02:24, 4 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
Footnote [a] is mispositioned, if we accept my change, put it with footnote [b], otherwise, it should be a sentence earlier. |
|||
:I see '''issues of balance and neutrality''' in the entire section that I think should be addressed. I've explained my thoughts in more detail [[Talk:J. K. Rowling#Is the transgender section imbalanced?|here]] [[User:WikiFouf|WikiFouf]] ([[User talk:WikiFouf|talk]]) 19:56, 2 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:@[[User:WikiFouf|WikiFouf]] (fun name) I share your thoughts and also think her recent behavior in regards to the Scottish Hate Crime law finally merits "anti-transgender rights advocate" or something similar in the lead. I also think the views section should be moved up because at this point she is just as well known for her transphobic views as for the Harry Potter franchise. [[User:LegalSmeagolian|LegalSmeagolian]] ([[User talk:LegalSmeagolian|talk]]) 20:00, 2 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::Concur. Would also like to see at least passing mention of the whole holocaust denial incident. [[User:Simonm223|Simonm223]] ([[User talk:Simonm223|talk]]) 20:28, 2 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::That really didn't make it in here? Lordy. Maybe I'll [[WP:BEBOLD]] later. [[User:LegalSmeagolian|LegalSmeagolian]] ([[User talk:LegalSmeagolian|talk]]) 20:30, 2 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:Yes, it obvious does need some changes (also, the FAR discussion didn't actually have very many people weighing in, particularly on individual aspects. I don't think it represents a strong consensus - that's not what FAR is for.) Even beyond that it is two years old on a topic that has changed fairly significantly and gotten a lot more coverage. At the very least the last paragraph was unbalanced and we need better sourcing for the "death threats" part if we're going to include it at all, given that it failed verification above. We should also try to update to more up-do-date sources, since many better sources are available on this today. --[[User:Aquillion|Aquillion]] ([[User talk:Aquillion|talk]]) 20:36, 2 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::Aquillon, you may not be reading all of the FAR talk archives; it was the (by far) one of the best attended FARs *ever*, with several dozen editors weighing in, following on a very widely attended RFC which hamstrung what could be done on the transgender content. But yes, it has been two years, and it was always intended to review the transgender content when more time had elapsed from the RFC, and as more high-quality sources become available. I strongly recommend anyone wanting to improve the content to review at minimum the numerous talk archives on the FAR at [[Wikipedia talk:Featured article review/J. K. Rowling/archive1]], and [[WP:FAOWN]]; a good method of working towards consensus developed. I also suggest before anything to be sure contentious topic alerts have been issued to everyone reverting content here; this article is subject to double sanctions (BLP and gender-related) and recent edits suggest a sub-optimal dynamic is taking hold. {{ping|AleatoryPonderings|Olivaw-Daneel}} who have almost all the sources. I am also traveling, and have been on an extended break due to personal tragedies, and am unlikely to be able to do as much this time as last. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 23:50, 2 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::I'm sorry, I'm not seeing it. The transgender section in that discussion consisted of only has a handful of editors, and the conclusion one of them gave was {{tq|Having reviewed the whole of the new text in context, it certainly reads better (and less breathlessly) than the former one. I would feel remiss, though, if I didn't register that it feels a bit WHITEWASH-y and BOTHSIDESist compared to the sources used (and those discussed on Talk). I expect that this will be even more evident once an additional wave of peer-reviewed sources become available; I suppose the newly-minted version will serve its purpose until something major happens, or until it is time to replace it with more authoritative sourcing (which I suspect will be less deferential to Rowling than our current text).}} That is not a strong consensus (unsurprising, since, as you've said, reaching long-term consensuses on an article is not really the purpose of FAR; the way it's being presented and used here was already inapproprite.) If that were all it wouldn't be an issue, but editors here have repeatedly reverted back to the FAR version (or not even really the FAR version; glancing back, the "death threats" part, which failed verification and was one of the bones of contention here, was added ''after'' the FAR) with no explanation beyond "get consensus." That is [[WP:OWN]] behavior! [[WP:FAOWN]] specifically does not excuse it - it says {{tq|explaining civilly why sources and policies support a particular version of a featured article does not necessarily constitute ownership}}, not "you can repeatedly revert back to the featured article with no explanation beyond asserting that it has consensus." This, more than anything else, is the reason discussions here are going the way they are; people are leaning on two-year-old discussions among a small number of editors in the FAR in a way that avoids actually engaging with serious issues about sources and content. Either way I think it's clear from the overwhelming direction of discussions here that whatever weak consensus may have been reached about ''coverage of trans issues specifically'' in the FAR no longer applies. I don't think it's necessary to do a whole new FAR if people acknowledge that - if necessary I think we could do it with an RFC even if some people refuse to acknowledge it - but I do think people need to stop trying to cite the FAR on anything related to trans issues; it clearly is not helping, because it clearly does not represent a current consensus. --[[User:Aquillion|Aquillion]] ([[User talk:Aquillion|talk]]) 16:05, 3 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::{{u|Aquillion}}, the issue was [[Talk:J. K. Rowling/Archive 11|being stuck with this well-attended RFC]], and the thinking was it was too soon to revisit such a well-attended RFC, hence wait until better sources appeared. What you call a "small number" of editors on the FAR were editors trying to respect a much larger group who participated in the RFC. Re consensus, there is now adequate distance from the RFC to revisit, but in the context still of high-quality sources. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 16:52, 3 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::Agree with Sandy on how it played out, it matches what I remember from back then. — ♠[[User:Ixtal|Ixtal]] <sup>( [[User talk:Ixtal|T]] / [[Special:Contributions/Ixtal|C]] ) </sup> ⁂ <small> [[Non nobis solum]]. </small>♠ 10:04, 4 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:I'm just about to go away on holiday for 2 weeks so I'll leave you all to <s>fight it out</s> discuss it rationally in my absence. I agree the latest Scottish law antics have moved the dial; maybe wait a few days for that story to settle? [[User:Johnbod|Johnbod]] ([[User talk:Johnbod|talk]]) 21:12, 2 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::Enjoy your holiday! [[User:LegalSmeagolian|LegalSmeagolian]] ([[User talk:LegalSmeagolian|talk]]) 21:16, 2 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:I also agree that there are issues. What was arguably neutral four years ago is now tilted towards her POV, since it's a small part of the article but has become a larger and larger part of her notability as time passes and she continues to do things that call attention to her anti-trans views. And beyond all that, it's just not up to date. There's lots of stuff that's happened that hasn't been reflected in the article. [[User:LokiTheLiar|Loki]] ([[User talk:LokiTheLiar|talk]]) 22:48, 2 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::Agreed. I realise that we don't want to default to going with whatever the most recent thing she did is (that has its own issues), but - well, I don't know her mind, so I can't say if this is her feeling more emboldened to voice views she already had or her becoming more extreme in her views, but the rhetoric she uses is, at the least, very much more openly transphobic. <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.118em 0.118em 0.118em; class=texhtml">'''[[User:Adam Cuerden|Adam Cuerden]]''' <sup>([[User talk:Adam Cuerden|talk]])</sup><sub>Has about 8.9% of all [[WP:FP|FPs]].</sub></span> 00:15, 3 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::[https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/features/jk-rowling-arrest-trans-transphobia-b2522155.html The Independent's article here] might be a decent source for summarising. <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.118em 0.118em 0.118em; class=texhtml">'''[[User:Adam Cuerden|Adam Cuerden]]''' <sup>([[User talk:Adam Cuerden|talk]])</sup><sub>Has about 8.9% of all [[WP:FP|FPs]].</sub></span> 00:22, 3 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::I am curious as to why you say an opinion piece would be a good source for a featured article, which requires high-quality sources? [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 15:44, 3 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::It's a major, repected British newspaper, avoding mere recetism. It might serve at least to point out what's going on, and it's at least as good as [https://deadline.com/2020/06/j-k-rowling-defends-trans-statements-essay-1202955524/] which is already in the article. <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.118em 0.118em 0.118em; class=texhtml">'''[[User:Adam Cuerden|Adam Cuerden]]''' <sup>([[User talk:Adam Cuerden|talk]])</sup><sub>Has about 8.9% of all [[WP:FP|FPs]].</sub></span> 16:05, 3 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:Very broadly speaking, I'm in favor of adjustments to the trans people section in order to reflect coverage in newer RS. It will be tricky to balance between what's covered in the highest quality book and academic sources—which tend to be more dated—and what's in news coverage. I do think it'll be worth it to push through the trickiness. Since they're up against the big-r-RS, I'd prefer to see us stick to only the cream of the news crop and to favor in particular ones that are focused on Rowling and her views over time. I wish we could have more dust-settling time before including some of the recent controversy, but it's too prominent to wait long. My hope is to see the mention kept brief to avoid recentism as much as possible. [[User:Firefangledfeathers|Firefangledfeathers]] ([[User talk:Firefangledfeathers|talk]] / [[Special:Contributions/Firefangledfeathers|contribs]]) 01:53, 3 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::Fully support this, and from the bit of research I did a couple of weeks ago I'm confident we can update the section while using high quality stuff for the most part [[User:WikiFouf|WikiFouf]] ([[User talk:WikiFouf|talk]]) 02:58, 3 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::I do agree that it's very much a moving target, but it's not in good enough shape to wait. Let's sketch in what seems likely to remain important, but I agree that we should keep recentism in mind (and can always throw any extra content into the Politics of... article). Offhand, it seems that patterns of behaviour (with RSes) are more important than most single incidents, and the incidents should be chosen to illustrate whatever patterns of behaviour RSes are already talking about. So, to give some examples, if (and this is an "if" here) RSes talk about here regularly misgendering people, maybe the India Willoughby incident is a notable example. If they talk about her grandstanding against laws meant to protect trans people, then the attempt to get arrested under Scotland's new hate speech law matters there. And if we don't have RSes that help them fit that context, maybe we should skip them. Of the three recent incidents, the Holocaust denial one is the only one that strikes me as being uniquely awful enough to likely deserve get mentioned on its own merits alone, the others feel like just the most recent examples of a pattern of behaviour.. <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.118em 0.118em 0.118em; class=texhtml">'''[[User:Adam Cuerden|Adam Cuerden]]''' <sup>([[User talk:Adam Cuerden|talk]])</sup><sub>Has about 8.9% of all [[WP:FP|FPs]].</sub></span> 04:27, 3 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::Yeah, I also agree to focus on the patterns as much as possible. With her April Fools tweets following the Willoughby stuff, I think there's now a good case that her conscious misgendering of trans women is becoming a pattern, as well as a key demonstration of her views. There's also now at least [https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/news/jk-rowling-misgender-trans-snp-b2521530.html one RSP green source] that covers India Willoughby in non-breaking news fashion, connecting it to the April Fools stuff. |
|||
::::I'm not sure about singling out the Holocaust stuff though, not only because it hasn't become a pattern thus far but also because we don't even have one RSP green source for it as far as I'm aware. [[User:WikiFouf|WikiFouf]] ([[User talk:WikiFouf|talk]]) 22:14, 3 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:I think the most recent, very highly publicized rant is a good place to rewrite the article. And I agree with neutrality issues. “Some people call her views transphobic, but she says that she supports trans people” when we have things like this [https://www.themarysue.com/j-k-rowling-holocaust-denial-nazi-transphobic/] and meanwhile a paragraph about all the righteous feminists that support her, has a very clear slant. At this point, I agree that it’s pretty hard (especially in light of the latest rant) to not put anti-trans activist into the summary. I don’t think there’s anyone at this point who hears her name and doesn’t think about, everything over the last couple of years. Downplaying it when it has very much become her brand, just makes this article look like a puff piece. [[User:Snokalok|Snokalok]] ([[User talk:Snokalok|talk]]) 05:07, 3 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::To clarify, I think we should have a half sentence or something dedicated to the holocaust thing. The weight of coverage isn't huge, but we do have RSP green sources saying it. At the very least, a "What many have described as holocaust denial" [[User:Snokalok|Snokalok]] ([[User talk:Snokalok|talk]]) 06:17, 3 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::Aye. It feels like something that might well increase in importance, but.... <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.118em 0.118em 0.118em; class=texhtml">'''[[User:Adam Cuerden|Adam Cuerden]]''' <sup>([[User talk:Adam Cuerden|talk]])</sup><sub>Has about 8.9% of all [[WP:FP|FPs]].</sub></span> 06:53, 3 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::And I just noticed the careful work of @[[User:Umdlye|Umdlye]] In finding these sources. All RSP green. |
|||
::The Independent: "prominent anti-trans activist" [https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/jk-rowling-scotland-hate-crime-trans-law-b2521897.html] |
|||
::Reuters: "prominent gender critical campaigner" [https://www.reuters.com/world/uk/uk-government-backs-jk-rowling-scottish-hate-crime-law-challenge-2024-04-02/] |
|||
::Financial Times: "high profile voice in the "gender critical" movement" [https://www.ft.com/content/b289c397-bece-4cf9-9cc5-9e1b4908f3e7] |
|||
::The only question now is whether we have consensus to take GC as synonymous with anti-trans. Personally, my belief is that it's the same as "racist" vs "race realist", but obviously this is something where consensus is needed. [[User:Snokalok|Snokalok]] ([[User talk:Snokalok|talk]]) 14:34, 3 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::I mean, it's in the definition: [[Gender-critical feminism]]. I think that providing a gloss for a term isn't a problem, as long as the definition is very well-sourced. <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.118em 0.118em 0.118em; class=texhtml">'''[[User:Adam Cuerden|Adam Cuerden]]''' <sup>([[User talk:Adam Cuerden|talk]])</sup><sub>Has about 8.9% of all [[WP:FP|FPs]].</sub></span> 17:00, 3 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::I'm against adding "anti-transgender activist" in the lead sentence. From the fair bit of reading I've done on her, even in the recent stuff, I haven't seen her being described that way by high-quality sources even once. It might start happening soon though, especially if she keeps focusing on laws (as she did on April Fools) and more concrete stuff like that. Another thing, and this may or may not be just a question of personal preference, is that we tend to put too many titles in lead sentences in general. |
|||
::Something I think we definitely ''should'' do though is dedicate a full paragraph to her views in the lead. Based on the coverage of her since 2019, this is more than justified. [[User:WikiFouf|WikiFouf]] ([[User talk:WikiFouf|talk]]) 18:43, 3 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::A full paragraph in the lead about her views would not be in accordance with [[WP:LEAD]] or with the content of the article, which is a bio of her full life and accomplishments-- not just the last five years. Dedicating a full paragraph to these issues at [[Politics of J. K. Rowling]] would be appropriate. The lead was written in accordance with guidelines by looking at the preponderance of all sources on Rowling (not just recent) and the size of each section, after each section was ruthlessly examined and trimmed where necessary. The lead is a summary of the entire article, and the entire article is a summary of her entire life, not just one piece of it. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 23:09, 3 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::I mean five years is still a fifth of her life in the public sphere, and it's pretty notable that's it's a full five years where she's been in the conversation for something other than writing. There's no other equivalent for it. If not a full paragraph, I at least think it should overtake the space in the lead dedicated to her views. Some of what precedes the trans stuff seems outdated anyways (I'm pretty sure she stopped supporting Labour, specifically because of their policies on trans people) [[User:WikiFouf|WikiFouf]] ([[User talk:WikiFouf|talk]]) 00:20, 5 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::Maybe we can look to [[Kanye West#Views|Ye]]'s page for guidance on this... looking at his lead the controversy atleast has a paragraph, however his lead is quite a bit shorter... I am going to [[WP:BEBOLD]] and narrow down some of the harry potter stuff as some of it is redundant and can be better summarized. [[User:LegalSmeagolian|LegalSmeagolian]] ([[User talk:LegalSmeagolian|talk]]) 00:40, 5 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::I tend to concur with this: {{tq|against adding "anti-transgender activist" in the lead sentence. From the fair bit of reading I've done on her, even in the recent stuff, I haven't seen her being described that way by high-quality sources even once}}. It's too much of a reach, based on assumptions of intent and of political activity (and labelling thereof) that is not in evidence in the actual sources. <span style="white-space:nowrap;font-family:'Trebuchet MS'"> — [[User:SMcCandlish|'''SMcCandlish''']] [[User talk:SMcCandlish|☏]] [[Special:Contributions/SMcCandlish|¢]] 😼 </span> 00:13, 6 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::Activist specifically is harder to justify, but I dispute that she hasn't been referred to as anti-trans in high-quality sources "even once": |
|||
::::* [https://www.vox.com/culture/23622610/jk-rowling-transphobic-statements-timeline-history-controversy Vox] repeatedly refers to her {{tq|anti-trans stance}}, {{tq|anti-trans arguments}}, and {{tq|anti-trans sentiments}}. |
|||
::::* [https://edition.cnn.com/2023/02/21/entertainment/jk-rowling-podcast-release-what-to-know-cec/index.html CNN] says she has a {{tq|history of anti-trans comments}} in the headline and repeatedly says she's made anti-trans comments in the body. |
|||
::::* [https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/jk-rowling-s-drawn-backlash-anti-trans-beliefs-hits-back-putin-citing-rcna21587 NBC] has said she has {{tq|anti-trans beliefs}} (tho I should note that NBC news usually puts a little more distance between claims that Rowling is anti-trans and their editorial voice). |
|||
::::* [https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/12/style/jk-rowling-transgender-fans.html The NYT] mentions Rowling's {{tq|anti-transgender comments}} and {{tq|anti-transgender tweets}}. |
|||
::::The general pattern I'm observing here is actually that higher quality sources are ''more'' willing to say she or her comments are anti-trans. At least so long as they're American: probably due to British libel law, even clearly partisan British publications like PinkNews don't ever directly call her anti-trans. [[User:LokiTheLiar|Loki]] ([[User talk:LokiTheLiar|talk]]) 03:53, 6 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::Let's not forget [https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/2046147X231180501#con this academic paper. And, y'know GLAAD and other organisations are pretty good inclusions. <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.118em 0.118em 0.118em; class=texhtml">'''[[User:Adam Cuerden|Adam Cuerden]]''' <sup>([[User talk:Adam Cuerden|talk]])</sup><sub>Has about 8.9% of all [[WP:FP|FPs]].</sub></span> 15:47, 7 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:As @[[User:Umdyle|Umdyle]] noted, there is more than enough notable evidence to describe Rowling as an "anti-trans activist" (the label "holocaust denier" should be added, as well). [[User:PenelopePlesiosaur|PenelopePlesiosaur]] ([[User talk:PenelopePlesiosaur|talk]]) 14:40, 3 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::Sources for holocaust denial, because wording ''will'' matter here: |
|||
::* [https://www.salon.com/2024/03/15/jk-rowling-trans-nazis-holocaust-denial/] "accused of being a holocaust denier by critics", "The author also faced criticism from people who saw this denial of Nazi practices as part of a larger pattern of antisemitism," |
|||
::* [https://www.assignedmedia.org/breaking-news/jkrowling-nazi-holocaust-hirschfield] "JK Rowling is a Holocaust denier!" |
|||
::* [https://www.hindustantimes.com/world-news/us-news/jk-rowling-under-fire-for-transphobic-remarks-claims-nazis-never-burnt-books-on-trans-health-101710387965834.html] "the renowned Harry Potter author found herself trending after posting comments denying the historical fact that Nazis burned "books on trans healthcare and research." |
|||
::* [https://www.thedailybeast.com/jk-rowling-adds-holocaust-denialism-to-her-transphobia] "J.K. Rowling Insinuates Nazis Did Not Burn Trans Books," "J.K. Rowling is once again making ignorant and anti-trans comments online," "Rowling has been spouting anti-trans rhetoric for years now" |
|||
::* [https://forward.com/culture/592580/j-k-rowling-holocaust-denial-trans/] "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. (I’m just kidding — obviously everyone online is already yelling about it. The Harry Potter author is always reliable for generating discourse,)" " She didn’t need to distort the Holocaust. But now we have to add that to her list of sins, under those antisemitic goblins." |
|||
::* [https://boingboing.net/2024/03/14/j-k-rowling-claims-nazis-didnt-burn-trans-books-issues-lawsuit-threat-when-called-a-holocaust-denier.html] "J.K. Rowling claims Nazis didn't burn trans books, issues lawsuit threat when called a holocaust denier," "J.K. Rowling had another "middle-aged moment" Wednesday, claiming that the Nazis did not target trans people when they "burned early books on trans healthcare and research," as an online critic had put it—then threatening to sue another who claimed this amounted to holocaust denial. The Nazis did in fact do that, burning down the first sexology clinic and targeting trans people over the course of the Holocaust," "As the plain intent of making such an argument is to exclude trans people from the history of Nazi victims, it implies nothing good about Rowling's intentions or the right-wing swamp her self-destructive social media persona now exists in." |
|||
::* [https://www.advocate.com/news/jk-rowling-trans-hate-crime] "Shortly after targeting Willoughby, Rowling engaged in Holocaust denial by claiming it is a "fever dream" to say that transgender people were persecuted by the Nazis — a well-documented historic fact that is recognized under German law." |
|||
::* [https://insidethemagic.net/2024/03/jk-rowling-denies-transgender-persecution-holocaust-jc1/] "Harry Potter series author JK Rowling is in hot water again after denying Holocaust facts on X (formerly Twitter). The controversial figurehead has dived full force into the trans-exclusionary radical feminist (TERF) movement in recent years, alienating many LGBTQIA+ Wizarding World fans." |
|||
::* [https://www.lgbtqnation.com/2024/03/jk-rowling-denies-transgender-persecution-during-the-holocaust/] "Anti-transgender troll and Harry Potter author J.K. Rowling has been accused of Holocaust denial for questioning whether transgender people were targeted in Nazi Germany," "While Rowling has not denied the Holocaust itself happened, she is accused of engaging in a form of Holocaust denial for questioning the persecution of trans people under the Nazi regime, a fact which has been well documented." [[User:Simonm223|Simonm223]] ([[User talk:Simonm223|talk]]) 15:23, 3 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::Those seem like highly biased sources, similar in tone to J. Jonah Jameson's "Spider-Man: Threat or Menace?" articles. [[User:Dtobias|*Dan T.*]] ([[User talk:Dtobias|talk]]) 15:31, 3 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::Severity isn't the same thing as bias. These sources are more credible by Wikipedia's standards than the sources defending Rowling. [[User:PenelopePlesiosaur|PenelopePlesiosaur]] ([[User talk:PenelopePlesiosaur|talk]]) 15:35, 3 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::Rowling's own statement on the issue: [https://www.jkrowling.com/opinions/statement-from-j-k-rowling-14th-march-2024/] [[User:Dtobias|*Dan T.*]] ([[User talk:Dtobias|talk]]) 15:34, 3 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::That's a primary source. Of *course* Rowling herself would deny being a Holocaust denier. Holocaust deniers deny the fact that they are all the time. [[User:PenelopePlesiosaur|PenelopePlesiosaur]] ([[User talk:PenelopePlesiosaur|talk]]) 15:36, 3 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::See [[WP:BLPPUBLIC]] and [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:J._K._Rowling&diff=prev&oldid=1217067079 this explanation]; we can't leave out her denials of charges (eg [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=J._K._Rowling&diff=prev&oldid=1216968214 reinstatement of inappropriate deletion]). [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 17:18, 3 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::A relevant article: [https://www.spiked-online.com/2024/03/21/no-jk-rowling-is-not-a-holocaust-denier/ No, JK Rowling is not a Holocaust denier] [[User:Dtobias|*Dan T.*]] ([[User talk:Dtobias|talk]]) 15:36, 3 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::Spiked is not considered a credible source. [[User:PenelopePlesiosaur|PenelopePlesiosaur]] ([[User talk:PenelopePlesiosaur|talk]]) 15:40, 3 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::There's a reason I excluded Spiked from that list and it wasn't personal bias. |
|||
:::::[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_289#Spiked] |
|||
:::::[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_181#Reliability_of_Spiked_for_Non-Fact_Issues] |
|||
:::::[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_206#spiked-online.com] |
|||
:::::[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_429#Spiked_%28magazine%29] |
|||
:::::It's a perennial question at [[WP:RS/N]] and never treated favorably. [[User:Simonm223|Simonm223]] ([[User talk:Simonm223|talk]]) 15:45, 3 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::It seems to me that we can unambiguously source something very roughly like "Rowling falsely claimed that the Nazis didn't persecute trans people, when persecution of trans people in Nazi Germany is a well-documented historical fact. Many people called her a Holocaust denier because of this." I'm much less confident that we have the sources for "Rowling is a holocaust denier" in Wikivoice. I'd want several big neutral newsorgs before we made a claim like that in Wikivoice in a BLP. [[User:LokiTheLiar|Loki]] ([[User talk:LokiTheLiar|talk]]) 19:32, 3 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::Honestly I concur. While I might have personal opinions about Rowling and about the intersection of transphobia and far-right ideologies we do need to be very cautious about how we address [[WP:BLP]] figures. The whole point of my exercise above was to demonstrate the extent to which sources tended to simply point out her false claims, such as in LGBTQ Nation "While Rowling has not denied the Holocaust itself happened, she is accused of engaging in a form of Holocaust denial for questioning the persecution of trans people under the Nazi regime, a fact which has been well documented." I would ''personally'' like to see mention of Advocate included ("Shortly after targeting Willoughby, Rowling engaged in Holocaust denial by claiming it is a "fever dream" to say that transgender people were persecuted by the Nazis — a well-documented historic fact that is recognized under German law.") but that would ''necessarily'' be under an "Ryan Adamczeski, writing for Advocate, said" qualifier if it was considered due. [[User:Simonm223|Simonm223]] ([[User talk:Simonm223|talk]]) 19:41, 3 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
These two sentences come right before a remarkably readable and clear statement of her positions (most of the rest of that paragraph). And they are in no way as clear or readable as those statements. At the least, it shouldn't come first. |
|||
I am in agreement with Firefangledfeathers post of 01:53 3 April, but find that the discussion after that point has taken off in the wrong direction with respect to blending academic and scholarly sources with the very best of the recent highest quality non-academic or scholarly sources. Any time Rowling speaks, there's a spike in news and publicity; avoiding [[WP:RECENTISM]] and [[WP:NOTNEWS]] is important for this broad overview article, and some of that kind of content can be better explored at [[Politics of J. K. Rowling]], from where it can be more easily seen later what can be summarized back to here. I see no exploration of how to blend the recent with scholarly/academic sources in the discussion above, and the idea of putting in wording like "anti-trans activist" because it is found in one newspaper isn't how FAs are written. And the sources listed by Simonm223 (please name your sources when posting them so we don't have to click on each one to find out if they are high quality) are not all of the caliber expected for featured content-- they may be fine for the "Politics of... " article, subject to consensus, but not for a broad overview summary Featured article. Please try to refocus this discussion on the kinds of sourcing expected in a featured article, and perhaps consider exploring more expansion using lesser quality sources at the "Politics of ... " sub-page. Rewriting as per Firefangled feathers will involve first a thorough examination of high-quality sources, and then workshopping through several drafts. We are finally far enough from the highly attended RFC to be able to revisit and rework content, but this has to be done with a backdrop of highest quality sources in mind. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 16:01, 3 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
<span style="text-shadow:grey 0.118em 0.118em 0.118em; class=texhtml">'''[[User:Adam Cuerden|Adam Cuerden]]''' <sup>([[User talk:Adam Cuerden|talk]])</sup><sub>Has about 8.8% of all [[WP:FP|FPs]].</sub></span> 04:16, 23 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::I agree and frankly some of the sources that Simonm223 listed above with regard to the "holocaust denial claims" strike me as utterly ridiculous (not to mention that if carefully read some of them don't even support that claim). Much of the arguments seem to be on "vegetarians are nazis, because like Hitler they avoid meat"-level. While WP could and should describe her Rowlings views on transgender critically, it really should stay away from hyperpartisan activist propaganda writings in mediocre sources.--[[User:Kmhkmh|Kmhkmh]] ([[User talk:Kmhkmh|talk]]) 12:10, 4 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::I think you're misinterpreting the core argument of those which actually do call Rowling a holocaust denier, which I've made a point of noting are only a small subset of what I've found. The actual argument is that denying that the holocaust impacted populations other than Jewish people is still holocaust denial. That is vastly different from "all vegetarians are nazis." [[User:Simonm223|Simonm223]] ([[User talk:Simonm223|talk]]) 12:26, 4 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::My point is that much/some of the sources you've listed there are imho largely unusable because they do what I described. They (presumably intentionally) conflate not knowing with denial, book burning with the holocaust, disagreeing with certain transgender views/policies with upholding nazi ideology. In other words it is s sensationalized propaganda style writing (designed as clickbait as well) without any interest in a sober analysis. Such writing is usually not a good source for Wikipedia articles. If they are just a small subset of what you've found, why not list ones doing an actually serious analysis?--[[User:Kmhkmh|Kmhkmh]] ([[User talk:Kmhkmh|talk]]) 13:05, 4 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::::According to the Regional Court of Cologne, denying trans people were targeted by the nazis is legally considered a denial of Nazi crimes.[https://www.spiegel.de/panorama/bildung/marie-luise-vollbrecht-verliert-streit-um-meinungsaeusserung-a-fabb1812-5a5c-4b52-8982-590f5b0e6f2f] |
|||
::::::As for not knowing, she actively called the events “a fever dream”.[https://www.themarysue.com/j-k-rowling-holocaust-denial-nazi-transphobic/] That’s not not knowing, that’s denying. [[User:Snokalok|Snokalok]] ([[User talk:Snokalok|talk]]) 16:40, 4 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::Yeah but [[WP:SYNTH]] of the Regional Court of Cologne plus Rowling's statements is not permissible, even though I agree that is clear cut denialism on her part. [[User:LegalSmeagolian|LegalSmeagolian]] ([[User talk:LegalSmeagolian|talk]]) 00:21, 5 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::::::There's sources making the connection. <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.118em 0.118em 0.118em; class=texhtml">'''[[User:Adam Cuerden|Adam Cuerden]]''' <sup>([[User talk:Adam Cuerden|talk]])</sup><sub>Has about 8.9% of all [[WP:FP|FPs]].</sub></span> 04:06, 5 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::::In that case, I am for inclusion with citations to reliable sources saying as much. [[User:LegalSmeagolian|LegalSmeagolian]] ([[User talk:LegalSmeagolian|talk]]) 04:17, 5 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:If we obey your statement, 90% of the sources ''in'' the article need junked. <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.118em 0.118em 0.118em; class=texhtml">'''[[User:Adam Cuerden|Adam Cuerden]]''' <sup>([[User talk:Adam Cuerden|talk]])</sup><sub>Has about 8.9% of all [[WP:FP|FPs]].</sub></span> 16:07, 3 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::Respectfully you can see the source by hovering over the link without clicking. However I will endeavor to remember this for the future, as a courtesy. I would note that the absence of LGBTQ Nation, Advocate, and similar mainstream queer publications from this article is a current failure of [[WP:NPOV]] and not something to be celebrated as meritorious of a featured article considering the subject. [[User:Simonm223|Simonm223]] ([[User talk:Simonm223|talk]]) 16:29, 3 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::Thx, but iPad editing from car as I travel, and I can't see source by hovering over it ... I had to go in to edit mode to view the list. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 16:57, 3 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::Aye. Apparently [[Deadline Hollywood]] is a good source, but Reuters and the Financial Times aren't? The sources for the statement ' She has rejected these characterisations and the notion that she holds animosity towards transgender people, saying that her viewpoint has been misunderstood.' are herself, ''[[Variety (magazine)|Variety]]'', and ''[[Vanity Fair (magazine)|Vanity Fair]]'' - but that's fine? Why do the goalposts move to whereever makes it hardest to criticise Rowling? <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.118em 0.118em 0.118em; class=texhtml">'''[[User:Adam Cuerden|Adam Cuerden]]''' <sup>([[User talk:Adam Cuerden|talk]])</sup><sub>Has about 8.9% of all [[WP:FP|FPs]].</sub></span> 16:37, 3 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::Adam Cuerden, context ... appropriate sourcing depends on content being sourced, and for some of the non-controversial or biographical content, what is used is appropriate, and for the transgender material, the FAR was hamstrung by the well-attended RFC, and there was an attempt to stick to using newspaper sources if they generally aligned with scholarly sources. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 16:56, 3 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::We're also hamstrung by [[WP:BLPPUBLIC]], which requires that we include denials of allegations for BLPs. In general, it's a policy I opposed and still oppose, but it's what we got. [[User:Firefangledfeathers|Firefangledfeathers]] ([[User talk:Firefangledfeathers|talk]] / [[Special:Contributions/Firefangledfeathers|contribs]]) 17:04, 3 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::Regardless, it's clear, that there is a current consensus that the page as it stands does not accurately reflect the extent of Rowling's activities as an anti-trans campaigner. Being as she is a [[WP:BLP]] I would certainly agree we should be cautious around attribution and use of wiki-voice. But I think we'd be remiss to leave it at "she's really just misunderstood," considering how clear it is within the LGBTQ+ community that, no, Rowling is entirely understood. This is also why I think it's critical, for [[WP:NPOV]] that sources from within that community, specifically, be included. And not just an off-the-cuff remark form Eddie Izzard. [[User:Simonm223|Simonm223]] ([[User talk:Simonm223|talk]]) 18:52, 3 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::I hasten to add that it's not ''just'' the LGBT community that agrees she is venturing increasingly far into anti-trans activism. Many high quality news sources have said something to the effect in their own voice. I'd at least say we have strong sourcing for "gender-critical activist". [[User:LokiTheLiar|Loki]] ([[User talk:LokiTheLiar|talk]]) 19:07, 3 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::::"Gender-critical activist" is better-supported than the pejorative "anti-trans". [[User:Dtobias|*Dan T.*]] ([[User talk:Dtobias|talk]]) 20:03, 3 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::It's not pejorative. It's a flat statement of her politics, expressed by her loudly and at length. She ''routinely'' misgenders trans people, regularly treats trans women as a threat to cis women and regularly supports other anti-trans activists. [[User:Simonm223|Simonm223]] ([[User talk:Simonm223|talk]]) 23:27, 3 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::Agree with Dan T. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 00:46, 4 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::"Gender-critical" vs "anti-transgender" rings a lot like "pro-life" vs "anti-abortion". Anti-transgender isn't pejorative at all, I would argue it's much less connoted and much more precise than gender-critical, which is vague and euphemistic. Rowling made a list of trans women (throwing registered sex offenders and regular trans people in the same bunch for good measure) and said they were "men, every single last one of them"; it's entirely rational to call her views "anti-transgender". An actually pejorative word would be something like TERF, for example [[User:WikiFouf|WikiFouf]] ([[User talk:WikiFouf|talk]]) 03:33, 4 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::Anti-trans isn’t perjorative anymore than racist is. It’s a more neutral wording, if anything, and there’s plenty of evidence for it. [[User:Snokalok|Snokalok]] ([[User talk:Snokalok|talk]]) 04:28, 4 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::If a pro-life/anti-abortion person got to decide all the labels in an article on that conflict, they might use "pro-death" for the other side, which wouldn't go over well with pro-choice people. It can be argued that the fairest way to deal with it is to use each side's preferred terminology for themselves, thus "pro-life" vs. "pro-choice". As for "TERF", it's actually sometimes being used as a reclaimed slur, as in "TERF is the New Punk" t-shirts, though it's still generally offensive if used to label somebody against their will. "Anti-Trans" hasn't been used as a self-label as far as I'm aware. [[User:Dtobias|*Dan T.*]] ([[User talk:Dtobias|talk]]) 15:59, 4 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::::::Your personal opinion is noted. It doesn't change the reality that Rowling is clearly anti-trans in her politics and regularly described as such by a preponderance of sources. [[User:Simonm223|Simonm223]] ([[User talk:Simonm223|talk]]) 16:04, 4 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::::Also, if we're going to call her "gender critical", we'd have to immediately define "gender critcal". So it works out to much the same thing <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.118em 0.118em 0.118em; class=texhtml">'''[[User:Adam Cuerden|Adam Cuerden]]''' <sup>([[User talk:Adam Cuerden|talk]])</sup><sub>Has about 8.9% of all [[WP:FP|FPs]].</sub></span> 16:14, 4 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::::::We use “anti-trans” for the pages of [[Graham Linehan]] and [[Posie Parker]]. Why not here? [[User:Snokalok|Snokalok]] ([[User talk:Snokalok|talk]]) 16:45, 4 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::::At one point both of those people were way more blatant about it than Rowling. But I'm not convinced that's the case any more. Rowling definitely at least seems to be going along the same path as Linehan. [[User:LokiTheLiar|Loki]] ([[User talk:LokiTheLiar|talk]]) 19:51, 4 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::I don't see how [[WP:BLPPUBLIC]] applies here: That's in the section about people famous for ''events'', and if there's doubt as to whether someone did something, then sure, but when there's no doubt as to her very public actions and statements, then it's not a denial of allegations, it's just her wanting it characterised differently. It's true she once denied transphobia, but does she even do that anymore? Like, after her "TERF wars" comment, hasn't she been oppenly allying herself with the TERF/Gender critical movement? <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.118em 0.118em 0.118em; class=texhtml">'''[[User:Adam Cuerden|Adam Cuerden]]''' <sup>([[User talk:Adam Cuerden|talk]])</sup><sub>Has about 8.9% of all [[WP:FP|FPs]].</sub></span> 21:15, 3 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:I agree with @[[User:SandyGeorgia|SandyGeorgia]] on this. As I wrote a bit earlier, I think there's enough high-quality recent stuff to rework the section using mostly that. It took me less than a hour to find [[Talk:J. K. Rowling#Scholarship and book sources|three academic papers written on her views]] a couple of weeks ago. I do agree that some of the more recent stuff is hard to avoid though, especially the number of people she deliberately misgendered in the last few weeks. It's a clear escalation of the topic that I think needs to be mentioned. [[User:WikiFouf|WikiFouf]] ([[User talk:WikiFouf|talk]]) 19:04, 3 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::[https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/2046147X231180501#con Here's] another academic journal calling her transphobic. <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.118em 0.118em 0.118em; class=texhtml">'''[[User:Adam Cuerden|Adam Cuerden]]''' <sup>([[User talk:Adam Cuerden|talk]])</sup><sub>Has about 8.9% of all [[WP:FP|FPs]].</sub></span> 13:12, 5 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*Whatever consensus was reached earlier is clearly outdated considering the progressive escalation of the subject's anti-trans views. ([[User talk:Buidhe|t]] · [[Special:Contributions/Buidhe|c]]) '''[[User:buidhe|<span style="color: black">buidhe</span>]]''' 00:38, 4 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:I would suggest that this section needs to be written as a chronological history of Rowling's involvement in the subject, which has markedly changed over time, and be not framed as some kind of "WP should state what Rowling's viewpoint is", as if we're capable of mind-reading or as if this has not been a complex and inconsistent matter that has drifted markedly over time. Rowling began mildly, basically observing that biological women and trans women have different life experiences and, in Rowling's view, should thus be considered separately and not conflated. This was bound to be controversial to at least some extent, but was also worded poorly enough that it generated far more controversy than it need have. Due to Rowling's public prominence, it led rapidly to everything from public condemnation by people who had worked with her, to former-fan boycots, to actual threats against her safety and life. It's clear that this experience radicalized her, and her statements on the subject have moved increasingly from a sort of neutral skeptic position (which is quite common among the British in general) toward actively anti-trans, with negative responses to these antics of course ratcheting right up along with them at each step – a vicious cycle. This has been a years-long process, much of it taking place in public, and about which a fair amount has been written and published, so covering it as a chronological process, instead of something we oversimplify, should not be difficult. <span style="white-space:nowrap;font-family:'Trebuchet MS'"> — [[User:SMcCandlish|'''SMcCandlish''']] [[User talk:SMcCandlish|☏]] [[Special:Contributions/SMcCandlish|¢]] 😼 </span> 00:16, 5 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::"Rowling began mildly, basically observing that biological women and trans women have different life experiences and, in Rowling's view, should thus be considered separately and not conflated" is complete conjecture, it is equally likely that she has always been bigoted and has felt more comfortable expressing that bigotry as time has gone on or as trans people have become more accepted. [[User:LegalSmeagolian|LegalSmeagolian]] ([[User talk:LegalSmeagolian|talk]]) 00:25, 5 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::Even if her beliefs have become more radical over time (which is unprovable), there is no way to know why that is the case (hanging around other people with anti-trans views is just as plausible as what smcandlish suggested). ([[User talk:Buidhe|t]] · [[Special:Contributions/Buidhe|c]]) '''[[User:buidhe|<span style="color: black">buidhe</span>]]''' 00:48, 5 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::Or both. What is provable is that her public statements on the matter have become more radical over time. I'm not suggesting that my explanation for how/why this happened is necessarily perfect and should be in reflected in the article; let's not confuse talk-page discussion with article content. We are not mind-readers and of course have to stick to what can be reliably sourced. My point is that there is a clear chronology in evidence. <span style="white-space:nowrap;font-family:'Trebuchet MS'"> — [[User:SMcCandlish|'''SMcCandlish''']] [[User talk:SMcCandlish|☏]] [[Special:Contributions/SMcCandlish|¢]] 😼 </span> 00:11, 6 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::Summarizing Rowling's actual public statements of the period is in no way "complete conjecture", while "it is equally likely that she has always been bigoted and has felt more comfortable expressing that bigotry as time has gone on or as trans people have become more accepted" absolutely qualifies for that label. <span style="white-space:nowrap;font-family:'Trebuchet MS'"> — [[User:SMcCandlish|'''SMcCandlish''']] [[User talk:SMcCandlish|☏]] [[Special:Contributions/SMcCandlish|¢]] 😼 </span> 00:01, 6 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::That is why I don't think it is a problem for us to simply state what her viewpoint currently is, as it has reached a level that merits a label in the lead. [[User:LegalSmeagolian|LegalSmeagolian]] ([[User talk:LegalSmeagolian|talk]]) 01:48, 5 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::Perhaps, but we should not completely obscure that this has a chronology of escalation to it. <span style="white-space:nowrap;font-family:'Trebuchet MS'"> — [[User:SMcCandlish|'''SMcCandlish''']] [[User talk:SMcCandlish|☏]] [[Special:Contributions/SMcCandlish|¢]] 😼 </span> 00:15, 6 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
Regarding the suggestion that the [[WP:LABEL|label]] “anti-trans” be introduced… bear in mind that [[anti-trans]] currently redirects to [[transphobia]], making them effectively synonyms on Wikipedia. We should expect a high degree of consensus amongst high-quality sources before introducing such a label into a BLP. [[User:Barnards.tar.gz|Barnards.tar.gz]] ([[User talk:Barnards.tar.gz|talk]]) 21:08, 5 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:And that might actually be achievable in this case. My main thrust is that however the lead material on this is phrased, it needs to indicate one way or another that Rowling's public position on this became more hostile over time, and the material in the article body (and the split-out article) needs to cover this process/devolution/whatever-you-call it accurately. <span style="white-space:nowrap;font-family:'Trebuchet MS'"> — [[User:SMcCandlish|'''SMcCandlish''']] [[User talk:SMcCandlish|☏]] [[Special:Contributions/SMcCandlish|¢]] 😼 </span> 00:11, 6 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::I don't really agree on the cause but I do agree that the article should be clear that she's gotten more clearly anti-trans over time, because it's both true and sourceable. |
|||
::(Whether she stopped hiding her existing beliefs or her beliefs got more extreme is kind of an open question. My reading of the sources is that it's at least some of the former: [https://www.vox.com/culture/23622610/jk-rowling-transphobic-statements-timeline-history-controversy this Vox article is a great source on the timeline], and it demonstrates that Rowling wrote a trans character in a pretty obviously hostile way in her mystery novels in 2014, six years before she wrote her manifesto, and was liking very transphobic tweets in 2017, three years before she wrote her manifesto.) [[User:LokiTheLiar|Loki]] ([[User talk:LokiTheLiar|talk]]) 03:30, 6 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::We don’t know for certain that her views themselves have changed over time (and honestly, she pushed ROGD as a concept and heaped praise upon Magdalen Berns in her 2020 essay, so I think she was already extreme). We just know that she’s become more ''vocally'' anti-trans. So ideally, we should say “Since 2019, Rowling has espoused increasingly radical anti-trans beliefs” or something to that effect. [[User:Snokalok|Snokalok]] ([[User talk:Snokalok|talk]]) 09:01, 6 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:I do think it's important to be clear about at least some of the specific bills she opposes, since she does oppose specific bills and not just the general concept of gender self-recognition. But I also agree that sentence 3 should come first: we should say the general thing first, which is that she opposes gender self-recognition and then progress to more specific things she's said, like the specific bills she's opposed. [[User:LokiTheLiar|Loki]] ([[User talk:LokiTheLiar|talk]]) 15:44, 23 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== Should Rowling's comments about India Willoughby be included before re-write? == |
|||
<!-- [[User:DoNotArchiveUntil]] 00:01, 10 May 2024 (UTC) -->{{User:ClueBot III/DoNotArchiveUntil|1715299269}} |
|||
{{rfc|bio|pol|policy|rfcid=6F624B2}} |
|||
Should we add Rowling's [https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/news/jk-rowling-india-willoughby-twitter-gender-b2507309.html comments on India Willoughby] from March 2024 to the end of the second paragraph of [[J._K._Rowling#Transgender_people|views -> transgender people]] before the paragraph as a whole is rewritten? I am proposing that we (only) add a short summary of the fact she did misgender Willoughby on Twitter and a short quote of one of the comments she made (see examples I have proposed elsewhere in this talk page). It would have a maximum length of two sentences. Subsequent developments after her comments themselves (police report etc) would not be included. The comments Rowling made on Willoughby in March are separate from those made on several transgender people including Willoughby on April Fools' Day. I'm almost certain her comments in March were the first times Rowling publicly misgendered a trans person. This would not include Rowling's additional recent comments on trans people in Nazi Germany, or other recent (separate) topics related to her views on trans people. [[User:13tez|13tez]] ([[User talk:13tez|talk]]) 23:30, 4 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== |
==Draft 8== |
||
I'm starting to see consensus to go ahead and implement this, but it would be a pity to do so without Sandy's forthcoming commentary.—[[User:S Marshall|<b style="font-family: Verdana; color: Maroon;">S Marshall</b>]] <small>[[User talk:S Marshall|T]]/[[Special:Contributions/S Marshall|C]]</small> 08:53, 23 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
{| class="wikitable" |
|||
:I '''support''' adding these comments because: |
|||
! style="width: 30em;" | Draft 8.2: 407 words |
|||
:* They are clearly significant and a significant change and escalation in her comments on trans people. In this respect, they are not just another "controversy of the week", being at least as important as other topics and views currently included in the same section and elsewhere in the article. |
|||
! style="width: 30em;" | Draft 8.3, with extra paragraph: 444 words |
|||
:* They are at least as significant and as notable as several other quotes on Rowling's views on trans people, and other topics generally, that are already included in the article. |
|||
! style="width: 30em;" | Historical: [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=J._K._Rowling&oldid=1202117364#Transgender_people 429 words] |
|||
:* They received [https://ground.news/article/jk-rowling-will-not-delete-posts-which-could-breach-ludicrous-hate-crime-laws_0fea76 widespread coverage], again at least as much as other topics in the article. |
|||
|- |
|||
:* The section on her views on transgender people needs to accurately summarise her views and comments on transgender people or there isn't any point having it. To give an overview of her views on trans people, these comments need to be included because of their significance. |
|||
:* They can be supported by references from articles in [[WP:RELIABLE]] news sources (see [[Talk:J._K._Rowling#News_sources|News sources]] -> Sources on misgendering India Willoughby in March 2024). |
|||
:* These news articles are not [[WP:RSBREAKING]]. They were made at least 2 days after Rowling's initial comments and/or have been published for more than 2 days, allowing for correction since then. This makes them secondary sources as well as reliable sources. |
|||
:* You shouldn't exclude topics just because they can only be referenced with (suitable) news sources and not academia, even with this being a featured article. Neither [[WP:FACR]] nor [[WP:SCHOLARSHIP]] say or imply to exclude news sources as references or that topics can only be included if they have references available from academia. |
|||
:* News articles are used as the only sources for other parts of the article, including in the same section (e.g. LGBT charities and leading...them "cruel" and "inaccurate") and the same paragraph (Rowling responded in December 2019...sex is real), so it would be inconsistent and unfair to exclude this topic from inclusion just because only news articles can be used as references rather than academia. |
|||
:* Although including a description of these comments doesn't give a full broader context in the change of Rowling's views over time, publicly attacking and misgendering a trans woman has a clear distinction from her initial comments (e.g. "Live your best life in peace and security"). In and of itself, this provides some context as to how her comments have changed until such a time as academia provides that commentary. |
|||
:* We don't need to use academic sources with broader overviews of her views on trans people generally or how they've changed to substantiate specific facts and quotes when we can already do so with suitable news sources. |
|||
:* Wikipedia is [[WP:IMPERFECT]] and a [[WP:Work in progress]], so we should add this topic now, even though we may rewrite the whole paragraph in the future. |
|||
:* As discussed elsewhere, the current text of the second paragraph was written in a [[WP:FAR]]. This was carried out even though there weren't academic sources available to describe the change in her comments over time, and instead used the best references available at that time. This reasoning was used to produce the best article possible before, optimising the relevance of the facts included and references used. We still want to produce the best article possible now, so we should use this same approach again. |
|||
:* A short summary and quote on her comments, with details and subsequent developments in [[Political views of J. K. Rowling]], would conform to [[WP:Summary]]. |
|||
:* The inclusion of these comments adheres to [[WP:NOTNEWS]] because it does not constitute original reporting and is notable. |
|||
:* Including these comments would not constitute [[WP:Recentism]]. I'm in favour of including them because of their significance and prominence, not because they happened relatively recently. If that was the case, I would be arguing for the inclusion of her comments on transgender people in Nazi Germany, which were made more recently. |
|||
:* As long as any text describing her comments is written in a [[WP:NPOV]] and everything is covered by the suitable sources available, it won't be giving [[WP:Undue weight]] to a minority view. Since it was notable and received widespread coverage, it won't be giving disproportionate coverage to an event either. By summarising without going into details, it would adhere to [[WP:WEIGHT]] as well. |
|||
:* Since her comments are verifiable from suitable sources, as long as any text describing her comments is written in a [[WP:NPOV]], it will conform to [[WP:Biography of living persons]]. |
|||
:[[User:13tez|13tez]] ([[User talk:13tez|talk]]) 23:31, 4 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:Pinging recent article editors {{re|Dtobias|Athousandcuts2005|Asperthrow|Xxanthippe|CallieCrewmanAuthor|CrossHouses|WorthPoke2|Mtspinxtreme246}}, recent participants in talk page discussions {{re|Sideswipe9th|Colin|WikiFouf|Victoriaearle|Kmhkmh|Snokalok|Amanda A. Brant|PenelopePlesiosaur|LokiTheLiar|Simonm223|Bazza_7|Umdlye|Dimadick|Adam_Cuerden|Daff22}}, and FAR participants {{re|SandyGeorgia|Hog Farm|Czello|Firefangledfeathers|Bastun|Vanamonde93|Olivaw-Daneel|AleatoryPonderings|Johnbod|DrKay}} I've created this topic because my discussions on whether to include Rowling's comments on Willoughby have stalled and consensus is needed as, from prior discussion, there are several people who take both views. Please let me know what your thoughts are. Thank you! [[User:13tez|13tez]] ([[User talk:13tez|talk]]) 23:31, 4 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::My opinion on the issue as presented by the RFC is "yes", but my more general opinion is that this is a premature RFC that needed some more [[WP:RFCBEFORE]]. It's too narrow: you can see above that there's lots of discussions about lots of changes to be made to the article. An RFC is a big formal process that takes at minimum 30 days, and usually freezes the article in the status quo state during that time. That doesn't seem like a great way to get consensus on a single small change that's really about a bunch of bigger structural issues. |
|||
::If we were gonna have an RFC, I'd rather have an RFC on whether that section should be significantly expanded. But really, I don't think we need an RFC to make one small change with a clear consensus behind it already. So personally I'd advocate taking off the RFC header and just discussing the changes normally; if there's any value here it's the long list of pings and not the formal process. [[User:LokiTheLiar|Loki]] ([[User talk:LokiTheLiar|talk]]) 23:39, 4 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::RFCs do not take a minimum of 30 days. Please see [[Wikipedia:Requests for comment#Duration]]. |
|||
:::The section immediately following that includes instructions on ending RFCs early; in particular, the editor who asked the question is entitled to stop asking their question at any time (just remove the RFC template). [[User:WhatamIdoing|WhatamIdoing]] ([[User talk:WhatamIdoing|talk]]) 16:08, 9 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::I'm for including it but I think it should be included as an example of her misgendering trans women rather than an event in itself. It could be tied to her series of (very recent, I'll admit) tweets on April 1st, as was done in [https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/news/jk-rowling-misgender-trans-snp-b2521530.html this ''Independent'' article] [[User:WikiFouf|WikiFouf]] ([[User talk:WikiFouf|talk]]) 00:08, 5 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::I’m '''not opposed''', but I think that in the context of the whole rant where she said just as bad things about other trans women and misgendered them similarly, Wiloughby is an odd choice to single out. [[User:Snokalok|Snokalok]] ([[User talk:Snokalok|talk]]) 00:10, 5 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::Thanks for tagging me! I think we should include information on Rowling's tweets about Willoughby. They have sparked much controversy, and most of the internet now knows about it. Also, they would serve as a good example of what exactly Rowling is doing to offend trans people. [[User:CallieCrewmanAuthor|CallieCrewmanAuthor]] ([[User talk:CallieCrewmanAuthor|talk]]) 00:39, 5 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::I would say worth including: if nothing else it's the point where she switched to just misgendering random prominent trans people, rather than previously restricting herself to those accused of wrongdoing. [[User:WorthPoke2|WorthPoke2]] ([[User talk:WorthPoke2|talk]]) 12:35, 5 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:'''Comment''' three weeks ago I [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=J._K._Rowling&diff=prev&oldid=1213903528 added] a mention. I self-reverted because it needed rewording & ref formatting, but the issue seemed to be resolved. Why wasn't that accepted & why isn't it enough? And why does it need an RfC? Three weeks gone from Wikipedia only to return to a bunch of pings and many tl;dr discussions. [[User:Victoriaearle|Victoria]] ([[User talk:Victoriaearle|tk]]) 01:09, 5 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::I'd say that blocking editing isn't very useful. If thibgs get sorted through collaboration, great. <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.118em 0.118em 0.118em; class=texhtml">'''[[User:Adam Cuerden|Adam Cuerden]]''' <sup>([[User talk:Adam Cuerden|talk]])</sup><sub>Has about 8.9% of all [[WP:FP|FPs]].</sub></span> 04:04, 5 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
* '''Not yet''', and unclear at this point. This RFC is premature; [[WP:RFCBEFORE]] has been inadequate, and the resolution isn't a simple yes or no. With the need to balance the voluminous [[WP:NOTNEWS|newsy]] and [[WP:RECENTISM|recent]] information about Rowling with higher-quality sources (not yet available on the recent events), proceeding to carefully draft new content is a better way to go than pushing in detail on recent events that will result in proseline and a bloated article if done similarly every time Rowling engages a news cycle. Past efforts avoided long lists of proseline, blow-by-blow, and who's who and naming individuals who support/oppose yada yada, as that detail can be better explored in the [[Political views of J. K. Rowling]] article (which I see is still poorly organized [[WP:PROSELINE|proseline]] without significant development of this content). I am yet to be convinced that naming one individual is something that higher quality sources will pick up over time as they summarize the events of 2024, and submit that updating the content here will be better done with broad strokes, relying on a summary of extra detail in the sub-article. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 08:39, 5 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*:Also, could folks here please keep in mind that the FAR was hamstrung by another very premature and poorly discussed/designed RFC, at [[Talk:J. K. Rowling/Archive 11]], which left the article stuck with sub-optimal content (where editors opined on content that wasn't even verified by the sources) for several years. Please don't fall into the same trap. Suggestions of how to rewrite would be more helpful than another premature RFC. If we include one name, do we go back to include all names, which will bloat the content? [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 14:04, 5 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*'''Strong support for inclusion''' furthermore greater weight should be given to LGBT voices with regard to Rowling's forceful anti-trans views and activism. To do less is a non-neutral white-wash. [[User:Simonm223|Simonm223]] ([[User talk:Simonm223|talk]]) 11:51, 5 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
* '''Not yet''' per [[WP:RECENT]] and [[WP:DUE]]. As noted above, Rowling has misgendered a lot of people, so why single out one of them? When this has been digested beyond the news cycle by high quality sources, a well-balanced addition may be warranted. -- [[User:Ssilvers|Ssilvers]] ([[User talk:Ssilvers|talk]]) 14:51, 5 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
* '''Oppose'''. This could eventually become part of a more comprehensive recounting of her recent activity, but by itself it's just another silly Twitter spat. From the tone of comments here I see lots of people champing at the bit to make the article a hatchet job against Rowling, and I'll do everything I can to oppose this. [[User:Dtobias|*Dan T.*]] ([[User talk:Dtobias|talk]]) 15:20, 5 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*'''Oppose''' - Echoing the sentiments of prior editors, seems UNDUE at this moment and I do think this is a case of RECENTISM. If content does become included, we must use Wikipedia's voice and properly attribute the reliable sources cited as such impactful claims could be breaching [[WP:EXCEPTIONAL|BLP protections]]. As editors it is hard to not let personal views cloud our neutrality, it is not our place to [[WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS| right great wrongs]]. [[User:MaximusEditor|MaximusEditor]] ([[User talk:MaximusEditor|talk]]) 17:38, 5 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
* '''Bad RFC''' - This plainly fails [[WP:RFCST]] since the statement is far from brief. I would support a '''procedural close,''' but put me in the '''oppose''' camp for the reasons already listed. [[User:Nemov|Nemov]] ([[User talk:Nemov|talk]]) 18:50, 5 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*:The RFC question is 159 words. This is a reasonable length. I think you may have mistaken [[Talk:J. K. Rowling#c-13tez-20240404233100-Survey|the OP's long response]] for [[Talk:J. K. Rowling#c-13tez-20240404233000-Should Rowling's comments about India Willoughby be included before re-write?|the actual RFC question]]? (Brevity is supposed to keep pages like [[Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Biographies]] at a functional size. It is not meant to restrict the OP from giving a detailed explanation of their view.) [[User:WhatamIdoing|WhatamIdoing]] ([[User talk:WhatamIdoing|talk]]) 16:11, 9 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
* Like I said in a comment above, '''procedural close''' but '''support''' if not closed. [[User:LokiTheLiar|Loki]] ([[User talk:LokiTheLiar|talk]]) 18:59, 5 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
* '''Procedural close''' or '''procedural oppose''' if left open. Not enough RFCBEFORE and no neutral statement. There's enough news about Rowling's recent statements and actions that we should carefully craft some proposals, attempt to reach a consensus, and seek dispute resolution (maybe an RfC) if we can't do so locally. It's too early in the process to lock ourselves into mentioning a specific event. [[User:Firefangledfeathers|Firefangledfeathers]] ([[User talk:Firefangledfeathers|talk]] / [[Special:Contributions/Firefangledfeathers|contribs]]) 23:13, 5 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
* '''Procedural close''' for the reasons Firefangledfeathers and others have already outlined. [[User:-sche|-sche]] ([[User talk:-sche|talk]]) 19:21, 6 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*'''Support'''. {{summoned by bot}} Rowling's position on this issue is long established and it would therefore have DUE [[WP:WEIGHT]] for inclusion. Not including the material would smack of white washing it. ''[[User:TarnishedPath|<b style="color:#ff0000;">Tar</b><b style="color:#ff7070;">nis</b><b style="color:#ffa0a0;">hed</b><b style="color:#420000;">Path</b>]]''<sup>[[User talk:TarnishedPath|<b style="color:#bd4004;">talk</b>]]</sup> 01:47, 7 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
* '''Oppose''' per the above. - [[User:SchroCat|SchroCat]] ([[User talk:SchroCat|talk]]) 07:52, 7 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*'''Oppose'''. This is just the latest incident in a very long running episode that should be treated at a much higher level of summarisation. Maybe it could go in [[Twitter drama of J.K. Rowling]]. Also, the RfC is problematic for all the reasons highlighted. [[User:Barnards.tar.gz|Barnards.tar.gz]] ([[User talk:Barnards.tar.gz|talk]]) 09:01, 7 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*'''Oppose'''. There is an issue recentism here and in general various details or "the latest" regarding her anti-trans views belong in the article on her political views rather than in this one, where a general summary of her anti trans views suffices. One that also should ideally be somewhat stable and not in need for constant updates. All that aside i have strong disliking of inserting the "latest twitter feud" or more general "latest social media driven shit storm" into biographical articles. It is imho a good rule of thumb to avoid that (certain exceptions notwithstanding)--[[User:Kmhkmh|Kmhkmh]] ([[User talk:Kmhkmh|talk]]) 15:47, 7 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*'''Oppose''', not indivually noteable enough IMO.--[[User:Ortizesp|Ortizesp]] ([[User talk:Ortizesp|talk]]) 12:40, 11 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
* '''Oppose''' per others above and [[WP:RECENTISM]]. Also [[WP:UNDUE]] to single this one incident out; [[Political views of J. K. Rowling#Transgender rights]] is the more appropriate place to mention those comments. [[User:Some1|Some1]] ([[User talk:Some1|talk]]) 00:57, 16 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*'''Support'''Yeah,include it. If she's a bigot, she's a bigot, and no article about her would be complete without including that aspect of her character. Just be sure whatever is written is true, accurate, and in keeping with Wikipedia conventions. All people in the world have negative characteristics, as well as positive ones. Everyone is a mix of both, as a balanced article about Ms. Rowling will reflect.[[User:Coalcity58|Coalcity58]] ([[User talk:Coalcity58|talk]]) 03:56, 16 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*'''Oppose'''. The article already has a substantial subsection about her views and I don't see how this incident can have a lasting significance. Would anyone write about it one year from now? 10 years? [[User:Alaexis|Alaexis]]<sub>[[User_talk:Alaexis|¿question?]]</sub> 11:18, 16 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*{{sbb}} '''Oppose''' in line with SandyGeorgia and the points about the current necessity & structure of this RfC. Happy days, ~ '''[[User:LindsayH|Lindsay]]'''<sup>'''[[User_talk:LindsayH|H]]'''[[User_talk:LindsayH|ello]]</sup> 17:15, 17 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
|| {{Main|Political views of J. K. Rowling#Transgender rights}} |
|||
===Discussion=== |
|||
It's absurd to argue it's still too soon for this article to indicate clearly Rowling's transphobia considering the extent to which it has impacted her: |
|||
<!-- Overview --> |
|||
*Career trajectory with her transphobic detective novels |
|||
Rowling has [[Feminist views on transgender topics#Gender-critical feminism and trans-exclusionary radical feminism|gender-critical]] views.{{sfn|Whited|2024|loc= p. 7. "But in June 2020, Rowling's manifesto led some people to label her as a trans-exclusionary radical feminist (TERF), a term first used in 2008 that has more recently evolved as 'gender critical'."}}{{sfn|Steinfeld|2020|loc= pp. 34–35. "Just ask JK Rowling and other women who have been labelled as Terfs"}}{{sfn|Schwirblat|Freberg|Freberg|2022|loc= pp. 367–368. "This sparked a heated discussion within the Twitter community, one side buttressing Rowling's statements, and the other espousing her as a trans-exclusionary radical feminist (TERF)"}} She opposes the [[Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill]] in Scotland, and resists proposed changes to the [[Equality Act 2010]] in the UK that would make it simpler to transition without a medical diagnosis. She opposes gender self-recognition{{sfn|Whited|2024|p=7}}<ref name=BacksProtest>{{cite news |title= JK Rowling backs protest over Scottish gender bill |date= 6 October 2022|url= https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-63162533 |publisher= [[BBC News]] |access-date= 5 May 2024}}</ref>{{efn|Rowling wrote in 2020: "The current explosion of trans activism is urging a removal of almost all the robust systems through which candidates for sex reassignment were once required to pass. A man who intends to have no surgery and take no hormones may now secure himself a Gender Recognition Certificate and be a woman in the sight of the law."<ref name=RowlingReasons/>}} and suggests that children and [[cisgender]] women are threatened by trans women and trans-positive messages.{{sfn|Duggan|2021|p=161}} Rowling is concerned that easier transitions could affect access to female-only spaces and legal protections for women.<ref name= Milne2020>{{cite web|first1= Amber |last1=Milne|first2 = Rachel| last2 =Savage | url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-lgbt-rowling-explainer-trfn-idUSKBN23I3AI | title=Explainer: J. K. Rowling and trans women in single-sex spaces: what's the furore? | publisher=[[Reuters]] | date=11 June 2020 | access-date=6 April 2021 }}</ref><ref name= Brooks2020>{{Cite news|last=Brooks|first=Libby|date=11 June 2020|title=Why is JK Rowling speaking out now on sex and gender debate? |url= http://www.theguardian.com/books/2020/jun/11/why-is-jk-rowling-speaking-out-now-on-sex-and-gender-debate|access-date=14 January 2022 |work= [[The Guardian]] }}</ref><ref name=Kottasova2019>{{cite news |title= J.K. Rowling's 'transphobia' tweet row spotlights a fight between equality campaigners and radical feminists |first1= Ivana |last1= Kottasová |first2= Scottie |last2= Andrew |publisher= [[CNN]] |date= 20 December 2019|url= https://edition.cnn.com/2019/12/20/uk/jk-rowling-transgender-explainer-intl-gbr/index.html |access-date= 5 May 2024}}</ref>{{efn|The laws and proposed changes are the UK [[Gender Recognition Act 2004]] and the Scotland [[Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill|Gender Recognition Reform Bill]]; related also are the UK [[Equality Act 2010]]{{sfn|Pedersen|2022|loc=Abstract}}{{sfn|Suissa|Sullivan|2021|pp=66–69}}{{sfn|Duggan|2021|loc=PDF pp. 14–15 (160–161)}} and the Scotland Gender Representation on Public Boards Act of 2018.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Watson |first1=Jeremy |title=JK Rowling donates £70k for legal challenge on defining a woman |date=18 February 2024 |url=https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/jk-rowling-donates-70k-for-legal-challenge-on-defining-a-woman-73tkvwq0b |work=[[The Times]] |access-date=5 May 2024|archive-url=https://archive.today/20240217200104/https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/jk-rowling-donates-70k-for-legal-challenge-on-defining-a-woman-73tkvwq0b |archive-date=17 February 2024 |url-status=live |url-access=subscription}}</ref>}} In April 2024, responding to [[Hate Crime and Public Order (Scotland) Act 2021|Scotland's Hate Crime and Public Order Act]], she tweeted a list of trans women, writing that they are "men, every last one of them".<ref name=Brooks2024>{{cite news |last1=Brooks |first1=Libby |title=JK Rowling’s posts on X will not be recorded as non-crime hate incident |url=https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/apr/03/jk-rowling-comments-scotland-non-crime-hate-incident |work=[[The Guardian]] |date=3 April 2024 |access-date= 3 May 2024}}</ref> |
|||
*Relationship with the cast of Harry Potter |
|||
*Reception of the Hogwarts video game |
|||
*General perception in public |
|||
*Relationship to LGBT fans in particular. |
|||
The article, as it stands, is absurdly non-neutral. [[User:Simonm223|Simonm223]] ([[User talk:Simonm223|talk]]) 11:55, 5 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
<!-- History --> |
|||
:Here are some sample references for each of the above. I should note this is a non-exhaustive list.: |
|||
Friction over Rowling's gender-critical writings surged in 2019 when she defended [[Maya Forstater]],{{sfn|Whited|2024|pp=6–8}} whose [[Forstater v Centre for Global Development Europe|Forstater's employment contract was not renewed]] after she shared gender-critical views.{{sfn|Pugh|2020|p=7}} Rowling wrote that trans people should live in "peace and security", but questioned women being "force[d] out of their jobs for stating that sex is real".<ref name=Stack2019/>{{efn|A tribunal ruled in 2021 that Forstater's gender-critical views were protected under the 2010 UK [[Equality Act 2010|Equality Act]].<ref name=Faulkner2021>{{cite news |first= Doug |last= Faulkner |url= https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-57426579 |title= Maya Forstater: woman wins tribunal appeal over transgender tweets |publisher= [[BBC News]] |date= 10 June 2021 |access-date= 26 March 2022}}</ref><ref name=Siddique2021>{{cite news |first= Haroon |last= Siddique |date= 10 June 2021 |title= Gender-critical views are a protected belief, appeal tribunal rules|url= https://www.theguardian.com/law/2021/jun/10/gender-critical-views-protected-belief-appeal-tribunal-rules-maya-forstater |work= [[The Guardian]] |access-date= 26 March 2022}}</ref>{{sfn|Pape|2022|p=230}} In July 2022, a new tribunal decision was published (''[[Forstater v Center for Global Development Europe]]'') ruling that Forstater had suffered direct discrimination from her employer.<ref>{{cite news |title=Maya Forstater: Woman discriminated against over trans tweets, tribunal rules|date=6 July 2022 |url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-62061929 |publisher=[[BBC News]] |access-date=6 July 2022}}</ref>}} According to ''Harry Potter'' scholar Lana Whited, in the next six months "Rowling herself fanned the flames as she became increasingly vocal".{{sfn|Whited|2024|p=6}} In June 2020,{{sfn|Whited|2024|p=6}} Rowling mocked the phrase "[[people who menstruate]]",<ref name=Gross2020>{{Cite news|last=Gross|first=Jenny|date=7 June 2020|title=Daniel Radcliffe criticizes J.K. Rowling's anti-transgender tweets|work=[[The New York Times]]|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/07/arts/Jk-Rowling-controversy.html |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200607221400/https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/07/arts/Jk-Rowling-controversy.html |archive-date=7 June 2020 |url-access=subscription |url-status=live|access-date=6 January 2022 }}</ref> and tweeted that [[women's rights]] and "lived reality" would be "erased" if "sex isn't real".{{sfn|Duggan|2021|pp=14–15}}{{sfn|Pugh|2020|p=7}} |
|||
<!-- Reaction --> |
|||
On the relationship of the pseudonym Robert Galbraith to [[Robert Galbraith Heath]] and the transphobia of the books: |
|||
Rowling's views have divided [[Feminist views on transgender topics|feminists]];<ref name=Kottasova2019>{{cite news |first1= Ivana |last1= Kottasová |first2= Scottie | last2= Andrew|title= J.K. Rowling's 'transphobia' tweet row spotlights a fight between equality campaigners and radical feminists |publisher= [[CNN]] |date= 20 December 2019 |access-date= 29 March 2022 | url= https://www.cnn.com/2019/12/20/uk/jk-rowling-transgender-explainer-intl-gbr/index.html}}</ref><ref name=BBC2020JKRResponds>{{cite news |url= https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-53002557 |publisher= [[BBC News]] |title= JK Rowling responds to trans tweets criticism |date= 11 June 2020 |access-date= 29 March 2022}}</ref><ref>{{cite news | url=https://www.newstatesman.com/international/2020/09/judith-butler-culture-wars-jk-rowling-and-living-anti-intellectual-times | title=Judith Butler on the culture wars, JK Rowling and living in 'anti-intellectual times'|first=Alona |last=Ferber | work=[[New Statesman]] | date=22 September 2020 | access-date=26 March 2021}}</ref> fuelled<!-- This article uses British spelling --> debates on [[freedom of speech]],{{sfn|Pape|2022|pp=229–230}}<ref>{{cite web|title=BBC nominates J.K.Rowling's controversial essay of trans rights for award|url=https://www.dw.com/en/bbc-nominates-jk-rowlings-controversial-essay-on-trans-rights-for-award/a-56014673|website=[[DW News]]|date=22 December 2020|access-date=22 December 2020}}</ref> [[academic freedom]]{{sfn|Suissa|Sullivan|2021|pp=66–69}} and [[cancel culture]];{{sfn|Schwirblat|Freberg|Freberg|2022|pp=367–369}} and prompted declarations of [[Transgender rights movement|support for transgender people]] from the literary,<ref>UK, US, Canada, Ireland: {{cite news |last= Flood |first= Alison |date=9 October 2020|title= Stephen King, Margaret Atwood and Roxane Gay champion trans rights in open letter|url= https://www.theguardian.com/books/2020/oct/09/stephen-king-margaret-atwood-roxane-gay-champion-trans-rights-open-letter-jk-rowling |work= [[The Guardian]] |access-date= 2 April 2022}}</ref> arts<ref>{{cite magazine|last= Rowley |first= Glenn |title= Artists fire back at J.K. Rowling's anti-trans remarks, share messages in support of the community|url= https://www.billboard.com/culture/pride/artists-fire-back-jk-rowling-anti-trans-remarks-9400386/|magazine= [[Billboard (magazine)|Billboard]]|date= 11 June 2020 |access-date= 7 April 2022}}</ref> and culture sectors.<ref>Culture sector: |
|||
* [https://ew.com/books/j-k-rowling-the-ink-black-heart-transphobic-character/ Entertainment Weekly] "The Harry Potter creator's latest novel, The Ink Black Heart — the sixth installment in her ongoing crime series which she pens under the name Robert Galbraith — was released Tuesday, and it reportedly contains a storyline that echoes events from Rowling's own life. |
|||
* [[Universal Destinations & Experiences]], [[Warner Bros.]] and [[Scholastic Corporation]]: {{cite news |last1= Siegel |first1= Tatiana |last2= Abramovitch |first2= Seth |date= 10 June 2020 |title= Universal Parks responds to J.K. Rowling tweets: 'Our core values include diversity, inclusion and respect' |work= [[The Hollywood Reporter]] |url= https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/lifestyle/lifestyle-news/universal-parks-responds-jk-rowling-tweets-core-values-include-diversity-inclusion-respect-1297845/ |access-date= 3 April 2022|ref=none}} |
|||
* [[Warner Bros. Interactive Entertainment]] president: {{cite news |last= Skrebels |first= Joe |title= WB Interactive president responds to ongoing debate over supporting JK Rowling |date=1 October 2020 |url= https://www.ign.com/articles/wb-interactive-president-responds-to-ongoing-debate-over-supporting-jk-rowling |publisher= [[IGN]] |access-date= 2 April 2022|ref=none}}</ref> She has been the target of widespread condemnation,{{sfn|Duggan|2021|loc=PDF pp. 14–15 (160–161)}}{{sfn|Schwirblat|Freberg|Freberg|2022|pp=367–369}}{{sfn|Pape|2022|pp=229–230, 238}} insults, and threats, including death threats.{{sfn|Whited|2024|p=9}}<ref name=Burnell4June>{{Cite news|last=Burnell|first=Paul|date=4 June 2024|title= Internet troll threatened to kill JK Rowling and MP|publisher=[[BBC News]]|url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c044vevjyd7o |access-date= 9 June 2024}}</ref> Criticism came from Harry Potter fansites, LGBT charities, leading actors of the Wizarding World,{{sfn|Henderson|2022|p=224}}<ref name=Petter2020>{{Cite web|last= Petter|first=Olivia|date=17 September 2020|title=Mermaids writes open letter to JK Rowling following her recent comments on trans people|url=https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/mermaids-jk-rowling-transphobia-transgender-sexual-abuse-domestic-letter-a9565176.html|access-date=26 March 2022|work=[[The Independent]] |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200615235531/https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/mermaids-jk-rowling-transphobia-transgender-sexual-abuse-domestic-letter-a9565176.html |archive-date=15 June 2020}}</ref><ref>{{cite news | url=https://www.newstatesman.com/long-reads/2021/11/the-battle-for-stonewall-the-lgbt-charity-and-the-uks-gender-wars | title=The battle for Stonewall: the LGBT charity and the UK's gender wars | work=[[New Statesman]]|first=Gaby |last=Hinsliff|date=3 November 2021 | access-date=24 November 2021}}</ref> and [[Human Rights Campaign]].<ref name= Milne2020/><ref name=AP7June2020>{{cite news |title= JK Rowling's tweets on transgender people spark outrage |date= 7 June 2020 |url= https://apnews.com/article/entertainment-jk-rowling-us-news-media-7338b2b262090c00f04deafe2e6689c2 |publisher= [[Associated Press]] |access-date= 4 May 2024}}</ref><ref name=Waterson2020>{{Cite news|last= Waterson |first= Jim|title= Children's news website apologises to JK Rowling over trans tweet row|url= https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/jul/23/childrens-news-website-apologises-jk-rowling-trans-tweet-day|date= 23 July 2020 |access-date=26 March 2022|work=[[The Guardian]] |quote= Rowling's comments on gender were condemned by LGBT charities and the leading stars of her Harry Potter film franchise.}}</ref><ref name=Lang2020>{{cite magazine |last=Lang |first=Brent |title= Eddie Redmayne criticizes J.K. Rowling's anti-trans tweets |date= 10 June 2020 |url= https://variety.com/2020/film/news/eddie-redmayne-jk-rowling-anti-trans-tweets-harry-potter-fantastic-beasts-1234630226/ |magazine= [[Variety (magazine)|Variety]]|access-date=28 March 2022 |quote= Eddie Redmayne, star of the ''Fantastic Beasts'' franchise, is speaking out against J.K. Rowling's anti-trans tweets, as the controversy surrounding the author and her beliefs continues to swirl.}}</ref> After [[Kerry Kennedy]] expressed "profound disappointment" in her views, Rowling returned the [[Ripple of Hope Award]] given to her by the Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights organisation.<ref name=RFKAward>{{cite news |last=Flood|first=Alison |url= https://amp.theguardian.com/books/2020/aug/28/jk-rowling-robert-f-kennedy-human-rights-award-trans-views|title=JK Rowling returns human rights award to group that denounces her trans views |work=[[The Guardian]]|date=28 August 2020|access-date=28 August 2020}}</ref> |
|||
<!-- Denial --> |
|||
In the novel, a popular YouTube content creator named Edie Ledwell is met with a wave of backlash online after her work is deemed racist, ableist, and transphobic. As a result, the character was "doxxed with photos of her home plastered on the internet, subjected to death and rape threats for having an opinion, and was ultimately found stabbed to death in a cemetery," reports Rolling Stone." |
|||
Rowling denies being transphobic.<ref name=RowlingReasons>{{cite web|title=J.K. Rowling writes about her reasons for speaking out on sex and gender issues |url=https://www.jkrowling.com/opinions/j-k-rowling-writes-about-her-reasons-for-speaking-out-on-sex-and-gender-issues/ |publisher=JK Rowling |date=10 June 2020 |access-date=10 June 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200610182056/https://www.jkrowling.com/opinions/j-k-rowling-writes-about-her-reasons-for-speaking-out-on-sex-and-gender-issues/ |archive-date=10 June 2020 |url-status=live}}</ref><ref name= Dismisses>{{cite news |title= JK Rowling dismisses backlash over trans comments: 'I don't care about my legacy' |date= 22 February 2023|url= https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-64729304 |publisher= [[BBC News]] |access-date= 3 May 2024}}</ref> In an essay posted on her website in June 2020 – which left trans people feeling betrayed{{sfn|Whited|2024|p=7}}{{sfn|Henderson|2022|p=224}} – Rowling said her views on women's rights sprang from survivorship of domestic abuse and [[sexual assault]].{{sfn|Duggan|2021|pp=160–161)}}<ref name=Shirbon2020>{{cite news |last1=Shirbon |first1=Estelle |title=J.K. Rowling reveals past abuse and defends right to speak on trans issues |url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-rowling/j-k-rowling-reveals-past-abuse-and-defends-right-to-speak-on-trans-issues-idUSKBN23H2XI |publisher=[[Reuters]] |date=10 June 2020 |access-date=13 June 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200611200348/https://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-rowling/j-k-rowling-reveals-past-abuse-and-defends-right-to-speak-on-trans-issues-idUSKBN23H2XI |archive-date=11 June 2020 |url-status=live}}</ref> While affirming that "the majority of trans-identified people not only pose zero threat to others, but are vulnerable ... Trans people need and deserve protection", she wrote that it would be unsafe to allow "any man who believes or feels he's a woman" into bathrooms or changing rooms.<ref name= Shirbon2020/><ref>{{cite news |last1=Gonzalez |first1=Sandra |title=J.K. Rowling explains her gender identity views in essay amid backlash |url=https://edition.cnn.com/2020/06/10/entertainment/jk-rowling/index.html |access-date=16 September 2023 |publisher=[[CNN]] |date=10 June 2020}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |last1=Garrand |first1=Danielle |title=J.K. Rowling defends herself after accusations of making 'anti-trans' comments on Twitter |url=https://www.cbsnews.com/news/j-k-rowling-defends-anti-trans-comments-twitter/ |access-date=16 September 2023 |publisher=[[CBS News]] |date=11 June 2020}}</ref> Whited asserted in 2024 that Rowling's sometimes "flippant" and "simplistic understanding of gender identity" had permanently changed her "relationship not only with fans, readers, and scholars ... but also with her works themselves".{{sfn|Whited|2024|pp=6, 8–9}} |
|||
* [https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-news/j-k-rowlings-latest-book-ink-black-heart-transphobic-views-1234582911/ Rolling Stone] "The Harry Potter author writes about a YouTube cartoon creator who was doxxed by her own fandom over content viewers found transphobic and racist. Sound familiar?" |
|||
* [https://www.out.com/books/2022/8/30/jk-rowlings-new-book-about-creator-doxxed-over-transphobia Out] "This isn't the first wild "coincidence" like this to happen recently to Rowling. When she released the first Cormoran Strike novel using the pen name Robert Galbraith, some readers noticed that her pen name is the same as Robert Galbraith Heath, a famous anti-LGBTQ+ therapist who was one of the leaders of gay conversion therapy." |
|||
* [https://www.vanityfair.com/style/2020/09/jk-rowling-transphobia-new-novel-troubled-blood-controversy Vanity Fair]"J.K. Rowling Proves Her Commitment to Transphobia in Her New Novel" (that's literally the headline). "No longer satisfied with simply repeatedly expressing her transphobic opinions on Twitter and in 3,600-word screeds on her personal website, J.K. Rowling now appears to be bringing her TERF (trans-exclusionary radical feminist) logic to a bookshelf near you via her new fictional novel, Troubled Blood, out Tuesday." "Strike traps her in his office, revealing her identity as a trans woman, with Rowling adding in a description of her Adam’s apple and hands. The detective then tells Pippa that prison “won’t be fun for you.… Not pre-op.” " |
|||
*[https://www.newsweek.com/why-jk-rowling-robert-galbraith-pseudonym-gay-conversion-robert-galbraith-heath-1532341 Newsweek] "The "Harry Potter" author just released another book in her Cormoran Strike detective novel series titled "Troubled Blood," where a plotline involving a male serial killer who disguises himself in women's clothing being cited as transphobic in some quarters. The book release follows months of criticism over her views on transgender issues. |
|||
Galbraith Heath was a mid-20th century psychiatrist who pioneered a range of unethical practices that would later become known as conversion therapy. |
|||
|| {{Main|Political views of J. K. Rowling#Transgender rights}} |
|||
He experimented with a variety of methods to "cure" gay men, using electroshock treatments in an attempt to change a person's sexual orientation—such procedures are now condemned by the medical community." |
|||
<!-- Overview --> |
|||
On the relationship with the cast of the Harry Potter films: |
|||
Rowling has [[Feminist views on transgender topics#Gender-critical feminism and trans-exclusionary radical feminism|gender-critical]] views.{{sfn|Whited|2024|loc= p. 7. "But in June 2020, Rowling's manifesto led some people to label her as a trans-exclusionary radical feminist (TERF), a term first used in 2008 that has more recently evolved as 'gender critical'."}}{{sfn|Steinfeld|2020|loc= pp. 34–35. "Just ask JK Rowling and other women who have been labelled as Terfs"}}{{sfn|Schwirblat|Freberg|Freberg|2022|loc= pp. 367–368. "This sparked a heated discussion within the Twitter community, one side buttressing Rowling's statements, and the other espousing her as a trans-exclusionary radical feminist (TERF)"}} She opposes the [[Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill]] in Scotland, and resists proposed changes to the [[Equality Act 2010]] in the UK that would make it simpler to transition without a medical diagnosis. She opposes gender self-recognition{{sfn|Whited|2024|p=7}}<ref name=BacksProtest>{{cite news |title= JK Rowling backs protest over Scottish gender bill |date= 6 October 2022|url= https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-63162533 |publisher= [[BBC News]] |access-date= 5 May 2024}}</ref>{{efn|Rowling wrote in 2020: "The current explosion of trans activism is urging a removal of almost all the robust systems through which candidates for sex reassignment were once required to pass. A man who intends to have no surgery and take no hormones may now secure himself a Gender Recognition Certificate and be a woman in the sight of the law."<ref name=RowlingReasons/>}} and suggests that children and [[cisgender]] women are threatened by trans women and trans-positive messages.{{sfn|Duggan|2021|p=161}} Rowling is concerned that easier transitions could affect access to female-only spaces and legal protections for women.<ref name= Milne2020>{{cite web|first1= Amber |last1=Milne|first2 = Rachel| last2 =Savage | url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-lgbt-rowling-explainer-trfn-idUSKBN23I3AI | title=Explainer: J. K. Rowling and trans women in single-sex spaces: what's the furore? | publisher=[[Reuters]] | date=11 June 2020 | access-date=6 April 2021 }}</ref><ref name= Brooks2020>{{Cite news|last=Brooks|first=Libby|date=11 June 2020|title=Why is JK Rowling speaking out now on sex and gender debate? |url= http://www.theguardian.com/books/2020/jun/11/why-is-jk-rowling-speaking-out-now-on-sex-and-gender-debate|access-date=14 January 2022 |work= [[The Guardian]] }}</ref><ref name=Kottasova2019>{{cite news |title= J.K. Rowling's 'transphobia' tweet row spotlights a fight between equality campaigners and radical feminists |first1= Ivana |last1= Kottasová |first2= Scottie |last2= Andrew |publisher= [[CNN]] |date= 20 December 2019|url= https://edition.cnn.com/2019/12/20/uk/jk-rowling-transgender-explainer-intl-gbr/index.html |access-date= 5 May 2024}}</ref>{{efn|The laws and proposed changes are the UK [[Gender Recognition Act 2004]] and the Scotland [[Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill|Gender Recognition Reform Bill]]; related also are the UK [[Equality Act 2010]]{{sfn|Pedersen|2022|loc=Abstract}}{{sfn|Suissa|Sullivan|2021|pp=66–69}}{{sfn|Duggan|2021|loc=PDF pp. 14–15 (160–161)}} and the Scotland Gender Representation on Public Boards Act of 2018.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Watson |first1=Jeremy |title=JK Rowling donates £70k for legal challenge on defining a woman |date=18 February 2024 |url=https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/jk-rowling-donates-70k-for-legal-challenge-on-defining-a-woman-73tkvwq0b |work=[[The Times]] |access-date=5 May 2024|archive-url=https://archive.today/20240217200104/https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/jk-rowling-donates-70k-for-legal-challenge-on-defining-a-woman-73tkvwq0b |archive-date=17 February 2024 |url-status=live |url-access=subscription}}</ref>}} In April 2024, responding to [[Hate Crime and Public Order (Scotland) Act 2021|Scotland's Hate Crime and Public Order Act]], she tweeted a list of trans women, writing that they are "men, every last one of them".<ref name=Brooks2024>{{cite news |last1=Brooks |first1=Libby |title=JK Rowling’s posts on X will not be recorded as non-crime hate incident |url=https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/apr/03/jk-rowling-comments-scotland-non-crime-hate-incident |work=[[The Guardian]] |date=3 April 2024 |access-date= 3 May 2024}}</ref> |
|||
*[https://ew.com/movies/why-j-k-rowling-didnt-join-harry-potter-reunion-special-return-to-hogwarts/ Entertainment Weekly] "J.K. Rowling, the creator and author of the massively popular Harry Potter books, did not join Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Watson, and Rupert Grint, nor did she sit down for a new interview to reminisce about adapting the eight movies inspired by the books. Instead, the producers of Return to Hogwarts used archival footage of Rowling from 2019. |
|||
<!-- History --> |
|||
An invitation was extended to Rowling to participate, but her team determined the archived comments from the writer were adequate, EW has learned." |
|||
Friction over Rowling's gender-critical writings surged in 2019 when she defended [[Maya Forstater]],{{sfn|Whited|2024|pp=6–8}} whose [[Forstater v Centre for Global Development Europe|Forstater's employment contract was not renewed]] after she shared gender-critical views.{{sfn|Pugh|2020|p=7}} Rowling wrote that trans people should live in "peace and security", but questioned women being "force[d] out of their jobs for stating that sex is real".<ref name=Stack2019/>{{efn|A tribunal ruled in 2021 that Forstater's gender-critical views were protected under the 2010 UK [[Equality Act 2010|Equality Act]].<ref name=Faulkner2021>{{cite news |first= Doug |last= Faulkner |url= https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-57426579 |title= Maya Forstater: woman wins tribunal appeal over transgender tweets |publisher= [[BBC News]] |date= 10 June 2021 |access-date= 26 March 2022}}</ref><ref name=Siddique2021>{{cite news |first= Haroon |last= Siddique |date= 10 June 2021 |title= Gender-critical views are a protected belief, appeal tribunal rules|url= https://www.theguardian.com/law/2021/jun/10/gender-critical-views-protected-belief-appeal-tribunal-rules-maya-forstater |work= [[The Guardian]] |access-date= 26 March 2022}}</ref>{{sfn|Pape|2022|p=230}} In July 2022, a new tribunal decision was published (''[[Forstater v Center for Global Development Europe]]'') ruling that Forstater had suffered direct discrimination from her employer.<ref>{{cite news |title=Maya Forstater: Woman discriminated against over trans tweets, tribunal rules|date=6 July 2022 |url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-62061929 |publisher=[[BBC News]] |access-date=6 July 2022}}</ref>}} According to ''Harry Potter'' scholar Lana Whited, in the next six months "Rowling herself fanned the flames as she became increasingly vocal".{{sfn|Whited|2024|p=6}} In June 2020,{{sfn|Whited|2024|p=6}} Rowling mocked the phrase "[[people who menstruate]]",<ref name=Gross2020>{{Cite news|last=Gross|first=Jenny|date=7 June 2020|title=Daniel Radcliffe criticizes J.K. Rowling's anti-transgender tweets|work=[[The New York Times]]|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/07/arts/Jk-Rowling-controversy.html |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200607221400/https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/07/arts/Jk-Rowling-controversy.html |archive-date=7 June 2020 |url-access=subscription |url-status=live|access-date=6 January 2022 }}</ref> and tweeted that [[women's rights]] and "lived reality" would be "erased" if "sex isn't real".{{sfn|Duggan|2021|pp=14–15}}{{sfn|Pugh|2020|p=7}} |
|||
*[https://www.thepinknews.com/2023/10/04/harry-potter-cast-trans-rights-jk-rowling/ Pink News]"In an opinion piece in the Mail on Sunday, ahead of the release of former comedy writer Linehan’s new book, he hit out at the three then-very-young actors, whom, he said, Rowling propelled to stardom. |
|||
But, in return, they insinuated that their “old mentor was a bigot”, he claimed. |
|||
<!-- Reaction --> |
|||
He said the stars “instantly betrayed” Rowling, before calling for the trio to be “remembered as symbols of the most remarkable arrogance, cowardice and ingratitude”. |
|||
Rowling's views have divided [[Feminist views on transgender topics|feminists]];<ref name=Kottasova2019>{{cite news |first1= Ivana |last1= Kottasová |first2= Scottie | last2= Andrew|title= J.K. Rowling's 'transphobia' tweet row spotlights a fight between equality campaigners and radical feminists |publisher= [[CNN]] |date= 20 December 2019 |access-date= 29 March 2022 | url= https://www.cnn.com/2019/12/20/uk/jk-rowling-transgender-explainer-intl-gbr/index.html}}</ref><ref name=BBC2020JKRResponds>{{cite news |url= https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-53002557 |publisher= [[BBC News]] |title= JK Rowling responds to trans tweets criticism |date= 11 June 2020 |access-date= 29 March 2022}}</ref><ref>{{cite news | url=https://www.newstatesman.com/international/2020/09/judith-butler-culture-wars-jk-rowling-and-living-anti-intellectual-times | title=Judith Butler on the culture wars, JK Rowling and living in 'anti-intellectual times'|first=Alona |last=Ferber | work=[[New Statesman]] | date=22 September 2020 | access-date=26 March 2021}}</ref> fuelled<!-- This article uses British spelling --> debates on [[freedom of speech]],{{sfn|Pape|2022|pp=229–230}}<ref>{{cite web|title=BBC nominates J.K.Rowling's controversial essay of trans rights for award|url=https://www.dw.com/en/bbc-nominates-jk-rowlings-controversial-essay-on-trans-rights-for-award/a-56014673|website=[[DW News]]|date=22 December 2020|access-date=22 December 2020}}</ref> [[academic freedom]]{{sfn|Suissa|Sullivan|2021|pp=66–69}} and [[cancel culture]];{{sfn|Schwirblat|Freberg|Freberg|2022|pp=367–369}} and prompted declarations of [[Transgender rights movement|support for transgender people]] from the literary,<ref>UK, US, Canada, Ireland: {{cite news |last= Flood |first= Alison |date=9 October 2020|title= Stephen King, Margaret Atwood and Roxane Gay champion trans rights in open letter|url= https://www.theguardian.com/books/2020/oct/09/stephen-king-margaret-atwood-roxane-gay-champion-trans-rights-open-letter-jk-rowling |work= [[The Guardian]] |access-date= 2 April 2022}}</ref> arts<ref>{{cite magazine|last= Rowley |first= Glenn |title= Artists fire back at J.K. Rowling's anti-trans remarks, share messages in support of the community|url= https://www.billboard.com/culture/pride/artists-fire-back-jk-rowling-anti-trans-remarks-9400386/|magazine= [[Billboard (magazine)|Billboard]]|date= 11 June 2020 |access-date= 7 April 2022}}</ref> and culture sectors.<ref>Culture sector: |
|||
* [[Universal Destinations & Experiences]], [[Warner Bros.]] and [[Scholastic Corporation]]: {{cite news |last1= Siegel |first1= Tatiana |last2= Abramovitch |first2= Seth |date= 10 June 2020 |title= Universal Parks responds to J.K. Rowling tweets: 'Our core values include diversity, inclusion and respect' |work= [[The Hollywood Reporter]] |url= https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/lifestyle/lifestyle-news/universal-parks-responds-jk-rowling-tweets-core-values-include-diversity-inclusion-respect-1297845/ |access-date= 3 April 2022|ref=none}} |
|||
* [[Warner Bros. Interactive Entertainment]] president: {{cite news |last= Skrebels |first= Joe |title= WB Interactive president responds to ongoing debate over supporting JK Rowling |date=1 October 2020 |url= https://www.ign.com/articles/wb-interactive-president-responds-to-ongoing-debate-over-supporting-jk-rowling |publisher= [[IGN]] |access-date= 2 April 2022|ref=none}}</ref> She has been the target of widespread condemnation,{{sfn|Duggan|2021|loc=PDF pp. 14–15 (160–161)}}{{sfn|Schwirblat|Freberg|Freberg|2022|pp=367–369}}{{sfn|Pape|2022|pp=229–230, 238}} insults, and threats, including death threats.{{sfn|Whited|2024|p=9}}<ref name=Burnell4June>{{Cite news|last=Burnell|first=Paul|date=4 June 2024|title= Internet troll threatened to kill JK Rowling and MP|publisher=[[BBC News]]|url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c044vevjyd7o |access-date= 9 June 2024}}</ref> Criticism came from Harry Potter fansites, LGBT charities, leading actors of the Wizarding World,{{sfn|Henderson|2022|p=224}}<ref name=Petter2020>{{Cite web|last= Petter|first=Olivia|date=17 September 2020|title=Mermaids writes open letter to JK Rowling following her recent comments on trans people|url=https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/mermaids-jk-rowling-transphobia-transgender-sexual-abuse-domestic-letter-a9565176.html|access-date=26 March 2022|work=[[The Independent]] |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200615235531/https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/mermaids-jk-rowling-transphobia-transgender-sexual-abuse-domestic-letter-a9565176.html |archive-date=15 June 2020}}</ref><ref>{{cite news | url=https://www.newstatesman.com/long-reads/2021/11/the-battle-for-stonewall-the-lgbt-charity-and-the-uks-gender-wars | title=The battle for Stonewall: the LGBT charity and the UK's gender wars | work=[[New Statesman]]|first=Gaby |last=Hinsliff|date=3 November 2021 | access-date=24 November 2021}}</ref> and [[Human Rights Campaign]].<ref name= Milne2020/><ref name=AP7June2020>{{cite news |title= JK Rowling's tweets on transgender people spark outrage |date= 7 June 2020 |url= https://apnews.com/article/entertainment-jk-rowling-us-news-media-7338b2b262090c00f04deafe2e6689c2 |publisher= [[Associated Press]] |access-date= 4 May 2024}}</ref><ref name=Waterson2020>{{Cite news|last= Waterson |first= Jim|title= Children's news website apologises to JK Rowling over trans tweet row|url= https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/jul/23/childrens-news-website-apologises-jk-rowling-trans-tweet-day|date= 23 July 2020 |access-date=26 March 2022|work=[[The Guardian]] |quote= Rowling's comments on gender were condemned by LGBT charities and the leading stars of her Harry Potter film franchise.}}</ref><ref name=Lang2020>{{cite magazine |last=Lang |first=Brent |title= Eddie Redmayne criticizes J.K. Rowling's anti-trans tweets |date= 10 June 2020 |url= https://variety.com/2020/film/news/eddie-redmayne-jk-rowling-anti-trans-tweets-harry-potter-fantastic-beasts-1234630226/ |magazine= [[Variety (magazine)|Variety]]|access-date=28 March 2022 |quote= Eddie Redmayne, star of the ''Fantastic Beasts'' franchise, is speaking out against J.K. Rowling's anti-trans tweets, as the controversy surrounding the author and her beliefs continues to swirl.}}</ref> After [[Kerry Kennedy]] expressed "profound disappointment" in her views, Rowling returned the [[Ripple of Hope Award]] given to her by the Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights organisation.<ref name=RFKAward>{{cite news |last=Flood|first=Alison |url= https://amp.theguardian.com/books/2020/aug/28/jk-rowling-robert-f-kennedy-human-rights-award-trans-views|title=JK Rowling returns human rights award to group that denounces her trans views |work=[[The Guardian]]|date=28 August 2020|access-date=28 August 2020}}</ref> |
|||
<!-- Nevertheless --> |
|||
It’s been more than 12 years since any of the actors appeared in a Potter movie." |
|||
Despite the controversy, Rowling's work is increasingly successful. Sales of ''Harry Potter'' books grew during the [[COVID-19]] lockdown.{{sfn|Pape|2022|p=238}}<ref>{{cite news |first=Mark |last= Sweney |title= Harry Potter books prove UK lockdown hit despite JK Rowling trans rights row |work= [[The Guardian]] |date= 21 July 2020 |url= https://www.theguardian.com/business/2020/jul/21/jk-rowling-book-sales-unaffected-by-transgender-views-row |access-date= 3 May 2024}}</ref> In 2023, streaming series Max (formerly HBO) began to develop a television series<ref>{{Cite web |date=12 April 2023 |title=First ever Harry Potter television series ordered by new streaming service, Max |url=https://www.wizardingworld.com/news/first-ever-harry-potter-television-series-coming-to-max |access-date=2023-04-13 |website=Wizarding World |language=en |archive-date=12 April 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230412214511/https://www.wizardingworld.com/news/first-ever-harry-potter-television-series-coming-to-max |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |date=12 April 2023 |title=Introducing the enhanced streaming service: Max |url=https://www.wizardingworld.com/news/introducing-enhanced-streaming-service-max |access-date=2023-04-13 |website=Wizarding World |language=en |archive-date=12 April 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230412214510/https://www.wizardingworld.com/news/introducing-enhanced-streaming-service-max |url-status=live }}</ref> which will be released in 2026.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Tapp |first=Tom |date=2024-02-23 |title='Harry Potter' TV Series Due To Hit Max In 2026: Everything We Know About The Cast, What J.K. Rowling Says & More – Update |url=https://deadline.com/2024/02/harry-potter-tv-series-max-release-date-cast-1235323284/ |access-date=2024-02-23 |website=Deadline |language=en-US}}</ref> |
|||
<!-- Denial --> |
|||
I'm not done but I need to step away for a moment. [[User:Simonm223|Simonm223]] ([[User talk:Simonm223|talk]]) 12:13, 5 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
Rowling denies being transphobic.<ref name=RowlingReasons>{{cite web|title=J.K. Rowling writes about her reasons for speaking out on sex and gender issues |url=https://www.jkrowling.com/opinions/j-k-rowling-writes-about-her-reasons-for-speaking-out-on-sex-and-gender-issues/ |publisher=JK Rowling |date=10 June 2020 |access-date=10 June 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200610182056/https://www.jkrowling.com/opinions/j-k-rowling-writes-about-her-reasons-for-speaking-out-on-sex-and-gender-issues/ |archive-date=10 June 2020 |url-status=live}}</ref><ref name= Dismisses>{{cite news |title= JK Rowling dismisses backlash over trans comments: 'I don't care about my legacy' |date= 22 February 2023|url= https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-64729304 |publisher= [[BBC News]] |access-date= 3 May 2024}}</ref> In an essay posted on her website in June 2020 – which left trans people feeling betrayed{{sfn|Whited|2024|p=7}}{{sfn|Henderson|2022|p=224}} – Rowling said her views on women's rights sprang from survivorship of domestic abuse and [[sexual assault]].{{sfn|Duggan|2021|pp=160–161)}}<ref name=Shirbon2020>{{cite news |last1=Shirbon |first1=Estelle |title=J.K. Rowling reveals past abuse and defends right to speak on trans issues |url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-rowling/j-k-rowling-reveals-past-abuse-and-defends-right-to-speak-on-trans-issues-idUSKBN23H2XI |publisher=[[Reuters]] |date=10 June 2020 |access-date=13 June 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200611200348/https://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-rowling/j-k-rowling-reveals-past-abuse-and-defends-right-to-speak-on-trans-issues-idUSKBN23H2XI |archive-date=11 June 2020 |url-status=live}}</ref> While affirming that "the majority of trans-identified people not only pose zero threat to others, but are vulnerable ... Trans people need and deserve protection", she wrote that it would be unsafe to allow "any man who believes or feels he's a woman" into bathrooms or changing rooms.<ref name= Shirbon2020/><ref>{{cite news |last1=Gonzalez |first1=Sandra |title=J.K. Rowling explains her gender identity views in essay amid backlash |url=https://edition.cnn.com/2020/06/10/entertainment/jk-rowling/index.html |access-date=16 September 2023 |publisher=[[CNN]] |date=10 June 2020}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |last1=Garrand |first1=Danielle |title=J.K. Rowling defends herself after accusations of making 'anti-trans' comments on Twitter |url=https://www.cbsnews.com/news/j-k-rowling-defends-anti-trans-comments-twitter/ |access-date=16 September 2023 |publisher=[[CBS News]] |date=11 June 2020}}</ref> Whited asserted in 2024 that Rowling's sometimes "flippant" and "simplistic understanding of gender identity" had permanently changed her "relationship not only with fans, readers, and scholars ... but also with her works themselves".{{sfn|Whited|2024|pp=6, 8–9}} |
|||
|| {{Main|Political views of J. K. Rowling#Transgender rights}} |
|||
:OK here's some more. |
|||
:Continuing on the relationship with the Harry Potter cast: |
|||
:*[https://www.usmagazine.com/celebrity-news/pictures/harry-potter-cast-how-stars-feel-about-j-k-rowling-controversy/ Us Weekly]As the controversy continued, several members of the Harry Potter universe including Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Watson and Rupert Grint, appeared to distance themselves from Rowling. “I firmly stand with the trans community,” Grint said in a statement to Us Weekly in June 2020. “Trans women are women. Trans men are men. We should all be entitled to live with love and without judgment.” and "Amid all of her controversies, Rowling did not take part in HBO’s recent Harry Potter 20th Anniversary reunion special but was instead featured in archival footage shot in 2019." |
|||
:*[https://www.scmp.com/magazines/style/celebrity/article/3160435/inside-jk-rowlings-relationship-harry-potter-cast-her South China Morning Post]"The main trio of Harry Potter – Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Watson and Rupert Grint – spoke out against Rowling’s 2020 tweet, which received backlash from the LGBT community" "Radcliffe’s statement was published by The Trevor Project – a non-profit dedicated to suicide prevention in the LGBTQ+ community. While Radcliffe acknowledged that Rowling was largely responsible for how his life and career had panned out thus far, he couldn’t stand by her comments. He apologised to all those who felt they could no longer cherish the Harry Potter series as they once did, and he hoped that people would still be able to find their own values in the stories despite Rowling’s tweets." "On the same day, Watson posted throwback photos to her Instagram, looking back on her Harry Potter experience. She expressed her gratitude for the fans and her fellow cast members – however, once again, there was no mention of Rowling." |
|||
:On the reception of Hogwarts Legacy: |
|||
:*[https://www.thegamer.com/hogwarts-legacy-transphobia-sales-reviews-jk-rowling/ The Gamer]"Hogwarts Legacy has already sold over 12 million copies. Good job, everyone - we worked together to show that pesky woke boycott who’s boss and stuck up for the little billionaire and the multinational corporation." |
|||
:*[https://www.cbc.ca/news/entertainment/hogwarts-legacy-controversy-explained-1.6765491 CBC] "A new Harry Potter video game is being boycotted by trans people and allies in the gaming community who say buying and playing the game puts money in J.K. Rowling's pocket. |
|||
:The Harry Potter author has been heavily scrutinized for expressing views critics say are transphobic, vilify trans people and play into dangerous stereotypes amid a swell of anti-trans violence, legislation and sentiments across North America and Western Europe." "Critics say giving money to a game that benefits Rowling financially is harmful, as she has questioned the use of gender-neutral language and the right of trans people to use gendered bathrooms. She has also opposed Scottish legislation that would make it easier for people to legally change their genders" "The boycott also extended to news outlets dedicated to gaming culture, where some made an editorial decision not to review or write about the game, instead spotlighting games made by trans people or asking readers to donate to trans advocacy organizations like Trans Lifeline." |
|||
:*[https://www.theguardian.com/games/2023/feb/08/pushing-buttons-hogwarts-legacy-jk-rowling The Guardian]"I’ve spent the past week playing and reviewing Hogwarts Legacy, an exercise in wizarding wish-fulfilment that would once have been a no-brainer purchase for anyone who grew up fantasising about walking the hallowed halls of that imaginary castle. But like the rest of the Wizarding World, including the ailing Fantastic Beasts franchise, Hogwarts Legacy has become caught up in the controversy surrounding JK Rowling’s statements about sex and gender. (This is a pretty comprehensive breakdown of what she has publicly said.) As someone who unequivocally supports trans rights, Rowling’s comments have soured and complicated my relationship with Harry Potter – and I am far from alone." "As a result of this controversy, some games media outlets decided not to cover Hogwarts Legacy. The moderators of ResetEra, one of the biggest games discussion forums, have banned all mention of it. One of the game’s actors, meanwhile – Sebastian Croft, who also plays a character in beloved LGBTQ+ Netflix teen drama, Heartstopper – has followed the example of the stars of the Potter movies and issued a statement distancing himself from Rowling’s comments. “I was cast in this project over three years ago, back when all Harry Potter was to me, was the magical world I grew up with. This was long before I was aware of JK Rowling’s views,” he said, in a series of tweets. “I’m really sorry to anyone hurt by this announcement. There is no LGB without the T.”" |
|||
:[[User:Simonm223|Simonm223]] ([[User talk:Simonm223|talk]]) 12:57, 5 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::Simonm223, could you please review [[WP:WIAFA]] and [[WP:RSP]] re high-quality sources to help keep this discussion focused? See [[WP:NEWSWEEK]] as an example. Re {{tq|It's absurd to argue it's still too soon for this article to indicate clearly Rowling's transphobia ... }}, has someone done that? Multiple editors have stated repeatedly that the content needs to updated/rewritten, and I [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:J._K._Rowling&diff=prev&oldid=1217346845 stated that it's too soon to decide on the inclusion of one name], as there have been no attempts to compose a draft of what new content would look like, how long it should be, whether it should go into individual names or use [[WP:SS|summary style]] depending on how long the content developed at the sub-article, [[Political views of J. K. Rowling]] ends up, while scholarly-sourced bits have been removed, etc. The RFC is premature when no one disagrees it is time to update, but no one has proposed what an update would look like. During the FAR (and since), an effort was made to make sure info was weighted towards scholarly and academic sources. No one denies the new incidents aren't yet covered in such sources, but we can't be looking at sources like [[WP:NEWSWEEK]] for a featured (or probably any) bio. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 13:58, 5 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::<s>SandyGeorgia it seems like no source is sufficient to persuade you that Rowling's obvious, open and regularly expressed transphobia is sufficient for inclusion. </s>[[User:Simonm223|Simonm223]] ([[User talk:Simonm223|talk]]) 14:03, 5 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::You have no evidence for that statement, plenty of evidence against it, and striking would be helpful. Please [[WP:FOC|focus on content]], and please take some time to digest what I {{em|am}} saying re how to more effectively and enduringly get where we all want to be. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 14:07, 5 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::[[WP:ROLLINGSTONEPOLITICS]] might also apply (unclear). [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 14:10, 5 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::Struck. But, let me be clear, if the featured article status of this article is an impediment to neutrality and leads to the exclusion of clear, reliable, and lasting information regarding Rowling's overall life trajectory for the last several years then the featured article status should be jettisoned in favor of a neutral article. The absence of LBGTQ voices from the sources used to discuss Rowling's views about queer people is an egregious failure of [[WP:NPOV]] and is to the continued shame of Wikipedia. [[User:Simonm223|Simonm223]] ([[User talk:Simonm223|talk]]) 14:12, 5 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::::: Thank you. See also US Weekly at [[WP:RSP]]. {{pb}} You also have no basis to say that the FA status is or will be an impediment to neutrality; there has so far not been a serious attempt to propose new content and work through drafts of that as was successfully done on the FAR, recognizing that it may be necessary to use some non-scholarly sources to reflect items not covered in academic sources, but that it will also be necessary to consider [[WP:SIZE]], [[WP:SS]], the author's entire life's work and preponderance of sources, and to focus the discussion on how to best reflect best sources. Long lists of sources, that often include marginal sources, aren't helpful. The approach on the FAR was for editors to suggest the very best sources they could find-- not to expect other readers to sort through lists of opinion pieces (which we've seen [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:J._K._Rowling&diff=prev&oldid=1216963219 suggested in these discussions]) and [[#News sources|dumps of news sources]]. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 14:18, 5 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::::::I just showed you a diversity of sources demonstrating how her life's work has included |
|||
::::::::* former mentees distancing themselves from her and disavowing her views |
|||
::::::::* major media platforms calling for boycotts of products that would earn her money |
|||
::::::::* a major pivot to transphobic novels published under a pseudonym that harkens to a notorious gay-conversion therapy administrator. This is what is frustrating me; to discuss Rowling's life-work while downplaying how her transphobia has impacted her life work is to inaccurately depict her life work. [[User:Simonm223|Simonm223]] ([[User talk:Simonm223|talk]]) 14:23, 5 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::::::: Please see {{u|S Marshall}} [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard&diff=prev&oldid=1183646139 here]; I understand your frustration, but you don't seem to be digesting what I'm writing, so I won't repeat it again. What evidence do you have that anyone is trying to downplay anything? [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 14:29, 5 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::::::::I am not saying a specific person is downplaying anything. I'm saying the article is. [[User:Simonm223|Simonm223]] ([[User talk:Simonm223|talk]]) 14:52, 5 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*{{unindent}} Thanks for the ping to this interesting discussion. I view the "Robert Galbraith" coincidence of names as innocent. Rowling is indisputably a transphobe but that doesn't make her a homophobe. I think her transphobia is rooted in her feminism and not in any kind of bigotry. I agree that there's a reasonable debate to be had about the prominence we give to her unapologetic transphobia and I personally would have expected greater prominence than we currently give it. I would oppose any mention of Robert Galbraith Heath in the article unless it's backed by an excellent source.—[[User:S Marshall|<b style="font-family: Verdana; color: Maroon;">S Marshall</b>]] <small>[[User talk:S Marshall|T]]/[[Special:Contributions/S Marshall|C]]</small> 15:19, 5 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*:This is a tangent, but: clearly it's rooted in ''some'' kind of bigotry, right? It's rooted in transphobia. |
|||
*:(I agree with you that the Galbraith thing is probably a coincidence, though, and current sources on it are way too speculative to include it.) [[User:LokiTheLiar|Loki]] ([[User talk:LokiTheLiar|talk]]) 06:04, 6 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*::(I don't think that transphobia can be rooted in transphobia? Usually, if you want to say "her transphobia is rooted in her ____," you need a word other than transphobia to go in the blank.) [[User:WhatamIdoing|WhatamIdoing]] ([[User talk:WhatamIdoing|talk]]) 16:20, 9 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:I don't like the word "transphobia". Rowling doesn't agree with the belief system regarding gender identity. Do you call atheists "theophobes"? [[User:Dtobias|*Dan T.*]] ([[User talk:Dtobias|talk]]) 15:23, 5 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::I'm sorry for your discomfort but this is not a comparable situation. Transphobes take specific political action against other humans on the basis of a bias surrounding gender. Atheists simply don't believe in gods. [[User:Simonm223|Simonm223]] ([[User talk:Simonm223|talk]]) 15:33, 5 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::: I think the thing I called "transphobia" isn't a political action but a state of mind. What term would you prefer for it, Dan?—[[User:S Marshall|<b style="font-family: Verdana; color: Maroon;">S Marshall</b>]] <small>[[User talk:S Marshall|T]]/[[Special:Contributions/S Marshall|C]]</small> 16:47, 5 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::: The [https://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKEAT/2021/0105_20_1006.html Employment Appeal Tribunal] in the Forstater case referred to it as "hold[ing] the belief that biological sex is real, important, immutable and not to be conflated with gender identity." That's rather lengthy, but they also called it the shorter "gender-critical beliefs" so I'll go with that. [[User:Dtobias|*Dan T.*]] ([[User talk:Dtobias|talk]]) 21:07, 5 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
Rowling's responses to proposed changes to UK gender recognition laws,<ref name= Milne2020>{{cite web|first1= Amber |last1=Milne|first2 = Rachel| last2 =Savage | url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-lgbt-rowling-explainer-trfn-idUSKBN23I3AI | title=Explainer: J. K. Rowling and trans women in single-sex spaces: what's the furore? | publisher=[[Reuters]] | date=11 June 2020 | access-date=6 April 2021 }}</ref><ref name= Brooks2020>{{Cite news|last=Brooks|first=Libby|date=11 June 2020|title=Why is JK Rowling speaking out now on sex and gender debate? |url= http://www.theguardian.com/books/2020/jun/11/why-is-jk-rowling-speaking-out-now-on-sex-and-gender-debate|access-date=14 January 2022 |work= [[The Guardian]] }}</ref>{{efn|The UK laws and proposed changes are the [[Gender Recognition Act 2004]], the [[Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill]] and the related [[Equality Act 2010]].{{sfn|Pedersen|2022|loc=Abstract}}{{sfn|Suissa|Sullivan|2021|pp=66–69}}{{sfn|Duggan|2021|loc=PDF pp. 14–15 (160–161)}} }} and her views on [[sexual identity|sex]] and [[gender identity|gender]], have provoked controversy.{{sfn|Duggan|2021|loc=PDF pp. 14–15 (160–161)}} Her statements have divided [[Feminist views on transgender topics|feminists]];<ref name=Kottasova2019>{{cite news |first1= Ivana |last1= Kottasová |first2= Scottie | last2= Andrew|title= J.K. Rowling's 'transphobia' tweet row spotlights a fight between equality campaigners and radical feminists |publisher= [[CNN]] |date= 20 December 2019 |access-date= 29 March 2022 | url= https://www.cnn.com/2019/12/20/uk/jk-rowling-transgender-explainer-intl-gbr/index.html}}</ref><ref name=BBC2020JKRResponds>{{cite news |url= https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-53002557 |publisher= [[BBC News]] |title= JK Rowling responds to trans tweets criticism |date= 11 June 2020 |access-date= 29 March 2022}}</ref><ref>{{cite news | url=https://www.newstatesman.com/international/2020/09/judith-butler-culture-wars-jk-rowling-and-living-anti-intellectual-times | title=Judith Butler on the culture wars, JK Rowling and living in 'anti-intellectual times'|first=Alona |last=Ferber | work=[[New Statesman]] | date=22 September 2020 | access-date=26 March 2021}}</ref> fuelled<!-- This article uses British spelling --> debates on [[freedom of speech]],{{sfn|Pape|2022|pp=229–230}}<ref>{{cite web|title=BBC nominates J.K.Rowling's controversial essay of trans rights for award|url=https://www.dw.com/en/bbc-nominates-jk-rowlings-controversial-essay-on-trans-rights-for-award/a-56014673|website=[[DW News]]|date=22 December 2020|access-date=22 December 2020}}</ref> [[academic freedom]]{{sfn|Suissa|Sullivan|2021|pp=66–69}} and [[cancel culture]];{{sfn|Schwirblat|Freberg|Freberg|2022|pp=367–369}} and prompted declarations of [[Transgender rights movement|support for transgender people]] from the literary,<ref>UK, US, Canada, Ireland: {{cite news |last= Flood |first= Alison |date=9 October 2020|title= Stephen King, Margaret Atwood and Roxane Gay champion trans rights in open letter|url= https://www.theguardian.com/books/2020/oct/09/stephen-king-margaret-atwood-roxane-gay-champion-trans-rights-open-letter-jk-rowling |work= [[The Guardian]] |access-date= 2 April 2022}}</ref> arts<ref>{{cite magazine|last= Rowley |first= Glenn |title= Artists fire back at J.K. Rowling's anti-trans remarks, share messages in support of the community|url= https://www.billboard.com/culture/pride/artists-fire-back-jk-rowling-anti-trans-remarks-9400386/|magazine= [[Billboard (magazine)|Billboard]]|date= 11 June 2020 |access-date= 7 April 2022}}</ref> and culture sectors.<ref>Culture sector: |
|||
::::: It costs me nothing to switch to that terminology, so I will. From now on, on this page I'll call it Rowling's GCB. |
|||
* [[Universal Destinations & Experiences]], [[Warner Bros.]] and [[Scholastic Corporation]]: {{cite news |last1= Siegel |first1= Tatiana |last2= Abramovitch |first2= Seth |date= 10 June 2020 |title= Universal Parks responds to J.K. Rowling tweets: 'Our core values include diversity, inclusion and respect' |work= [[The Hollywood Reporter]] |url= https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/lifestyle/lifestyle-news/universal-parks-responds-jk-rowling-tweets-core-values-include-diversity-inclusion-respect-1297845/ |access-date= 3 April 2022|ref=none}} |
|||
::::: I'm aware of no evidence Rowling is homophobic or that she advocates gay conversation therapy. And contrary to LokitheLiar, I don't think of the tendency among some feminists to hold GCB as "bigotry". I think there's a lot of impassioned debate to be had on that point; but let's just say that GCB can limited, where someone's GCB is meant to protect what they see as "women" from predators, and otherwise the person is gender tolerant. I am confident that Rowling's GCB are limited in that way although she sometimes expresses herself clumsily.—[[User:S Marshall|<b style="font-family: Verdana; color: Maroon;">S Marshall</b>]] <small>[[User talk:S Marshall|T]]/[[Special:Contributions/S Marshall|C]]</small> 06:27, 6 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
* [[Warner Bros. Interactive Entertainment]] president: {{cite news |last= Skrebels |first= Joe |title= WB Interactive president responds to ongoing debate over supporting JK Rowling |date=1 October 2020 |url= https://www.ign.com/articles/wb-interactive-president-responds-to-ongoing-debate-over-supporting-jk-rowling |publisher= [[IGN]] |access-date= 2 April 2022|ref=none}}</ref> |
|||
::::::Per [https://www.vox.com/culture/23622610/jk-rowling-transphobic-statements-timeline-history-controversy Vox], Rowling has repeatedly misgendered trans people, has implied trans people are "predators" or "rapists" several times, opposed many different instances of legal protections for trans people, promoted misinformation about Nazi persecution of trans people and doubled down when challenged on it, and as far back as 2014 she was having a heroic character in her Cormoran Strike novels threaten a trans woman with prison rape. |
|||
::::::She is not "expressing herself clumsily", she is a bigot. [[User:LokiTheLiar|Loki]] ([[User talk:LokiTheLiar|talk]]) 06:48, 6 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::I think that where we agree is that the lead should give more prominence to Rowling's GCB than is currently the case. |
|||
:::::::I'm not at all surprised that Aja Romano, a queer journalist, would collect all of Rowling's GCB in one place and maximise the trans case against Rowling. |
|||
:::::::The Strike novel portrays a transwoman as very hostile and unsympathetic indeed. That's Rowling's genuine view of transwomen, I'm sure. It comes from Rowling being an abuse survivor with a platform. She isn't noticeably hostile to transmen.—[[User:S Marshall|<b style="font-family: Verdana; color: Maroon;">S Marshall</b>]] <small>[[User talk:S Marshall|T]]/[[Special:Contributions/S Marshall|C]]</small> 07:28, 6 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::::::I feel as though, while I can see the connection you're drawing (and that, as I recall, she herself has drawn) with the abuse survivor thing, we need to be very careful about how we mention that. There's no short history of people hating the minority of the day and then saying "It's because I'm an abuse survivor". Anita Bryant did it with the gays, countless people before her did it with black people. While we should say that that's her stated reason, we shouldn't present it as necessary fact in and of itself. [[User:Snokalok|Snokalok]] ([[User talk:Snokalok|talk]]) 09:47, 6 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::::::1. She's absolutely hostile to trans men, if anything more than trans women. It's just that she's hostile in a very condescending "trans men are just deluded girls" way that doesn't feel as obviously rude as when she calls trans women rapists. |
|||
::::::::2. I also do not really think that Rowling's beliefs are just because she's an abuse survivor. She wasn't abused by a trans woman, for one, and most abuse survivors don't become transphobic, for two. |
|||
::::::::3. You can't dismiss Vox, a green RSP source, just because the journalist who wrote the article uses "they/them" pronouns. That is, quite frankly, itself transphobic and I'd like you to strike it. |
|||
::::::::I'm harping on this not because I think that we at Wikipedia need to judge what's in Rowling's heart but because being clear about what Rowling actually believes, why, and how we know that is crucial to understanding the problems with this article as it currently stands. This is all public enough and consistent enough that many high-quality mainstream publications now say in their own editorial voice that she makes anti-trans comments. Given that, the current language in the article, while it may have been neutral based on 2020 sources, is now unacceptably biased towards her defenders' POV. [[User:LokiTheLiar|Loki]] ([[User talk:LokiTheLiar|talk]]) 18:28, 6 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::::When I was discussing transphobia as a set of political deeds this is why. We are not [[Ma'at]] weighing hearts. It's irrelevant whether a person ''believes'' they are a bigot if they do bigoted things. [[User:Simonm223|Simonm223]] ([[User talk:Simonm223|talk]]) 18:57, 6 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::::::::I mused that queer journalists have reasons to dislike J.K. Rowling and to maximise the trans case against her. That's not the same as dismissing Vox out of hand. Just to be clear, I'm not saying the Vox source is unreliable. I'm saying that it looks POV to me. We're broadly on the same side here: I've come to this discussion to agree with you that we should give more coverage to Rowling's gender-criticalness than we do now. I'd say it merits one of the four paragraphs of the lead and at least 20% of the article.—[[User:S Marshall|<b style="font-family: Verdana; color: Maroon;">S Marshall</b>]] <small>[[User talk:S Marshall|T]]/[[Special:Contributions/S Marshall|C]]</small> 21:13, 6 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::::::I guess the overall point is that, marginalized groups shouldn’t be considered automatic POV parties when discussing their own oppression. To invoke Godwin’s Law, are Jewish voices POV on Nazi Germany? [[User:Snokalok|Snokalok]] ([[User talk:Snokalok|talk]]) 17:37, 7 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::::::::::No, I'm not saying that marginalized groups are automatically POV when discussing their own oppression. I'm saying that this specific source by Aja Romano about J.K. Rowling looks POV to me.—[[User:S Marshall|<b style="font-family: Verdana; color: Maroon;">S Marshall</b>]] <small>[[User talk:S Marshall|T]]/[[Special:Contributions/S Marshall|C]]</small> 19:40, 7 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::Has anyone looked in the scholarly literature? Here's a few that I found: |
|||
::* {{doi|10.1007/s12124-021-09670-4}}, from a top-tier cultural studies journal [https://www.scopus.com/sourceid/10600153338], which is about the use of the victim narrative in public discourse (activists saying people shouldn't be mean to trans people because they're victims; Rowling's response that people shouldn't be mean to her because she's a victim, too). |
|||
::* {{doi|10.1080/17577632.2022.2153216}}, from a middling law/media journal [https://www.scopus.com/sourceid/21100789025], her effect on public opinion around the 2018 consultation about the [[Gender Recognition Act 2004]]. |
|||
::* {{doi|10.1007/s10583-021-09446-9}}, top-tier children's literature journal [https://www.scopus.com/sourceid/145077], long article about LBGTQ+ Harry Potter fan fiction |
|||
::* {{doi|10.1007/s12119-022-10008-4}}, top-tier cultural studies journal (mid-ranked for gender studies) [https://www.scopus.com/sourceid/145138], one long sentence summarizing the contours of Rowling's political views (i.e., supporting trans folks' rights in sex-neutral contexts and opposing them in sex-specific contexts) |
|||
::Related to that, I would like to suggest that editors try out a deliberate anti-POV strategy in evaluating possible sources. The criteria for reliable sources look like this: |
|||
::* {{tick}} It has a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy. |
|||
::* {{tick}} It is [[Wikipedia:Published|published]] by a reputable publishing house, rather than by the author(s). |
|||
::* {{tick}} It is "appropriate for the material in question", i.e., the source is directly about the subject, rather than mentioning something unrelated in passing. |
|||
::* {{tick}} It is a third-party or independent source, with no significant financial or other [[conflict of interest]]. |
|||
::* {{tick}} It has a professional structure in place for deciding whether to publish something, such as [[Editor|editorial]] oversight or [[peer review]] processes. |
|||
::They do not look like this: |
|||
::* {{cross}} Produced the answer I expected/wanted/agreed with. |
|||
::Especially on hot-button subjects, the draw for the cognitive bias in that last item can be unbelievably strong (literally ''unbelievable'', as in, it is stronger than most people ''can'' believe). |
|||
::Everything here is from an academic journal, and everything here is (according to EBSCOhost) peer-reviewed. As far as I can tell, all of them meet all five of the usual criteria. All of them are recent articles. I did not filter out any source that seemed relevant based on whether it felt pro/anti/otherwise, and I have tried to write descriptions that did not focus on that aspect. I suggest that editors first look at whether a given source sounds like a reliable source that would be useful for this article, and only later consider whether that source is agreeable to you. A well-written, [[WP:YESPOV]]-compliant article may well be easier to achieve if we intentionally select sources for their formal strength regardless of content. |
|||
::That is, I think that sources should be selected for reasons like "Law journal seems like a good idea" or rejected for reasons like "Eh, it's 'only' mid-rated, and we have enough top-tier journals that we don't need to use average journals", and should ''not'' be selected or rejected for reasons like "The twitterverse cancelled that author years ago" or "There's no way that I will ever agree to citing a source that says that person's name favorably/unfavorably". |
|||
::It would probably be a good idea to look for more sources. [[User:WhatamIdoing|WhatamIdoing]] ([[User talk:WhatamIdoing|talk]]) 17:32, 9 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
When [[Maya Forstater]]'s employment contract with the London branch of the [[Center for Global Development]] was not renewed after she tweeted [[Feminist views on transgender topics#Gender-critical feminism and trans-exclusionary radical feminism|gender-critical views]],{{sfn|Pugh|2020|p=7}}<ref name=Stack2019>{{Cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/19/world/europe/jk-rowling-maya-forstater-transgender.html|title=J.K. Rowling criticized after tweeting support for anti-transgender researcher|last=Stack|first=Liam|date=19 December 2019|work=[[The New York Times]]|access-date=13 June 2020| url-access=registration|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200613012737/https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/19/world/europe/jk-rowling-maya-forstater-transgender.html|archive-date=13 June 2020|url-status=live}}</ref> Rowling responded in December 2019 with a tweet that [[transgender]] people should live their lives as they pleased in "peace and security", but questioned women being "force[d] out of their jobs for stating that sex is real".<ref name=Stack2019/>{{efn|A tribunal ruled in 2021 that Forstater's gender-critical views were protected under the 2010 UK [[Equality Act 2010|Equality Act]].<ref name=Faulkner2021>{{cite news |first= Doug |last= Faulkner |url= https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-57426579 |title= Maya Forstater: woman wins tribunal appeal over transgender tweets |publisher= [[BBC News]] |date= 10 June 2021 |access-date= 26 March 2022}}</ref><ref name=Siddique2021>{{cite news |first= Haroon |last= Siddique |date= 10 June 2021 |title= Gender-critical views are a protected belief, appeal tribunal rules|url= https://www.theguardian.com/law/2021/jun/10/gender-critical-views-protected-belief-appeal-tribunal-rules-maya-forstater |work= [[The Guardian]] |access-date= 26 March 2022}}</ref> In July 2022, a new tribunal decision was published (''[[Forstater v Center for Global Development Europe]]'') ruling that Forstater had suffered direct discrimination from her employer.<ref>{{cite news |title=Maya Forstater: Woman discriminated against over trans tweets, tribunal rules|date=6 July 2022 |url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-62061929 |publisher=[[BBC News]] |access-date=6 July 2022}}</ref>}} In another controversial tweet in June 2020,<ref name=Petter2020>{{Cite web|last= Petter|first=Olivia|date=17 September 2020|title=Mermaids writes open letter to JK Rowling following her recent comments on trans people|url=https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/mermaids-jk-rowling-transphobia-transgender-sexual-abuse-domestic-letter-a9565176.html|access-date=26 March 2022|work=[[The Independent]] |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200615235531/https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/mermaids-jk-rowling-transphobia-transgender-sexual-abuse-domestic-letter-a9565176.html |archive-date=15 June 2020}}</ref> Rowling mocked an article for using the phrase "[[people who menstruate]]",<ref name=Gross2020>{{Cite news|last=Gross|first=Jenny|date=7 June 2020|title=Daniel Radcliffe criticizes J.K. Rowling's anti-transgender tweets|work=[[The New York Times]]|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/07/arts/Jk-Rowling-controversy.html |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200607221400/https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/07/arts/Jk-Rowling-controversy.html |archive-date=7 June 2020 |url-access=subscription |url-status=live|access-date=6 January 2022 }}</ref> and tweeted that [[women's rights]] and "lived reality" would be "erased" if "sex isn't real".{{sfn|Duggan|2021|loc=PDF pp. 14–15}}<ref>{{cite magazine|url=https://variety.com/2020/film/news/jk-rowling-transphobic-tweets-controversy-1234627081/|title=J.K. Rowling gets backlash over anti-trans tweets|last=Moreau|first=Jordan|magazine=[[Variety (magazine)|Variety]]|date=6 June 2020|access-date=13 June 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200607005447/https://variety.com/2020/film/news/jk-rowling-transphobic-tweets-controversy-1234627081/|archive-date=7 June 2020|url-status=live}}</ref> |
|||
== Cuts to the Lead == |
|||
[[LGBT]] charities and leading actors of the [[Wizarding World]] franchise condemned Rowling's comments;<ref name=Waterson2020>{{Cite news|last= Waterson |first= Jim|title= Children's news website apologises to JK Rowling over trans tweet row|url= https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/jul/23/childrens-news-website-apologises-jk-rowling-trans-tweet-day|date= 23 July 2020 |access-date=26 March 2022|work=[[The Guardian]] |quote= Rowling's comments on gender were condemned by LGBT charities and the leading stars of her Harry Potter film franchise.}}</ref><ref name=Lang2020>{{cite magazine |last=Lang |first=Brent |title= Eddie Redmayne criticizes J.K. Rowling's anti-trans tweets |date= 10 June 2020 |url= https://variety.com/2020/film/news/eddie-redmayne-jk-rowling-anti-trans-tweets-harry-potter-fantastic-beasts-1234630226/ |magazine= [[Variety (magazine)|Variety]]|access-date=28 March 2022 |quote= Eddie Redmayne, star of the ''Fantastic Beasts'' franchise, is speaking out against J.K. Rowling's anti-trans tweets, as the controversy surrounding the author and her beliefs continues to swirl.}}</ref>{{efn| [[Daniel Radcliffe]], [[Emma Watson]], [[Rupert Grint]],<ref name= Hibberd2021/> [[Eddie Redmayne]]<ref name=Lang2020/> and others expressed support for the transgender community in reaction to Rowling's comments;<ref>{{cite magazine |first= Maureen |last= Lenker|title= Every Harry Potter actor who's spoken out against J.K. Rowling's controversial trans comments |date= 10 June 2020 |access-date= 1 April 2022 |magazine= [[Entertainment Weekly]]|url=https://ew.com/movies/every-harry-potter-actor-whos-spoken-out-against-j-k-rowlings-controversial-transgender-comments/ }}</ref><ref>{{cite news |first= Maggie |last= Baska|title= Stephen Fry defends 'friendship' with JK Rowling: 'I'm sorry that people are upset' |date= 20 May 2021 |url= https://www.pinknews.co.uk/2021/05/20/stephen-fry-jk-rowling-friend-harry-potter-jordan-b-peterson-podcast-trans/ |publisher= [[PinkNews]] |access-date= 29 March 2022}}</ref> [[Helena Bonham Carter]],<ref name=Evans2022> {{cite news |first= Greg |last= Evans |url= https://deadline.com/2022/11/helena-bonham-carter-johnny-depp-j-k-rowling-1235182523/ |title= Helena Bonham Carter says Johnny Depp 'completely vindicated' in defamation trial, and J.K. Rowling 'hounded' for transgender stance |work= [[Deadline Hollywood]] |access-date= 18 December 2022}}</ref> [[Robbie Coltrane]],<ref>{{cite news |last= Yasharoff |first= Hannah |title= How the 'Harry Potter' reunion addresses author J.K. Rowling's anti-trans controversy |date= 30 December 2021|url= https://www.usatoday.com/story/entertainment/movies/2021/12/30/harry-potter-return-hogwarts-20th-reunion-emma-watson-jk-rowling-controversy/9042955002/ |work= [[USA Today]] |access-date= 2 April 2022}}</ref> and [[Ralph Fiennes]] supported Rowling.<ref name= Hibberd2021>{{cite news |first= James |last= Hibberd |url= https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-news/ralph-fiennes-defends-j-k-rowling-amid-trans-controversy-says-backlash-is-disturbing-4151944/ |title= Ralph Fiennes defends J.K. rowling amid trans controversy, says backlash is 'disturbing' |date= 17 March 2021 |access-date=26 March 2022 |work= [[The Hollywood Reporter]]}}</ref>}} [[GLAAD]] called them "cruel" and "inaccurate".<ref name= Yasharoff2020> {{cite news |last= Yasharoff |first=Hannah|url= https://www.usatoday.com/story/entertainment/celebrities/2020/06/07/j-k-rowling-harry-potter-author-slammed-transphobic-comments/3169833001/ |title= J.K. Rowling reveals she's a sexual assault survivor; Emma Watson reacts to trans comments |work= [[USA Today]] |date= 10 June 2020 |access-date= 27 March 2022}}</ref> Rowling responded with an essay on her website<ref name=RowlingReasons>{{cite web|title=J.K. Rowling writes about her reasons for speaking out on sex and gender issues |url=https://www.jkrowling.com/opinions/j-k-rowling-writes-about-her-reasons-for-speaking-out-on-sex-and-gender-issues/ |publisher=JK Rowling |date=10 June 2020 |access-date=10 June 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200610182056/https://www.jkrowling.com/opinions/j-k-rowling-writes-about-her-reasons-for-speaking-out-on-sex-and-gender-issues/ |archive-date=10 June 2020 |url-status=live}}</ref> in which she revealed that her views on women's rights were informed by her experience as a survivor of domestic abuse and [[sexual assault]].<ref name=Shirbon2020>{{cite news |last1=Shirbon |first1=Estelle |title=J.K. Rowling reveals past abuse and defends right to speak on trans issues |url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-rowling/j-k-rowling-reveals-past-abuse-and-defends-right-to-speak-on-trans-issues-idUSKBN23H2XI |publisher=[[Reuters]] |date=10 June 2020 |access-date=13 June 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200611200348/https://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-rowling/j-k-rowling-reveals-past-abuse-and-defends-right-to-speak-on-trans-issues-idUSKBN23H2XI |archive-date=11 June 2020 |url-status=live}}</ref> While affirming that "the majority of trans-identified people not only pose zero threat to others, but are vulnerable ... Trans people need and deserve protection", she believed that it would be unsafe to allow "any man who believes or feels he's a woman" into bathrooms or changing rooms.<ref name= Shirbon2020/><ref>{{cite news |last1=Gonzalez |first1=Sandra |title=J.K. Rowling explains her gender identity views in essay amid backlash |url=https://edition.cnn.com/2020/06/10/entertainment/jk-rowling/index.html |access-date=16 September 2023 |work=[[CNN]] |date=10 June 2020}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |last1=Garrand |first1=Danielle |title= J.K. Rowling defends herself after accusations of making "anti-trans" comments on Twitter |url=https://www.cbsnews.com/news/j-k-rowling-defends-anti-trans-comments-twitter/ |access-date=16 September 2023 |work=[[CBS News]] |date=11 June 2020}}</ref> Writing of her own experiences with [[sexism]] and [[misogyny]],<ref>{{cite news |first= Sian |last= Cain |date= 11 June 2020 |title= JK Rowling reveals she is survivor of domestic abuse and sexual assault |url= https://www.theguardian.com/books/2020/jun/10/jk-rowling-says-survivor-of-domestic-abuse-sexual-assault |work= [[The Guardian]] |access-date= 29 March 2022}}</ref> she wondered if the "allure of escaping womanhood" would have led her to [[Gender transitioning|transition]] if she had been born later, and said that trans activism was "seeking to erode 'woman' as a political and biological class".<ref name=DAlessandro2020>{{cite news |last=D'Alessandro |first=Anthony |title=J.K. Rowling defends trans statements in lengthy essay, reveals she's a sexual assault survivor & says 'trans people need and deserve protection' |url=https://deadline.com/2020/06/j-k-rowling-defends-trans-statements-essay-1202955524/ |access-date=5 January 2022 |work=[[Deadline Hollywood]] |date=10 June 2020}}</ref> |
|||
Going to try to get consensus for the following changes to the third paragraph in the lead, primarily because this is an article about an author and not their work (see [[J.R.R.Tolkien]] for instance) - we do not need to be name dropping Voldemort (he who should not be named (cringe moment millennial moment)) in this lead, nor including various details on the genre. Generally, what are peoples thoughts on the following changes to the third, coupled with a merger to the second paragraph: |
|||
Rowling's continual statements – beginning in 2017{{sfn|Duggan|2021|loc=PDF pp. 14–15 (160–161)}}<ref name= Jacobs2023>{{cite news |last= Jacobs |first= Julia |title= Hogwarts legacy can't cast aside debate over J. K. Rowling |url= https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/09/arts/hogwarts-legacy-jk-rowling.html |date= 9 February 2023 |work = [[The New York Times]] |access-date= 14 July 2023}}</ref><ref name= Spangler2023>{{cite news |last= Spangler|first= Todd |title= J.K. Rowling addresses backlash to her anti-trans comments in new podcast: 'I never set out to upset anyone' |url= https://variety.com/2023/digital/news/jk-rowling-anti-trans-comments-podcast-witch-trials-1235522301/ |date= 14 February 2023|work= [[Variety (magazine)|Variety]]|access-date= 14 July 2023}}</ref> – have been called transphobic by critics<ref name= Breznican2023>{{cite news |last= Breznican |first= Anthony |title= J.K. Rowling will oversee a new streaming ''Harry Potter'' series |url= https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2023/04/jk-rowling-harry-potter-series|date= 12 April 2023 |work= [[Vanity Fair (magazine)|Vanity Fair]] |access-date= 14 July 2023}}</ref><ref name=Rosenblatt2020>{{Cite web|last = Rosenblatt| first =Kalhan |title=J.K. Rowling doubles down in what some critics call a 'transphobic manifesto' |url= https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/j-k-rowling-doubles-down-what-some-critics-call-transphobic-n1229351|date= 10 June 2020 |access-date=19 January 2022|publisher=[[NBC News]] }}</ref> and she has been referred to as a [[TERF (acronym)|TERF]].<ref name= Rosenblatt2020/>{{sfn|Steinfeld|2020|pp=34–35}}{{sfn|Schwirblat|Freberg|Freberg|2022|pp=367–368}} She rejects these characterisations and the notion that she holds animosity towards transgender people, saying that her viewpoint has been misunderstood.<ref name=RowlingReasons/><ref name= Breznican2023/><ref name= Spangler2023/> Criticism of Rowling's views has come from the ''Harry Potter'' fansites [[MuggleNet]] and [[The Leaky Cauldron (website)|The Leaky Cauldron]];<ref name=FanSites>{{cite news|url=https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jul/03/harry-potter-fan-sites-distance-themselves-from-jk-rowling-over-transgender-rights|title=Harry Potter fan sites distance themselves from JK Rowling over transgender rights|publisher=[[Reuters]]|work=[[The Guardian]]|date=3 July 2020|access-date=3 July 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200703011204/https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jul/03/harry-potter-fan-sites-distance-themselves-from-jk-rowling-over-transgender-rights|archive-date=3 July 2020|url-status=live}}</ref> and the charities [[Mermaids (charity)|Mermaids]],<ref name=Petter2020/> [[Stonewall (charity)|Stonewall]],<ref>{{cite news | url=https://www.newstatesman.com/long-reads/2021/11/the-battle-for-stonewall-the-lgbt-charity-and-the-uks-gender-wars | title=The battle for Stonewall: the LGBT charity and the UK's gender wars | work=[[New Statesman]]|first=Gaby |last=Hinsliff|date=3 November 2021 | access-date=24 November 2021}}</ref> and [[Human Rights Campaign]].<ref>{{cite news |first= Elise |last= Brisco |title=Dave Chappelle says he's 'Team TERF,' defends J.K. Rowling in new Netflix comedy special|url= https://www.usatoday.com/story/entertainment/tv/2021/10/05/dave-chappelle-terf-defends-j-k-rowling-netflix-special/6002017001/ |work= [[USA Today]] |date= 8 October 2021|access-date= 29 March 2022}}</ref> After [[Kerry Kennedy]] expressed "profound disappointment" in her views, Rowling returned the [[Ripple of Hope Award]] given to her by the Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights organisation.<ref name=RFKAward>{{cite news |last=Flood|first=Alison |url= https://amp.theguardian.com/books/2020/aug/28/jk-rowling-robert-f-kennedy-human-rights-award-trans-views|title=JK Rowling returns human rights award to group that denounces her trans views |work=[[The Guardian]]|date=28 August 2020|access-date=28 August 2020}}</ref> |
|||
"<s>Rowling concluded the Harry Potter series with Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows (2007).</s> The novels follow a boy called Harry Potter as he attends Hogwarts[''','''] <s>(</s>a school for wizards<s>), and battles Lord Voldemort</s>. Death and the divide between good and evil are the central themes of the series. <s>Its influences include Bildungsroman (the coming-of-age genre), school stories, fairy tales, and Christian allegory.</s> The series revived fantasy as a genre in the children's market, spawned a host of imitators, and inspired an active fandom. Critical reception has been more mixed. Many reviewers see Rowling's writing as conventional; some regard her portrayal of gender and social division as regressive. There were also religious debates over the Harry Potter series." |
|||
As Rowling's views on the [[legal status of transgender people]] came under scrutiny,{{sfn|Suissa|Sullivan|2021|pp=66–69}} she received insults and death threats{{sfn|Suissa|Sullivan|2021|p=69}}{{sfn|Qiao|2022|p=1323}} and discussion moved beyond the Twitter community.{{sfn|Schwirblat|Freberg|Freberg|2022|p=368}} Some performers and feminists have supported her.{{sfn|Schwirblat|Freberg|Freberg|2022|p=368}}<ref> Supporting Rowling: |
|||
Let me know y'alls thoughts. Cheers. [[User:LegalSmeagolian|LegalSmeagolian]] ([[User talk:LegalSmeagolian|talk]]) 01:58, 5 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
* [[Ayaan Hirsi Ali]]: {{cite news |first=Katie |last=Law |date= 15 October 2020|title= JK Rowling and the bitter battle of the book world |url=https://www.standard.co.uk/culture/books/trans-battle-book-world-jk-rowling-a4571221.html |work= [[Evening Standard]] |access-date=27 March 2022|ref=none}} |
|||
:I am firmly opposed to cutting the influences on the HP series. It's a little hard to remember in our perennially online, news-hungry world, but the ''sine qua non'' of Rowling as a public figure is Harry Potter. Those books are the only reason she has a twitter following at all. They are the overwhelming focus of scholarly work about her, and I dare say they remain the overwhelming focus of news articles about Rowling if anyone is able to analyze news coverage beginning in the 90s. A sentence about influences on the series is essential. I'm open to shortening the fragment in the first proposed cut, though the chronology needs to be worked in somehow. I don't care if Voldemort is mentioned by name, but the saving of four words doesn't seem worth turning the plot summary into a meaningless sentence. [[User:Vanamonde93|Vanamonde93]] ([[User talk:Vanamonde93|talk]]) 02:42, 5 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
* [[Allison Bailey]]: {{cite news |url= https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/maya-forstater-transgender-twitter-jk-rowling-b1838151.html |title= Maya Forstater: who is woman in employment tribunal over transgender comments? |first= Sam |last= Hancock |date= 27 April 2021 |work= [[The Independent]] |access-date= 27 March 2022|archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20210427131430/https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/maya-forstater-transgender-twitter-jk-rowling-b1838151.html |archive-date= 27 April 2021 |quote= criminal defence barrister Allison Bailey – known for launching legal action against LGBT+ rights charity Stonewall over its attempt to have her investigated for setting up the anti-trans rights group LGB Alliance – has also been a vocal supporter of Ms Forstater.|ref=none}} |
|||
::Oh this was my compromise version, I wanted to get rid of "Death and the divide between good and evil are the central themes of the series." - [[Tolkien]]'s page (another featured article) does not talk about the influences on the works he created, rather it talks about the works as a whole ("After Tolkien's death, his son Christopher published a series of works based on his father's extensive notes and unpublished manuscripts, including The Silmarillion. These, together with The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings, form a connected body of tales, poems, fictional histories, invented languages, and literary essays about a fantasy world called Arda and, within it, Middle-earth. Between 1951 and 1955, Tolkien applied the term legendarium to the larger part of these writings.") No talk of influences there, I personally think that is too nitty gritty for the lead. Would be more appurtenant to talk about the wizarding world and franchise the books inspired, but thats already in the first paragraph of the lead. [[User:LegalSmeagolian|LegalSmeagolian]] ([[User talk:LegalSmeagolian|talk]]) 02:50, 5 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
* [[Julie Bindel]]: {{cite news |last1=Thorpe |first1=Vanessa |title=JK Rowling: from magic to the heart of a Twitter storm |url=https://www.theguardian.com/books/2020/jun/14/jk-rowling-from-magic-to-the-heart-of-a-twitter-storm |work=[[The Guardian]] |date=14 June 2020 |quote=Arrayed on Rowling's side are some of the veteran voices of feminism, including the radical Julie Bindel, who spoke out in support this weekend |access-date=6 July 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200704200412/https://www.theguardian.com/books/2020/jun/14/jk-rowling-from-magic-to-the-heart-of-a-twitter-storm |archive-date=4 July 2020 |url-status=live|ref=none}} |
|||
:::What Tolkein's lead has is neither here nor there, because the weight given to any topic is determined by what the sources about this subject say. But in any case the Tolkein lead is far too short given the length and complexity of that article. [[User:Vanamonde93|Vanamonde93]] ([[User talk:Vanamonde93|talk]]) 03:00, 5 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
* [[Dave Chappelle]]: {{Cite news |first= Maya |last=Yang|date=7 October 2021|title='I'm team Terf': Dave Chappelle under fire over pro-JK Rowling trans stance|url=https://www.theguardian.com/stage/2021/oct/07/dave-chappelle-transgender-netflix-special-backlash|access-date=27 March 2022|work=[[The Guardian]]|ref=none}} |
|||
::::It is certainly not "far too short." [[User:LegalSmeagolian|LegalSmeagolian]] ([[User talk:LegalSmeagolian|talk]]) 03:03, 5 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
* [[Dana International]]: {{cite news |last1=Shirbon |first1=Estelle |title=J.K. Rowling reveals past abuse and defends right to speak on trans issues |url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-rowling/j-k-rowling-reveals-past-abuse-and-defends-right-to-speak-on-trans-issues-idUSKBN23H2XI |publisher=[[Reuters]] |date=10 June 2020 |access-date=13 June 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200611200348/https://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-rowling/j-k-rowling-reveals-past-abuse-and-defends-right-to-speak-on-trans-issues-idUSKBN23H2XI |archive-date=11 June 2020 |url-status=live|ref=none}} |
|||
:::::Yes, Tolkien's lead is far too short (I note it was [[Wikipedia:Featured article review/J. R. R. Tolkien|last reviewed at FAR fifteen years ago]], so whether it is at [[WP:WIAFA|standard]] is undetermined). I believe the amount of space in the lead here strikes the right balance wrt article content and the body of sources. We have three sentences devoted to Rowling's views on transgender issues; if content were workshopped and developed correctly, I ''might'' be convinced the rewrite could expand that to four sentences, but in relation to the preponderance of sources on Rowling and her work, convincing is needed on whether three or four sentences is most appropriate. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 08:55, 5 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
* [[Eddie Izzard]]: {{cite news |title='I don't think JK Rowling is transphobic,' says gender-fluid comedian Eddie Izzard |url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/comedy/what-to-see/dont-think-jk-rowling-transphobic-says-gender-fluid-comedian/ |archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20220110/https://www.telegraph.co.uk/comedy/what-to-see/dont-think-jk-rowling-transphobic-says-gender-fluid-comedian/ |archive-date=10 January 2022 |url-access=subscription |url-status=live |access-date=27 November 2021 |work=[[The Daily Telegraph]]|date=1 January 2021|ref=none}}{{cbignore}} |
|||
::::Agree with Vanamonde93; the [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=J._K._Rowling&diff=prev&oldid=1217300197 cuts to the lead here] are not an improvement. In our "perennially online, news-hungry world", recent edits here are overlooking the "''sine qua non'' of Rowling as a public figure" and decades worth of sources and work; a Rowling bio that is balanced according to high-quality sources is never going to ignore her entire body of work, and the bulk of this talk page is being overtaken by [[WP:RECENTISM]] and personal opinions, not always backed by high-quality sources. {{pb}} Further, working on the lead before the body is rarely productive or the best way to get the job done; leads are summaries of the body. {{pb}} And, working on a broad overview biography article before developing content in the sub-article at [[Politics of J. K. Rowling]] is also a less-than-effective approach. Rewriting the transgender content cannot be at the expense of the rest of a fine article, and should not be done recklessly on a Featured article. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 08:30, 5 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
* [[Kathleen Stock]], [[Alison Moyet]]: {{cite news |url= https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-53002557 |publisher= [[BBC News]] |title= JK Rowling responds to trans tweets criticism |date= 11 June 2020 |access-date= 29 March 2022}}</ref> Figures from the arts world criticised "hate speech directed against her".<ref name= Flockhart2020>{{cite news |last= Flockhart |first= Gary |date= 28 September 2020 |access-date= 2 April 2022 |work = [[The Scotsman]] |title= JK Rowling receives support from Ian McEwan and Frances Barber amid 'transphobia' row|url= https://www.scotsman.com/news/people/jk-rowling-receives-support-from-ian-mcewan-and-frances-barber-amid-transphobia-row-2986268|ref=none}}</ref> |
|||
:The "Rowling concluded..." sentence belongs in the preceding paragraph. I moved it before I saw this talk section [[User:Tfdavisatsnetnet|Tfdavisatsnetnet]] ([[User talk:Tfdavisatsnetnet|talk]]) 12:33, 5 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
|} |
|||
::[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=J._K._Rowling&diff=prev&oldid=1217367717 That] looks like an improvement to me (although there may have been a reason why it developed the way it did, I can't recall what it might have been at this point years later). [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 14:39, 5 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:I agree with these changes and especially with the reduction of the length of the themes and influences part of the lead. Themes of Harry Potter go in the lead of [[Harry Potter]], not this article. We spend less time discussing the themes of [[Franz Kafka]]'s work than J.K. Rowling, which seems obviously backwards to me. [[User:LokiTheLiar|Loki]] ([[User talk:LokiTheLiar|talk]]) 20:36, 5 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::If HP-related material goes in [[Harry Potter]], then logically JKR's views go in [[Political views of J. K. Rowling]], and we can obviate the need for this article entirely (sarcasm, of course). Both these topics are a part of Rowling's persona, and both deserve mention in the lead. The themes of Harry Potter receive greater coverage in scholarly sources about Rowling than anything she's said on twitter. Talk of removing it is misguided. [[User:Vanamonde93|Vanamonde93]] ([[User talk:Vanamonde93|talk]]) 04:38, 6 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::I hope you see the difference between [[Harry Potter]], a series of books that while written by Rowling is not Rowling, and [[Political views of JK Rowling]], which is only separate from this article because otherwise it'd be extremely long. |
|||
:::Also, I very much doubt that they do, actually. Rowling's transphobic remarks are an increasingly large part of her notability, which is why it's increasingly weird how little prominence they have in the article. Harry Potter as a series in general still definitely has better coverage in the sources, but the ''themes'' of Harry Potter specifically I doubt. Lots of sources on Harry Potter do not actually go into any great level of detail about the content of the books at all. (Which, to be clear, is the thing I'm objecting to: it's fine to say she wrote seven books in the Harry Potter series, because that's a fact about Rowling, but not that the Harry Potter series has death as a major theme, because that's a fact about Harry Potter and not JK Rowling.) [[User:LokiTheLiar|Loki]] ([[User talk:LokiTheLiar|talk]]) 06:14, 6 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:Something that might be worthwhile, elsewhere in the lede, is inserting a para break before starting to talk about her trans/gender views. Doing this serves to separate and highlight this and note that it is one of the things most prominent about her at this point. [[User:WorthPoke2|WorthPoke2]] ([[User talk:WorthPoke2|talk]]) 23:21, 6 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:: See [[#Five-paragraph lead?]] [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 14:15, 7 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:I agree with Vanamonde that scholarly sources continue to cover Rowling's writing more than her views – see this 2024 book [https://muse.jhu.edu/pub/254/edited_volume/book/111748], for example. The TG section likely needs an update, but I see from the source list above that it’s being worked on; let’s not change the lead before the body. [[User:Olivaw-Daneel|Olivaw-Daneel]] ([[User talk:Olivaw-Daneel|talk]]) 11:16, 9 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::This [https://muse.jhu.edu/pub/254/edited_volume/book/111748 2024 scholarly book source] sounds very promising:{{tq2|While it was once considered a universally beloved book series, the relationship between HP and its fans has grown more complicated in recent years. As its readers have grown older and Rowling’s reputation has wavered in the public eye, Whited and her contributors consider the complicated legacy of Harry Potter and its author and explore how the series will evolve in the next twenty years.}} The summary reads as the kind of balanced scholarly source we should be considering, and focusing on sources like this could help bring focus to the rambling, non-source-based discussions (some based more on opinions than sources and dominated by RECENTISM) taking over this talk page.{{pb}} {{u|Olivaw-Daneel}} will you be available to help draft new content? Do you have the book? And considering this book summary, are adjustments warranted to the Legacy section as well ? Glad to see you again; this book demonstrates that it is likely possible to base new content on what has been covered by scholarly sources, augmenting with news sources only as needed to provide accessible sources to readers. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 12:32, 9 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::It should be free to read via [[WP:TWL]], but my access has lapsed. Not sure how active I can be on the TG section but if others such as Sideswipe9th are interested in drafting, I could help support. I'll add that book and a couple of others I found to the list above. [[User:Olivaw-Daneel|Olivaw-Daneel]] ([[User talk:Olivaw-Daneel|talk]]) 16:27, 9 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::My TWL access tends to lapse & unlapse depending on activity. Today I was able to log in & downloaded Whited's new book - so thanks for the find {{u|Olivaw-Daneel}}. From a brief glance, one chapter in Whited takes a look at JKR's reputation/fans now vs. when the HP books were being published. She has a large fanbase and apparently there were equally large expectations of her, as author, and also apparently some issues to do w/ fan fiction (according to [https://muse.jhu.edu/article/921546 this source] (available via TWL) there are more than 400,000 on [[Archive of Our Own|AO3]], which opens issues of who owns the characters/concepts/themes/ etc.){{pb}} All of this seems to have morphed into hostility according the Whited chapter's author, but I need to read it and the paper re fanfiction closely and process. I've also downloaded Duggan's paper "Transformative readings" ([https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10583-021-09446-9.pdf pdf available here]), which starts from generally the same premise: Duggan writes that Harry Potter (the character) and ''Harry Potter'' (the series) is about a marginalized group (witches, sorcerers, magic users) which attracted a fan base expecting the author to espouse and or align herself with marginalized peoples, hence creating strong hostility vis-a-vis her public comments re transgender rights. This is all interesting, needs a closer reading and processing. But generally that's the frame the scholars are using: how her fan base has morphed. I think we can get some material from these scholarly works to work into the article, but it will take some time and thought. Anyway, sorry for the long post, and thanks again to Olivaw-Daneel for dipping into Project Muse. [[User:Victoriaearle|Victoria]] ([[User talk:Victoriaearle|tk]]) 23:28, 9 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::{{ping|Victoriaearle|Olivaw-Daneel}} I don't know what I'm doing wrong at TWL (I am logged in), but I am unable to find [https://muse.jhu.edu/pub/254/edited_volume/book/111748 this source at TWL]. Could someone toss me a cluestick, or maybe email me the two relevant chapters? {{pb}} Meanwhile, after four days off due to hand surgery, I have returned to find a) no significant development of content at the sub-article [[Political views of J. K. Rowling]], and b) more rambling discussions involving opinion, recentism and news reports, and less-than-highest-quality sources. Someone needs to take the lead here and put up drafts; I am hoping {{u|Sideswipe9th}} will engage soon, as my stitches are in my hand until 22 April, limiting my typing. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 14:40, 13 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::::Book sent & cluestick posted to your talk to reduce volume here :) [[User:Victoriaearle|Victoria]] ([[User talk:Victoriaearle|tk]]) 23:06, 13 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::::[[WP:NOTCOMPULSORY]] on your part and on other editors part re: development of sub article. [[User:LegalSmeagolian|LegalSmeagolian]] ([[User talk:LegalSmeagolian|talk]]) 00:08, 14 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
==== Sources ==== |
|||
== Five-paragraph lead? == |
|||
{{cot|Sources}} |
|||
WorthPoke2 suggests above [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:J._K._Rowling&diff=prev&oldid=1217627036] that {{tq2|"Something that might be worthwhile, elsewhere in the lede, is inserting a para break before starting to talk about her trans/gender views. Doing this serves to separate and highlight this and note that it is one of the things most prominent about her at this point."}} It is [[WP:LEAD|generally recommended]] that leads be no longer than four paragraphs, and four paragraphs is typical for an article this size. But some FAs deviate from the LEAD guideline; for example, a recent FA [[Climate change]] is a similar [[WP:SIZE]] (8,925 words of readable prose) as Rowling (8,913 words of readable prose), and has a five-paragraph lead. Without starting another premature RFC, is this something that other editors feel might be helpful or appropriate in this case? {{pb}} Please '''discuss''' rather than starting with premature !voting. I am open to being convinced. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 14:15, 7 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
{{reflist-talk}} |
|||
{{notelist-talk}} |
|||
* {{Cite journal|last=Duggan|first=Jennifer|date=28 March 2021|title=Transformative readings: Harry Potter fan fiction, trans/queer reader response, and J. K. Rowling|journal=[[Children's Literature in Education]]|volume=53 |issue=2 |pages=147–168 |doi=10.1007/s10583-021-09446-9|pmid=35645426 |pmc=9132366 |s2cid=233661189 }} |
|||
*{{cite book |editor-last=Konchar Farr |editor-first=Cecilia |title=Open at the Close: Literary Essays on Harry Potter |publisher=[[University Press of Mississippi]] |year=2022 |isbn=978-1-4968-3931-2|ref = {{harvid|Konchar Farr|2022}} }} |
|||
**{{harvc|last=Henderson |first=Tolonda |date=2022 |in=Konchar Farr |c= A Coda: She-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named |url= https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctv2kqx0kz.19 |doi= 10.2307/j.ctv2kqx0kz.19|year=2022|nb=yes}} |
|||
* {{cite journal |first= Madeleine |last= Pape |author-link= Madeleine Pape |title= Feminism, trans justice, and speech rights: a comparative perspective |journal= [[Law and Contemporary Problems]] |pages= 215–240 |url= https://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=5037&context=lcp |date= 2022 |volume= 85 |issue= 1 |access-date= 29 March 2022 }} |
|||
* {{cite journal |first= Sarah |last= Pedersen |title= 'They've got an absolute army of women behind them': the formation of a women's cooperative constellation in contemporary Scotland |journal= [[Scottish Affairs]] |date= 2022 |volume= 31 |issue= 1 |pages= 1–20 |doi= 10.3366/scot.2022.0394 |s2cid= 246762983 |url= https://rgu-repository.worktribe.com/output/1375349 }} |
|||
* {{Cite book|last=Pugh|first=Tison|author-link=Tison Pugh|title=Harry Potter and Beyond: On J. K. Rowling's Fantasies and Other Fictions|publisher=[[University of South Carolina Press]]|year=2020|isbn=978-1-64336-088-1|oclc=1142046769|doi=10.2307/j.ctvs09qwv|s2cid=225791872}} |
|||
* {{cite book |first1=Tatiana |last1=Schwirblat|first2=Karen |last2=Freberg |first3=Laura |last3=Freberg |year=2022 |chapter= Chapter 21: Cancel culture: a career vulture amongst influencers on social media |editor1-last=Lipschultz |editor1-first= Jeremy Harris |editor2-last=Freberg |editor2-first= Karen |editor3-last=Luttrell |editor3-first= Regina|title= The Emerald Handbook of Computer-Mediated Communication and Social Media |publisher= [[Emerald Group Publishing|Emerald Publishing Limited]] |doi=10.1108/978-1-80071-597-420221021|isbn=978-1800715981}} |
|||
* {{cite journal |last1=Steinfeld |first1=Jemimah|title= Not my turf: Helen Lewis argues that vitriol around the trans debate means only extreme voices are being heard |journal= [[Index on Censorship]] |year=2020 |volume=49 |issue= 1 |pages=34–35 |doi= 10.1177/0306422020917609 |s2cid=216495541 |doi-access=free }} |
|||
* {{cite journal |first1= Judith |last1= Suissa |first2= Alice |last2= Sullivan |title= The gender wars, academic freedom and education |journal= [[Journal of Philosophy of Education]] |volume= 55 |issue= 1 |date= February 2021 |pages= 55–82 |doi= 10.1111/1467-9752.12549 |s2cid= 233646159 |doi-access= free |url= https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/10125585/1/Suissa_1467-9752.12549.pdf }} |
|||
*{{Cite book|editor-last=Whited|editor-first=Lana A.|title=The Ivory Tower, Harry Potter, and Beyond|publisher=[[University of Missouri Press]]|year=2024|isbn=978-0-8262-2300-5 |ref= {{harvid|Whited (ed)|2024}} }} |
|||
** {{harvc|last= Borah |first= Rebecca Sutherland |c= 'Accio Jo!' Woke Wizards and Generational Potter Fandom |in= Whited (ed) |year=2024 |nb=yes}} |
|||
** {{harvc|last=Whited|first=Lana A.|c = Introduction |in= Whited (ed) |year=2024 |nb=yes}} |
|||
{{cob}} |
|||
===Discussion of Draft 8=== |
|||
:My personal view: if a five-para lead is agreed on, I wouldn't be strongly opposed. But I would ''not'' separate it as WorthPoke2 suggests, rather I would prefer putting all of her views (related content) into that separate paragraph. Looking at [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=J._K._Rowling&oldid=1217670382 the current version], that would mean the break would be after her accolades and charitable giving, and before the "In politics" sentence, but viewing the current lead content, one can see it flows from accolades, to giving, to giving in politics, to her political and other views ... that progression of narrative made/makes sense to me. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 14:21, 7 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
S Marshall, I have another full day today, but hope to be able to look this evening. Quickly though, I did see one comma issue in the first para that may leave a misimpression:{{tq2|She resists the Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill in Scotland, and proposed changes to the Equality Act 2010 in the UK, which would make it simpler to transition without a medical diagnosis.}} It could read to the uninitiated as if she a) resists X, and b) (instead) proposes Y, when what is meant is that she a) resists X, and b) resists proposals to Y. And there's some redundant wording and detail. Not sure how to fix it ... maybe something like ... She resisted the (year?) Gender Recognition Reform Bill in Scotland and changes proposed (in year X) to the UK Equality Act, (both of?) which would make it simpler to transition without a medical diagnosis. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 11:18, 23 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::I do think that a paragraph break there makes a lot of sense. I'd also like to add a little more material about the trans stuff to that paragraph but I'd support a paragraph break regardless. [[User:LokiTheLiar|Loki]] ([[User talk:LokiTheLiar|talk]]) 17:26, 7 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::In the lede I wouldn’t mind a paragraph break but I disagree with the idea of all her views. Joanne’s views on Blairite economics aren’t notable, her views on trans people absolutely are. [[User:Snokalok|Snokalok]] ([[User talk:Snokalok|talk]]) 17:40, 7 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:I agree with this. |
|||
::I've read it a few times today and think it works as written. It starts with accolades and honors, mentions philanthropy - monies given, including to politics - then to politics & transgender views. It's all worthy of mention and packed together in a single para - which is how leads are written. [[User:Victoriaearle|Victoria]] ([[User talk:Victoriaearle|tk]]) 21:09, 7 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:I would phrase it as {{tq|She opposes the Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill in Scotland, and also opposes proposed changes to the Equality Act 2010 in the UK which would make it simpler to transition without a medical diagnosis.}} [[User:LokiTheLiar|Loki]] ([[User talk:LokiTheLiar|talk]]) 15:39, 23 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
{{pb}}Another concern I have is (sentences numbered for discussion purposes):{{tq2|1. She resists the Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill in Scotland, and proposed changes to the Equality Act 2010 in the UK, which would make it simpler to transition without a medical diagnosis. 2. Rowling is concerned that easier transitions could affect access to female-only spaces and legal protections for women. 3. She opposes gender self-recognition and suggests that children and cisgender women are threatened by trans women and trans-positive messages.}} In earlier drafts, we didn't have Sentence 2, so that the "without a medical diagnosis" in Sentence 1 led straight to Sentence 3 (her opposition). Now with the intervening Sentence 2, I'm not sure it's clear what she actually opposes (she said something along the lines, I forget and don't have time to look it up, call yourself what you want, live your life as you please, or whatever that bit was, so it's not self-recognition per se that she opposes); what she seems to oppose is giving access to certain spaces (that she views as necessary to protect women and children) to people who self-identify "without a medical diagnosis". Maybe this can be addressed by fiddling with the word "easier" to something more explicit to her concerns and what she has said (I believe that wording can be found in her essay, or maybe reviewing that New York Times opinion piece from someone who defended Rowling would provide some wording ideas). I hope I can find time to look more closely this evening to suggest wording, but someone else may get to it sooner. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 11:31, 23 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*I do feel there should be a separate paragraph in the lead about her gender-critical-ness. In the UK and particularly in Scotland, there's been a ''lot'' of 2020s coverage of her in connection with [[Isla Bryson]] and the drama about the [[Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill]]. So much so in fact that if you asked a Scottish teen about J.K. Rowling, they might well say she's a leading anti-transwoman activist, oh, and didn't she write some books as well? What I really advocate is one gender-views paragraph in a four-paragraph lead, but if we have to go to a five paragraph lead to achieve that, then okay, let's do it.—[[User:S Marshall|<b style="font-family: Verdana; color: Maroon;">S Marshall</b>]] <small>[[User talk:S Marshall|T]]/[[Special:Contributions/S Marshall|C]]</small> 23:23, 7 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:PS, I agree we are close to installation, and will try tonight to dig up the newer sources I mentioned in discussion of Draft 7, but no promises; I am coming to sadly realize that the changes in the structure of my free time may be permanent; apologies again. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 11:37, 23 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*It's a tough one. The current lead does flow well right now, so I think a fifth paragraph related to her views would be best. Quick draft to give an idea: "Rowling is known for donating to political causes and sharing her views on politics and society. She has opposed Scottish independence and Brexit and is an outspoken feminist. Since 2019, her views on transgender rights and identity have attracted unprecedented media attention and made her a controversial figure, etc. etc." [[User:WikiFouf|WikiFouf]] ([[User talk:WikiFouf|talk]]) 04:30, 8 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*:I’d counter with “Since 2019, she has also become notable for her prominence within anti-transgender activism, with her stated views becoming increasingly radical over time - to the point of what some have characterized as holocaust denial.” [[User:Snokalok|Snokalok]] ([[User talk:Snokalok|talk]]) 12:44, 8 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*::Please don't introduce "known for" and "notable for" into the [[WP:WIAFA|lead of a featured article]]; that should be obvious or the content wouldn't be in the lead. The current lead explores the main things she was known for without wasting those (trite) words in the word count. Also, please don't try to rewrite the lead yet when NO ONE has yet attempted to draft new body content. Leads follow bodies; could we stay focused on the question of whether we should deviate from the [[WP:LEAD]] guideline to allow an extra paragraph (''either now or when we rewrite the content'')-- which [[Climate change|happens at times]], but is rare?[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:WhatamIdoing/Sandbox_3&oldid=1136415819][https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:WhatamIdoing/Sandbox&oldid=1199432695#Most_recent_FAs] The current lead is dated and needs rewriting, but at least it was not poorly written considering it was constrained by a [[Talk:J. K. Rowling/Archive 11|well-attended RFC]]. Vanamonde93 was one of the three main authors of the Featured version, and has been following here, but we are still missing the other two ({{u|AleatoryPonderings}} and {{u|Olivaw-Daneel}}, who have access to scholarly sources), and {{u|Sideswipe9th}}, a competent FA writer with source access, has gone missing for a week. Victoriaearle makes a good point and I'm still unsure if we need to deviate from a guideline in this case (it's not an ultra-long article, it complies with SIZE), and am hoping to hear from more of the others before making up my own mind. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 14:41, 8 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*:::Alternative suggestion: combine the first three paras into two? [[User:WorthPoke2|WorthPoke2]] ([[User talk:WorthPoke2|talk]]) 18:28, 8 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*::::I'm hoping we will hear more from other highly involved editors; I have done all I can to catch up here after two weeks travel, but haven't been able to thoroughly weigh in on everything yet, and I am having hand surgery tomorrow, and don't know what to expect, in case I go silent for a few days or can't type. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 00:09, 9 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:I don't think a five paragraph lead is needed. From the worldwide point of view WP is supposed to espouse, she is still primarily known for Harry Potter, and her political/cultural viewpoints are very much a consequence of HP rather than an equal to it. Sure, a Western teen might know her only from recently controversies in the news (I doubt it). What about teens in South America, Africa, Asia, and Oceania? Please keep [[WP:BIAS|the systemic bias]] of Wikipedia in mind. [[User:AirshipJungleman29|~~ AirshipJungleman29]] ([[User talk:AirshipJungleman29|talk]]) 01:02, 9 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::The media coverage of her over the last 4-5 years has been almost entirely transphobia related. Notability is pretty thoroughly established, I do believe [[User:Snokalok|Snokalok]] ([[User talk:Snokalok|talk]]) 07:44, 9 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::Though, I do agree with the thought about ties between her views and Harry Potter, but that’s just because I watch a lot of Shaun’s video essays. [[User:Snokalok|Snokalok]] ([[User talk:Snokalok|talk]]) 07:45, 9 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::Yes, which is why the transgender politics is mentioned in the lead. To go further would be [[WP:RECENTISM]]. Media coverage of the previous three decades was entirely HP-focused. [[User:AirshipJungleman29|~~ AirshipJungleman29]] ([[User talk:AirshipJungleman29|talk]]) 10:18, 9 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::That she is famous because of and for Harry Potter and not because of her views on gender/transphobia etc does not mean those views are not some of the presently most prominent things about her. [[User:WorthPoke2|WorthPoke2]] ([[User talk:WorthPoke2|talk]]) 17:36, 9 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::Yes, but encyclopedias are supposed to take the long-term view, instead of focusing on the [[WP:RECENTISM]] of what's "presently" the most prominent thing about her in the daily news. [[User:WhatamIdoing|WhatamIdoing]] ([[User talk:WhatamIdoing|talk]]) 17:40, 9 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::At the same time, ignoring what's been her main point of notability for four years is also a problem. [[Template:Update]] exists for a reason. The height of Harry Potter's popularity is long past, but most of the article was written based on sources from then, and we're left with a time capsule of 2010s recentism as it stands. |
|||
::::Would themes of Harry Potter fit the ten year rule? I'd say the thing that started to cause the author's downfall from the unquestioned heights of popularity she once had ''does'' fit the 10 year rule. It's vital to understand what happened to her. <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.118em 0.118em 0.118em; class=texhtml">'''[[User:Adam Cuerden|Adam Cuerden]]''' <sup>([[User talk:Adam Cuerden|talk]])</sup><sub>Has about 8.9% of all [[WP:FP|FPs]].</sub></span> 21:43, 9 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::I'd question whether her trans POV is really "her main point of notability", even during the last few years. [[GHits]] are an imperfect system, but they're probably more objective than what each of us remember from our individual [[Filter bubble|filter bubbles]]. Consider what I find in Google Books: |
|||
:::::* for the five years before the 2018 GRA consultation (2013–2017): |
|||
:::::** <code>"j.k. rowling" "harry potter"</code> – 469 books |
|||
:::::** <code>"j.k. rowling" "transgender"</code> – 30 books |
|||
:::::* for the five years after it (2019–2023): |
|||
:::::** <code>"j.k. rowling" "harry potter"</code> – 559 books |
|||
:::::** <code>"j.k. rowling" "transgender"</code> – 256 books |
|||
:::::These results suggest increased coverage of transgender subjects relative to the earlier years, but they still show more than twice as many mentions of Harry Potter. |
|||
:::::Some of the increase may be driven by increased coverage of trans issues generally; Google Ngram indicates that in 2013 there were almost two, and by 2018, more than three, books using the word ''transgender'' for every one book that mentioned ''Harry Potter'', but that dataset only runs up until 2019, so we can't use it to look at recent years. Looking at the graphs, I'd guess that much less than half of the increase is due to the "background" effect of people writing about trans issues. [[User:WhatamIdoing|WhatamIdoing]] ([[User talk:WhatamIdoing|talk]]) 17:15, 10 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::::A lot of the mentions of Rowling in general may refer to her as "the Harry Potter author". That it's included does not make it about them -- I'd compare the intersection and compare only Rowling and Potter without Trans to all mentions of Towling and trans, to try and get that breakdown. [[User:WorthPoke2|WorthPoke2]] ([[User talk:WorthPoke2|talk]]) 11:32, 11 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::I'm not going for recentism: my point is that in the same way someone can become famous for doing one thing then move to spending most of their time doing something very different: your argument there would prevent us noting the second acts of anyone. |
|||
::::(For instance, David Cameron is famous because he was UK Prime Minister. That does not mean the fact he's UK Foreign Secretary is not notable! Or Johnson became famous as a journalist, panel show guest, before going into being a mayor with a brief stint as Prime Minister before returning to his current role as journalist and author. All of those parts have a place in the lead!) [[User:WorthPoke2|WorthPoke2]] ([[User talk:WorthPoke2|talk]]) 15:13, 10 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::I don't think that the number of paragraphs is the right way to measure the length of a lead. It is presently 429 words and 25 sentences. For comparison, most [[Wikipedia:Featured articles|featured articles]] have a lead length of about three paragraphs, containing 10 to 18 sentences, or 250 to 400 words. This article is longer than most FAs, and has a lead length that is only a bit longer than the lead for most FAs. I don't think this is a problem. [[User:WhatamIdoing|WhatamIdoing]] ([[User talk:WhatamIdoing|talk]]) 17:39, 9 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*I cannot keep up with the volume of comments here, so apologies if this is not addressing everything. I am not convinced we need a lead paragraph dedicated to transgender issues, largely per AirshipJungleman above. JKR has said things on social media, and as those things have become less subtle she's received increasingly sharp criticism. We should absolutely mention that, and I'm in agreement with many folks above that the summary of the transgender issue is currently charitable to JKR relative to the the sources (I don't think it was when written). But relative to the rest of her career, the coverage is still minor, and it's still largely the celebrity news sections of the media that spend time on this issue. We really need to be careful about RECENTISM and NOTNEWS. [[User:Vanamonde93|Vanamonde93]] ([[User talk:Vanamonde93|talk]]) 15:51, 10 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*:* Considering the things I've raised previously, specifically the chilling of her relationships with members of the Harry Potter film cast, the transition of her writing career to transphobic detective novels and the attempted boycott of Hogwarts Legacy as a result of her social media statements I'd say that the transphobia has become a significant enough part of her ''professional'' life to be due mention in the lede. [[User:Simonm223|Simonm223]] ([[User talk:Simonm223|talk]]) 18:43, 10 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*:*:Which doesn't contradict anything I've written in the slightest, as it's already mentioned in the lead. We're discussing the need for a separate paragraph. [[User:Vanamonde93|Vanamonde93]] ([[User talk:Vanamonde93|talk]]) 15:49, 11 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::Calling her Cormoran Strike novels "transphobic" is a biased statement with no basis in reality. Have you actually read any of these books? (I've read all of them.) [[User:Dtobias|*Dan T.*]] ([[User talk:Dtobias|talk]]) 15:16, 11 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::There's a scene in one of them, years before any of this popped off even, where the main character threatens a trans woman with prison rape. [[User:LokiTheLiar|Loki]] ([[User talk:LokiTheLiar|talk]]) 18:31, 11 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::What you're referring to is in ''[[The Silkworm]]'', 69% through in the Kindle edition, where Strike tells Pippa "it won't be fun for you inside" (when threatening to call the police on her). In his defense, she did just try to stab him with a knife, and had been stalking him for a while before that, but Strike can still be a bit crude at times (but Robin still likes him). Ultimately everybody calms down, various misunderstandings are cleared up, and Pippa becomes a fairly sympathetic character despite the inauspicious introduction. Nobody misgenders her, not Strike nor any other character nor the book's omniscient narrator. Kudos to you for citing the one actual transgender character in the entire series, who isn't the serial killer who sometimes puts on a dress in a different book of the series who sometimes gets cited by critics of Rowling. [[User:Dtobias|*Dan T.*]] ([[User talk:Dtobias|talk]]) 01:07, 12 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::{{U|S Marshall}} thanks again for doing the work! It's great to see this & it looks great. Re the comma, suggest adding a "the" in front of "proposed changes" so as not to confuse that JKR is proposing the changes. {{U|SandyGeorgia}}, re self-recognition, Whited writes, page 7, "In late 2022 and early 2023, as Scotland considered its own gender identity reform, Rowling continued to be a vocal opponent of self-designation, especially for those in early adolescence." [[User:Victoriaearle|Victoria]] ([[User talk:Victoriaearle|tk]]) 13:42, 23 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*Just to see what this could look like, I've put the existing wording in a different order, to get to one possible draft of a five-paragraph version of the lead [[User:S Marshall/sandbox|here]].—[[User:S Marshall|<b style="font-family: Verdana; color: Maroon;">S Marshall</b>]] <small>[[User talk:S Marshall|T]]/[[Special:Contributions/S Marshall|C]]</small> 22:42, 14 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:I made a suggestion about sentence 2 in the section above this, which would redistribute it. Does anyone have any commentary on my suggestion? We could keep or lose sentence 1 in my opinion - though I think it's largely redundant to later comments - but sentence 2 is kind of a mess. <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.118em 0.118em 0.118em; class=texhtml">'''[[User:Adam Cuerden|Adam Cuerden]]''' <sup>([[User talk:Adam Cuerden|talk]])</sup><sub>Has about 8.8% of all [[WP:FP|FPs]].</sub></span> 14:09, 23 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:*Thanks {{u|S Marshall}} for taking a stab at it. I could support something like this, but would want to see the numbers (half a billion books sold, etc) appear earlier. However it's viewed the numbers of books sold and the subsequent media franchise is what makes her notable. I think it still needs a bit of juggling around, but thinking about it. That said, I'm wondering if we should wait until the transgender section is rewritten so we can write the lead to reflect the article? Let's see what others think. [[User:Victoriaearle|Victoria]] ([[User talk:Victoriaearle|tk]]) 23:30, 15 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::(Also, as said above, footnote [a] is clearly misplaced as things stand. <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.118em 0.118em 0.118em; class=texhtml">'''[[User:Adam Cuerden|Adam Cuerden]]''' <sup>([[User talk:Adam Cuerden|talk]])</sup><sub>Has about 8.8% of all [[WP:FP|FPs]].</sub></span> 14:13, 23 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*Now tweaked to draft 8.1.—[[User:S Marshall|<b style="font-family: Verdana; color: Maroon;">S Marshall</b>]] <small>[[User talk:S Marshall|T]]/[[Special:Contributions/S Marshall|C]]</small> 16:47, 23 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== Transgender people section: removed references should be reinstated == |
|||
*:Just passing by, great work by everyone. I noted a small issue on the third paragraph: "Criticism came from Harry Potter fansites, LGBT charities, and leading actors of the Wizarding World. and Human Rights Campaign." There is a punctuation mark after Wizarding World that is misplaced. Maybe also change one "and" to something else then. [[User:Vestigium Leonis|Vestigium Leonis]] ([[User talk:Vestigium Leonis|talk]]) 10:20, 24 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*::Fixed in draft 8.1a.—[[User:S Marshall|<b style="font-family: Verdana; color: Maroon;">S Marshall</b>]] <small>[[User talk:S Marshall|T]]/[[Special:Contributions/S Marshall|C]]</small> 12:03, 24 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*:::{{ping|S Marshall}} I have one more minor point: "is concerned" feels like loaded language. How about just a neutral "says" or "stated". I still think "legal protections for women" is vague, but later in the paragraph it matters less. <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.118em 0.118em 0.118em; class=texhtml">'''[[User:Adam Cuerden|Adam Cuerden]]''' <sup>([[User talk:Adam Cuerden|talk]])</sup><sub>Has about 8.8% of all [[WP:FP|FPs]].</sub></span> 17:53, 24 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*::::Loaded how? Do you doubt that she's concerned about those things?—[[User:S Marshall|<b style="font-family: Verdana; color: Maroon;">S Marshall</b>]] <small>[[User talk:S Marshall|T]]/[[Special:Contributions/S Marshall|C]]</small> 23:18, 24 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*:::::I also share this, uh, concern with Adam. |
|||
*:::::My concern here is that "is concerned about X" implies that X is true. So when we say that {{tq2|Rowling is concerned that easier transitions could affect access to female-only spaces and legal protections for women}} we're implicitly saying that {{tq2|easier transitions could affect access to female-only spaces and legal protections for women}}, a statement we haven't sourced and couldn't say in Wikivoice. [[User:LokiTheLiar|Loki]] ([[User talk:LokiTheLiar|talk]]) 23:44, 24 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*:::::::Weird. Must be an ENGVAR thing, because "Rowling is concerned about X" doesn't suggest any truth value for X in English English. Anyway, I certainly don't love "says" or "stated". Always use a specific verb in preference to a generic one whenever you can: specific verbs don't just convey more information in a similar word count, they also make your sentence clearer and more engaging. Rowling worries? Fears? Believes?—[[User:S Marshall|<b style="font-family: Verdana; color: Maroon;">S Marshall</b>]] <small>[[User talk:S Marshall|T]]/[[Special:Contributions/S Marshall|C]]</small> 00:22, 25 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*::::::::"Believes" seems better. <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.118em 0.118em 0.118em; class=texhtml">'''[[User:Adam Cuerden|Adam Cuerden]]''' <sup>([[User talk:Adam Cuerden|talk]])</sup><sub>Has about 8.8% of all [[WP:FP|FPs]].</sub></span> 00:43, 25 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
==== Forstater times 3 ==== |
|||
This section contains more than 15 references to people reacting negatively to comments made by Rowling. |
|||
Working on redundancy: |
|||
:'''Current''' proposal: Friction over Rowling's gender-critical writings surged in 2019 when she defended [[Maya Forstater]]. When [[Forstater v Centre for Global Development Europe|Forstater's employment contract was not renewed]] after Forstater shared gender-critical views, Rowling wrote that |
|||
:: --> '''Less repetitive''': Friction over Rowling's gender-critical writings surged in 2019 when she defended [[Maya Forstater]], whose [[Forstater v Centre for Global Development Europe|employment contract was not renewed]] after she shared gender-critical views. Rowling wrote that |
|||
Or something similar to the reduce the repetition of Forstater's name three times. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 14:24, 24 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*Fixed in draft 8.2.—[[User:S Marshall|<b style="font-family: Verdana; color: Maroon;">S Marshall</b>]] <small>[[User talk:S Marshall|T]]/[[Special:Contributions/S Marshall|C]]</small> 14:35, 24 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*: Thx! Still working through ... [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 14:37, 24 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
==== But sales of books grew, and more ==== |
|||
It is eminently relevant to attach to the existing description of Rowling’s April 2024 comments that her views have been supported by the Prime Minister of the UK. |
|||
Why was [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:J._K._Rowling&diff=next&oldid=1230597656 this sentence cut]? There's more, see for example {{tq|"In fact, book sales increased, Universal Studios is expanding Harry Potter World, a TV series is in the works, Maya Forstater was exonerated, etc ... "}} that we [[Talk:J._K._Rowling/Archive_20#Thoughts_from_Victoria|discussed, now back in Archive 20]]. If we need more sources, they can be added, but by leaving out that the popularity of her work continues, while expressing that her image or reputation has been impacted, we are losing some neutrality. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 14:37, 24 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*That paragraph wasn't flowing right with that sentence, but on reflection I agree that we need to put it back in... somewhere. Thinking cap on.—[[User:S Marshall|<b style="font-family: Verdana; color: Maroon;">S Marshall</b>]] <small>[[User talk:S Marshall|T]]/[[Special:Contributions/S Marshall|C]]</small> 14:41, 24 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*: OK, I'll try to revisit this after the rest of my morning work (I finally have a fully free day!). [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 14:48, 24 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*:: I've tentatively added it to a fifth paragraph?—[[User:S Marshall|<b style="font-family: Verdana; color: Maroon;">S Marshall</b>]] <small>[[User talk:S Marshall|T]]/[[Special:Contributions/S Marshall|C]]</small> 14:57, 24 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*:::This [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:J._K._Rowling&diff=prev&oldid=1230757570 format change] explodes my brain; could be do this another way ? Like, just add the suggested para here ? [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 15:04, 24 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*::::The last sentence of the 8.3 version ''({{tq|Whited asserted in 2024 that Rowling's sometimes...}})'' could be split off into its own paragraph (as the fifth and final paragraph of the section), and the new paragraph in the 8.3 version ''({{tq|Despite the controversy, Rowling's work is increasingly successful...}})'' can then be placed right after the Whited sentence (in the same paragraph). [[User:Some1|Some1]] ([[User talk:Some1|talk]]) 22:50, 24 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*:::OK, now that I think I've been able to pick out the new para, I'm (always) concerned that we're adding text that isn't necessarily scholarly sourced ... the one sentence that was there before was from Pape. Let me continue my perusal of new sources to see what else comes up, but generally, I'm not fond of the new para, and I'm more concerned that by having a three-column proposal, we will confuse subsequent editors/readers of the page. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 15:07, 24 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*::::I also suspect we might find a way to work that one sentence in to the (now) third para, after examining new sources. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 15:10, 24 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*:::::<s>I don't love the new paragraph, because it feels a little off-topic: it's not about Rowling's views directly, and it's not really comparing Rowling's book sale increase to how COVID-19 affected other book sales. I don't hate it enough to object to the draft, but speculation about a series two years out and book sales increasing (Compared to what, 2019? Because I doubt they reached original release sales numbers) during a pandemic doesn't feel that relevant. <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.118em 0.118em 0.118em; class=texhtml">'''[[User:Adam Cuerden|Adam Cuerden]]''' <sup>([[User talk:Adam Cuerden|talk]])</sup><sub>Has about 8.8% of all [[WP:FP|FPs]].</sub></span> 17:57, 24 June 2024 (UTC)</s> |
|||
*:::::::Actually, checking this, I have '''major''' objections to the sales increasing language. See below. <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.118em 0.118em 0.118em; class=texhtml">'''[[User:Adam Cuerden|Adam Cuerden]]''' <sup>([[User talk:Adam Cuerden|talk]])</sup><sub>Has about 8.8% of all [[WP:FP|FPs]].</sub></span> 05:14, 25 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*::::::::After seeing the context below, I also object to this line. It's hard to say what her sales increasing means in a context where everyone's sales increased. If her sales increased less than everyone else's, it's still possible the controversy hurt sales. And we don't get a comparison in the sources we have. [[User:LokiTheLiar|Loki]] ([[User talk:LokiTheLiar|talk]]) 05:34, 25 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
==== Flow issues and redundancy in first para ==== |
|||
Either that or all reactions to comments should be moved to the sub-article on Rowling’s political views, as per the suggestion attached to the predictably rapid deletion of a positive reaction to Rowling’s views. [[User:ThisIsGeraint|ThisIsGeraint]] ([[User talk:ThisIsGeraint|talk]]) 04:11, 8 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
As discussed above by me, and under Draft 7 by Adam Cuerden, there are still flow problems in the first para, and there is a lot of repetition as well as duplication in footnotes. And that leads to a (slight) misrepresentation of her position. And there are missing links and definitions (eg, we manage to never link transitioning). {{pb}} I suggest simplifying the whole thing, while by the way, attributing Duggan's opinion, which is slightly at odds with Rowling's own words: |
|||
: Concerned that easier [[gender transition]]s could affect access to female-only spaces and legal protections for women,<ref name= Milne2020>{{cite web|first1= Amber |last1=Milne|first2 = Rachel| last2 =Savage | url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-lgbt-rowling-explainer-trfn-idUSKBN23I3AI | title=Explainer: J. K. Rowling and trans women in single-sex spaces: what's the furore? | publisher=[[Reuters]] | date=11 June 2020 | access-date=6 April 2021 }}</ref><ref name= Brooks2020>{{Cite news|last=Brooks|first=Libby|date=11 June 2020|title=Why is JK Rowling speaking out now on sex and gender debate? |url= http://www.theguardian.com/books/2020/jun/11/why-is-jk-rowling-speaking-out-now-on-sex-and-gender-debate|access-date=14 January 2022 |work= [[The Guardian]] }}</ref><ref name=Kottasova2019>{{cite news |title= J.K. Rowling's 'transphobia' tweet row spotlights a fight between equality campaigners and radical feminists |first1= Ivana |last1= Kottasová |first2= Scottie |last2= Andrew |publisher= [[CNN]] |date= 20 December 2019|url= https://edition.cnn.com/2019/12/20/uk/jk-rowling-transgender-explainer-intl-gbr/index.html |access-date= 5 May 2024}}</ref> Rowling opposes proposed legislation{{efn|The laws and proposed changes are the UK [[Gender Recognition Act 2004]] and the Scotland [[Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill|Gender Recognition Reform Bill]]; related also are the UK [[Equality Act 2010]]{{sfn|Pedersen|2022|loc=Abstract}}{{sfn|Suissa|Sullivan|2021|pp=66–69}}{{sfn|Duggan|2021|loc=PDF pp. 14–15 (160–161)}} and the Scotland Gender Representation on Public Boards Act of 2018.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Watson |first1=Jeremy |title=JK Rowling donates £70k for legal challenge on defining a woman |date=18 February 2024 |url=https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/jk-rowling-donates-70k-for-legal-challenge-on-defining-a-woman-73tkvwq0b |work=[[The Times]] |access-date=5 May 2024|archive-url=https://archive.today/20240217200104/https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/jk-rowling-donates-70k-for-legal-challenge-on-defining-a-woman-73tkvwq0b |archive-date=17 February 2024 |url-status=live |url-access=subscription}}</ref>}} to advance gender self-recognition and make it simpler to transition without a medical diagnosis.{{sfn|Whited|2024|p=7}}<ref name=BacksProtest>{{cite news |title= JK Rowling backs protest over Scottish gender bill |date= 6 October 2022|url= https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-63162533 |publisher= [[BBC News]] |access-date= 5 May 2024}}</ref>{{efn|Rowling wrote in 2020: "The current explosion of trans activism is urging a removal of almost all the robust systems through which candidates for sex reassignment were once required to pass. A man who intends to have no surgery and take no hormones may now secure himself a Gender Recognition Certificate and be a woman in the sight of the law."<ref name=RowlingReasons/>}} According to English professor Jennifer Duggan, Rowling suggests that children and [[cisgender]] women are threatened by trans women and trans-positive messages.{{sfn|Duggan|2021|p=161}} |
|||
:Could several of you please stop the borderline edit warring over [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=J._K._Rowling&diff=1217825300&oldid=1217670382 that content]? See [[WP:ONUS]] and [[WP:FAOWN]] and gain consensus here before changing that content again.{{pb}} Whether and how many complaints any authorities received is detail that can be explored in the [[Political views of J. K. Rowling|sub-article]]; my choice would be to remove mention of number of complaints, who agrees, who disagrees, entirely and simply state the outcome (there were no charges). [[Police Scotland]] stated that "no action [would] be taken" on complaints that resulted. See [[WP:SS]], [[WP:SIZE]] and [[WP:WIAFA]]. Explore the rest in the sub-article, which remains underdeveloped. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 15:01, 8 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
{{cot|title= Sources}} |
|||
::Honestly, the testing the Scottish law... really doesn't feel like anything that'll be relevant in a year. Especially given you could write off anything she said during that as free speech provocateurship (probably not accurately, but that's her "out"). There are incidents much, much more likely to be relevant after a year; meanwhile. the denial of transgender people being persecuted by the Holocaust feels likely to be much more of a touchstone, given A. it was extremely dumb of her to even say in the first place, and B. she repeatedly double downed on it. |
|||
{{reflist-talk}} |
|||
::That said, a good rule of thumb is that anything from the last month we should be relatively hesitant to include, even though we shouldn't necessarily reject it out of hand. Anything from 2023 that's still relevant, though, probably is ''very'' relevant. |
|||
{{notelist-talk}} |
|||
::Offhand, maybe https://twitter.com/jk_rowling/status/1714279937279160596 ? It's pretty widely reported and referenced, and, I believe, was her pinned tweet for months. <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.118em 0.118em 0.118em; class=texhtml">'''[[User:Adam Cuerden|Adam Cuerden]]''' <sup>([[User talk:Adam Cuerden|talk]])</sup><sub>Has about 8.9% of all [[WP:FP|FPs]].</sub></span> 09:27, 9 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
{{cob}} |
|||
:One common rule, based in our [[Wikipedia:Summary style]] approach, that we could choose to adopt explicitly for this article, is that there should be nothing in [[J. K. Rowling]] about her trans POV that isn't already in developed in some detail in [[Political views of J. K. Rowling#Transgender rights]]. The goal here would be to summarize (=have less volume and less detail than) that section in this article, so the process would look like: |
|||
I'll work next on the sources I promised to explore for the third para of Draft 8. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 14:48, 24 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:* put it in the more relevant article |
|||
:* look over the whole section and see which parts need to be included here, and at what level of detail, and which can be excluded. |
|||
:(For clarity, the process would ''not'' look like: put it in the more relevant article, and now immediately copy it to this [more general] article, because everything in the more relevant article needs to be here, too.) |
|||
:Another potentially useful rule of thumb might be: When the content is "somebody said something", wait at least 30 days after the event before putting it into this article. The internet outrage machine is adept at making us think that the latest comment is extraordinarily important, but when we get a different, seemingly important comment every other week... well, maybe deliberately giving ourselves time to reflect would let us see the artificial urgency for the social-media-induced emotional manipulation that it is. [[User:WhatamIdoing|WhatamIdoing]] ([[User talk:WhatamIdoing|talk]]) 19:04, 9 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::Wholeheartedly agree with both of WhatamIdoing's suggestions. Much of the reason this page is a battlezone is because [[WP:SUMMARY]] is not being followed, and the other main reason is [[WP:NOT#NEWS]] and [[WP:NOT#SOCIAL]] and [[WP:NOT#INDISCRIMINATE]] are not being followed. —[[Special:Contributions/2001:5A8:4260:3100:A457:D8C:E45B:2FBC|2001:5A8:4260:3100:A457:D8C:E45B:2FBC]] ([[User talk:2001:5A8:4260:3100:A457:D8C:E45B:2FBC|talk]]) [{{User|SMcCandlish}}, in another browser; my usual one is struggling to render this over-long talk page at all.], 05:27, 11 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
I mean, most of Rowling's scandals are on the same topic. If a current one is a good example of a reliably sourced trend, then sure, a brief mention is maybe valid. From what I can tell - though we need RSes, not me - the big trends are A. General fearmongering about trans people (Often something like "keep dangerous men out of women's spaces", B. Fighting against juveniles right to gender affirming care. C. Attacks on specific trans people, sometimes with claims they somehow attacked her first; and D. general misgendering/denying transgender is a thing in the first place. If we had reliable sources for making connections between those types of incidents, we could easily write a simple, accurate section. But we'd '''need''' reliable sources to make those connections. <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.118em 0.118em 0.118em; class=texhtml">'''[[User:Adam Cuerden|Adam Cuerden]]''' <sup>([[User talk:Adam Cuerden|talk]])</sup><sub>Has about 8.9% of all [[WP:FP|FPs]].</sub></span> 05:39, 10 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::That's a highly slanted way of putting all of this, especially after the Cass report raises serious questions about the desirability of so-called "gender affirming care". [[User:Dtobias|*Dan T.*]] ([[User talk:Dtobias|talk]]) 15:19, 11 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::She denies trans people exist, explicitky. <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.118em 0.118em 0.118em; class=texhtml">'''[[User:Adam Cuerden|Adam Cuerden]]''' <sup>([[User talk:Adam Cuerden|talk]])</sup><sub>Has about 8.9% of all [[WP:FP|FPs]].</sub></span> 13:48, 12 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::Please don't bring up the CASS report here or I will hat this thread as [[WP:NOTFORUM]]. [[User:Simonm223|Simonm223]] ([[User talk:Simonm223|talk]]) 13:52, 12 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::::Please don't close a thread because of one person. ''Rowling'' denies people exist. The Cass report is irrelevant to any discussion here: It just came out, and it would be utter [[WP:SYNTH]] to try and defend Rowling based on ''her'' portrayal of the report. <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.118em 0.118em 0.118em; class=texhtml">'''[[User:Adam Cuerden|Adam Cuerden]]''' <sup>([[User talk:Adam Cuerden|talk]])</sup><sub>Has about 8.9% of all [[WP:FP|FPs]].</sub></span> 21:24, 12 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::Notwithstanding your hyperbolic statements, disagreeing with somebody's claims about themselves is not the same as denying they exist. [[User:Dtobias|*Dan T.*]] ([[User talk:Dtobias|talk]]) 23:10, 12 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::::She literally, explicitly, denies that transgender people, as a grouping, exist. That isn't at all hyperbolic. She has explicitly said transwomen are men. <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.118em 0.118em 0.118em; class=texhtml">'''[[User:Adam Cuerden|Adam Cuerden]]''' <sup>([[User talk:Adam Cuerden|talk]])</sup><sub>Has about 8.9% of all [[WP:FP|FPs]].</sub></span> 14:28, 13 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::::::::That sounds like a POV rather than a denial that somebody exists. [[User:Barnards.tar.gz|Barnards.tar.gz]] ([[User talk:Barnards.tar.gz|talk]]) 12:31, 17 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::::::Let's not get hung up on semantics before somebody starts asking for definitions of chairs. Rowling denies trans women exist ''as a category.'' That isn't to say that she solipsistically believes the actual people aren't really there. Just that she denies the authenticity of their experience as a category of people. This denialism is a relevant detail about her views and has had a significant impact on her career and her relationships. As such it is due mention in the core article. We don't need to do a blow-by-blow of who exactly said what when but we do, to follow from WhatamIdoing's point, need to have a summary of that position. And it needs to accurately reflect her denialism of the authenticity of trans experience and her concomitant refusal to accept the rights of trans people as valid. [[User:Simonm223|Simonm223]] ([[User talk:Simonm223|talk]]) 12:58, 17 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::::::::::If we're going to summarise what her position is, it would seem sensible to determine what exactly she has said on the matter. "she denies the authenticity of their experience as a category of people" sounds quite abstract and not like something she actually said. This thread shows how easy it is to slip into false summaries like "She denies trans people exist". By identifying her actual views we can judge which sources are reliably reporting what they are. [[User:Barnards.tar.gz|Barnards.tar.gz]] ([[User talk:Barnards.tar.gz|talk]]) 15:10, 17 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::::::::If you don't believe that there is no God but Allah and Muhammad is His prophet, does that mean that you deny Muslims exist as a category, because you don't believe in the factual accuracy of the beliefs that define their identity? [[User:Dtobias|*Dan T.*]] ([[User talk:Dtobias|talk]]) 18:14, 17 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::::::::::::Just to stay on topic, the point here is that if an otherwise-generally-reliable source is caught making such mischaracterisations of a person’s views, we should not consider it reliable in the [[WP:CONTEXTMATTERS|context]] of an article about that person. [[User:Barnards.tar.gz|Barnards.tar.gz]] ([[User talk:Barnards.tar.gz|talk]]) 19:05, 17 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::::::::::Is it a mischaracterization of her views? I see it as a colloquial but very much accurate representation of her views. |
|||
:::::::::::::::Rowling definitely believes that trans women are men (look at her Twitter if you don't believe me). That implies that she believes that there is no such thing as a trans woman, only lying men, and therefore that trans women don't exist. [[User:LokiTheLiar|Loki]] ([[User talk:LokiTheLiar|talk]]) 20:56, 17 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::::::::::::::Certainly, if reliable sources say that Rowling believes trans women are men, and that this is a notable aspect of her beliefs, then the article should reflect this, presenting the belief in a factual manner without making further attempts at claiming what it "implies" in order to encourage value judgments about it on the part of readers. [[User:Dtobias|*Dan T.*]] ([[User talk:Dtobias|talk]]) 21:30, 17 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:I'd say "Rowling believes" is better than "Rowling suggests" in your last sentence: "suggests" is a little loaded, insofar as it presents the statement after it as a reasonable idea to suggest; we need to avoid any impression that Wikipedia agrees with very explicitly transphobic comments. Like, this is vague connotation stuff, but it still reads very wrong. <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.118em 0.118em 0.118em; class=texhtml">'''[[User:Adam Cuerden|Adam Cuerden]]''' <sup>([[User talk:Adam Cuerden|talk]])</sup><sub>Has about 8.8% of all [[WP:FP|FPs]].</sub></span> 04:55, 25 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== More recent source material == |
|||
==== Citation overkill ? ==== |
|||
Just a place to record "finds". |
|||
How did we end up with four sources citing "human rights campaign"? Did the citations get attached to the wrong bits here ? We shouldn't need four sources to cite criticism from Human Rights Campaign, so could we re-distribute the citations to what they are actually sourcing? |
|||
* Criticism came from Harry Potter fansites, LGBT charities, leading actors of the Wizarding World,[37][38][39] and Human Rights Campaign.[8][40][41][42] |
|||
[[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 16:58, 24 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
==== Paragraph 3 re-do proposal ==== |
|||
* {{cite news |last=Sands |first=Leo |title=Scotland’s hate speech law ignites culture war far outside its borders |date=10 April 2024 |work=[[Washington Post]] |url= https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2024/04/10/hate-crime-speech-scotland-jk-rowling |url-access=subscription}}<br />Internet Archive is no longer getting through ''WashPost''<nowiki />'s paywall, but the usual trick still works if you want the full text: do a quick copy after the bulk of the page loads but before the paywall pops up, and paste into a text editor or word processor. |
|||
As I've mentioned, there are plenty of new sources to cite this content; since I don't have full journal access, I've only listed some at the end of this section, hoping that others will review and decide which to use. And I'd combine the bit we lost at [[#But sales of books grew, and more]] in to this paragraph. My (original) concern was that we not lose the enduring content about the debates the controversy has generated as spillover. Suggest Paragraph 3 thusly (once new sources are chosen from list below and substituted in): [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 17:09, 24 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
—[[Special:Contributions/2001:5A8:4260:3100:A457:D8C:E45B:2FBC|2001:5A8:4260:3100:A457:D8C:E45B:2FBC]] ([[User talk:2001:5A8:4260:3100:A457:D8C:E45B:2FBC|talk]]) [{{User|SMcCandlish}}, in another browser; my usual one is having trouble loading this talk page for some reason.], 05:21, 11 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
* Rowling's views have fuelled<!-- This article uses British spelling --> discussions about [[feminist views on transgender topics]],<ref name=Kottasova2019>{{cite news |first1= Ivana |last1= Kottasová |first2= Scottie | last2= Andrew|title= J.K. Rowling's 'transphobia' tweet row spotlights a fight between equality campaigners and radical feminists |publisher= [[CNN]] |date= 20 December 2019 |access-date= 29 March 2022 | url= https://www.cnn.com/2019/12/20/uk/jk-rowling-transgender-explainer-intl-gbr/index.html}}</ref><ref name=BBC2020JKRResponds>{{cite news |url= https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-53002557 |publisher= [[BBC News]] |title= JK Rowling responds to trans tweets criticism |date= 11 June 2020 |access-date= 29 March 2022}}</ref><ref>{{cite news | url=https://www.newstatesman.com/international/2020/09/judith-butler-culture-wars-jk-rowling-and-living-anti-intellectual-times | title=Judith Butler on the culture wars, JK Rowling and living in 'anti-intellectual times'|first=Alona |last=Ferber | work=[[New Statesman]] | date=22 September 2020 | access-date=26 March 2021}}</ref> [[freedom of speech]],{{sfn|Pape|2022|pp=229–230}}<ref>{{cite web|title=BBC nominates J.K.Rowling's controversial essay of trans rights for award|url=https://www.dw.com/en/bbc-nominates-jk-rowlings-controversial-essay-on-trans-rights-for-award/a-56014673|website=[[DW News]]|date=22 December 2020|access-date=22 December 2020}}</ref> [[academic freedom]],{{sfn|Suissa|Sullivan|2021|pp=66–69}} [[cancel culture]]{{sfn|Schwirblat|Freberg|Freberg|2022|pp=367–369}} and the relationship of authors to their [[fandom]];{{sfn|Whited|2024|pp=6, 8–9}} and prompted declarations of [[Transgender rights movement|support for transgender people]] from the literary,<ref>UK, US, Canada, Ireland: {{cite news |last= Flood |first= Alison |date=9 October 2020|title= Stephen King, Margaret Atwood and Roxane Gay champion trans rights in open letter|url= https://www.theguardian.com/books/2020/oct/09/stephen-king-margaret-atwood-roxane-gay-champion-trans-rights-open-letter-jk-rowling |work= [[The Guardian]] |access-date= 2 April 2022}}</ref> arts<ref>{{cite magazine|last= Rowley |first= Glenn |title= Artists fire back at J.K. Rowling's anti-trans remarks, share messages in support of the community|url= https://www.billboard.com/culture/pride/artists-fire-back-jk-rowling-anti-trans-remarks-9400386/|magazine= [[Billboard (magazine)|Billboard]]|date= 11 June 2020 |access-date= 7 April 2022}}</ref> and culture sectors.<ref>Culture sector: |
|||
:Just to confirm, yes that was me. Whatever the page-loading issue was, it has gone away now. [shrug]. <span style="white-space:nowrap;font-family:'Trebuchet MS'"> — [[User:SMcCandlish|'''SMcCandlish''']] [[User talk:SMcCandlish|☏]] [[Special:Contributions/SMcCandlish|¢]] 😼 </span> 07:02, 11 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
* [[Universal Destinations & Experiences]], [[Warner Bros.]] and [[Scholastic Corporation]]: {{cite news |last1= Siegel |first1= Tatiana |last2= Abramovitch |first2= Seth |date= 10 June 2020 |title= Universal Parks responds to J.K. Rowling tweets: 'Our core values include diversity, inclusion and respect' |work= [[The Hollywood Reporter]] |url= https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/lifestyle/lifestyle-news/universal-parks-responds-jk-rowling-tweets-core-values-include-diversity-inclusion-respect-1297845/ |access-date= 3 April 2022|ref=none}} |
|||
* [[Warner Bros. Interactive Entertainment]] president: {{cite news |last= Skrebels |first= Joe |title= WB Interactive president responds to ongoing debate over supporting JK Rowling |date=1 October 2020 |url= https://www.ign.com/articles/wb-interactive-president-responds-to-ongoing-debate-over-supporting-jk-rowling |publisher= [[IGN]] |access-date= 2 April 2022|ref=none}}</ref> Criticism came from Harry Potter fansites, LGBT charities, leading actors of the Wizarding World,{{sfn|Henderson|2022|p=224}}<ref name=Petter2020>{{Cite web|last= Petter|first=Olivia|date=17 September 2020|title=Mermaids writes open letter to JK Rowling following her recent comments on trans people|url=https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/mermaids-jk-rowling-transphobia-transgender-sexual-abuse-domestic-letter-a9565176.html|access-date=26 March 2022|work=[[The Independent]] |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200615235531/https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/mermaids-jk-rowling-transphobia-transgender-sexual-abuse-domestic-letter-a9565176.html |archive-date=15 June 2020}}</ref><ref>{{cite news | url=https://www.newstatesman.com/long-reads/2021/11/the-battle-for-stonewall-the-lgbt-charity-and-the-uks-gender-wars | title=The battle for Stonewall: the LGBT charity and the UK's gender wars | work=[[New Statesman]]|first=Gaby |last=Hinsliff|date=3 November 2021 | access-date=24 November 2021}}</ref> and [[Human Rights Campaign]].<ref name= Milne2020/><ref name=AP7June2020>{{cite news |title= JK Rowling's tweets on transgender people spark outrage |date= 7 June 2020 |url= https://apnews.com/article/entertainment-jk-rowling-us-news-media-7338b2b262090c00f04deafe2e6689c2 |publisher= [[Associated Press]] |access-date= 4 May 2024}}</ref><ref name=Waterson2020>{{Cite news|last= Waterson |first= Jim|title= Children's news website apologises to JK Rowling over trans tweet row|url= https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/jul/23/childrens-news-website-apologises-jk-rowling-trans-tweet-day|date= 23 July 2020 |access-date=26 March 2022|work=[[The Guardian]] |quote= Rowling's comments on gender were condemned by LGBT charities and the leading stars of her Harry Potter film franchise.}}</ref><ref name=Lang2020>{{cite magazine |last=Lang |first=Brent |title= Eddie Redmayne criticizes J.K. Rowling's anti-trans tweets |date= 10 June 2020 |url= https://variety.com/2020/film/news/eddie-redmayne-jk-rowling-anti-trans-tweets-harry-potter-fantastic-beasts-1234630226/ |magazine= [[Variety (magazine)|Variety]]|access-date=28 March 2022 |quote= Eddie Redmayne, star of the ''Fantastic Beasts'' franchise, is speaking out against J.K. Rowling's anti-trans tweets, as the controversy surrounding the author and her beliefs continues to swirl.}}</ref> After [[Kerry Kennedy]] expressed "profound disappointment" in her views, Rowling returned the [[Ripple of Hope Award]] given to her by the Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights organisation.<ref name=RFKAward>{{cite news |last=Flood|first=Alison |url= https://amp.theguardian.com/books/2020/aug/28/jk-rowling-robert-f-kennedy-human-rights-award-trans-views|title=JK Rowling returns human rights award to group that denounces her trans views |work=[[The Guardian]]|date=28 August 2020|access-date=28 August 2020}}</ref> She has been the target of widespread condemnation{{sfn|Duggan|2021|loc=PDF pp. 14–15 (160–161)}}{{sfn|Schwirblat|Freberg|Freberg|2022|pp=367–369}}{{sfn|Pape|2022|pp=229–230, 238}} and insults, including death threats.{{sfn|Whited|2024|p=9}}<ref name=Burnell4June>{{Cite news|last=Burnell|first=Paul|date=4 June 2024|title= Internet troll threatened to kill JK Rowling and MP|publisher=[[BBC News]]|url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c044vevjyd7o |access-date= 9 June 2024}}</ref> Despite the controversy, sales of ''Harry Potter'' books grew during the [[COVID-19]] lockdown.{{sfn|Pape|2022|p=238}}<ref>{{cite news |first=Mark |last= Sweney |title= Harry Potter books prove UK lockdown hit despite JK Rowling trans rights row |work= [[The Guardian]] |date= 21 July 2020 |url= https://www.theguardian.com/business/2020/jul/21/jk-rowling-book-sales-unaffected-by-transgender-views-row |access-date= 3 May 2024}}</ref> Some performers and feminists have supported her,{{sfn|Schwirblat|Freberg|Freberg|2022|p=368}}<ref>{{cite news |first=Katie |last=Law |date= 15 October 2020|title= JK Rowling and the bitter battle of the book world |url=https://www.standard.co.uk/culture/books/trans-battle-book-world-jk-rowling-a4571221.html |work= [[Evening Standard]] |access-date=27 March 2022|ref=none}}<Br />* {{cite news |url= https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/maya-forstater-transgender-twitter-jk-rowling-b1838151.html |title= Maya Forstater: who is woman in employment tribunal over transgender comments? |first= Sam |last= Hancock |date= 27 April 2021 |work= [[The Independent]] |access-date= 27 March 2022|archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20210427131430/https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/maya-forstater-transgender-twitter-jk-rowling-b1838151.html |archive-date= 27 April 2021 |quote= ... criminal defence barrister Allison Bailey – known for launching legal action against LGBT+ rights charity Stonewall over its attempt to have her investigated for setting up the anti-trans rights group LGB Alliance – has also been a vocal supporter of Ms Forstater.|ref=none}}<br />* {{cite news |last1=Thorpe |first1=Vanessa |title=JK Rowling: from magic to the heart of a Twitter storm |url=https://www.theguardian.com/books/2020/jun/14/jk-rowling-from-magic-to-the-heart-of-a-twitter-storm |work=[[The Guardian]] |date=14 June 2020 |quote=Arrayed on Rowling's side are some of the veteran voices of feminism, including the radical Julie Bindel, who spoke out in support this weekend |access-date=6 July 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200704200412/https://www.theguardian.com/books/2020/jun/14/jk-rowling-from-magic-to-the-heart-of-a-twitter-storm |archive-date=4 July 2020 |url-status=live|ref=none}}<br />* {{Cite news |first= Maya |last=Yang|date=7 October 2021|title='I'm team Terf': Dave Chappelle under fire over pro-JK Rowling trans stance|url=https://www.theguardian.com/stage/2021/oct/07/dave-chappelle-transgender-netflix-special-backlash|access-date=27 March 2022|work=[[The Guardian]]|ref=none}}<br />* {{cite news |last1=Shirbon |first1=Estelle |title=J.K. Rowling reveals past abuse and defends right to speak on trans issues |url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-rowling/j-k-rowling-reveals-past-abuse-and-defends-right-to-speak-on-trans-issues-idUSKBN23H2XI |publisher=[[Reuters]] |date=10 June 2020 |access-date=13 June 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200611200348/https://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-rowling/j-k-rowling-reveals-past-abuse-and-defends-right-to-speak-on-trans-issues-idUSKBN23H2XI |archive-date=11 June 2020 |url-status=live|ref=none}}<br />* {{cite news |title='I don't think JK Rowling is transphobic,' says gender-fluid comedian Eddie Izzard |url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/comedy/what-to-see/dont-think-jk-rowling-transphobic-says-gender-fluid-comedian/ |archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20220110/https://www.telegraph.co.uk/comedy/what-to-see/dont-think-jk-rowling-transphobic-says-gender-fluid-comedian/ |archive-date=10 January 2022 |url-access=subscription |url-status=live |access-date=27 November 2021 |work=[[The Daily Telegraph]]|date=1 January 2021|ref=none}}<br />* {{cite news |url= https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-53002557 |publisher= [[BBC News]] |title= JK Rowling responds to trans tweets criticism |date= 11 June 2020 |access-date= 29 March 2022}}</ref> and figures from the arts world criticised "hate speech directed against her".<ref name= Flockhart2020>{{cite news |last= Flockhart |first= Gary |date= 28 September 2020 |access-date= 2 April 2022 |work = [[The Scotsman]] |title= JK Rowling receives support from Ian McEwan and Frances Barber amid 'transphobia' row|url= https://www.scotsman.com/news/people/jk-rowling-receives-support-from-ian-mcewan-and-frances-barber-amid-transphobia-row-2986268|ref=none}}</ref> |
|||
{{cot|title= Sources}} |
|||
{{reflist-talk}} |
|||
{{notelist-talk}} |
|||
{{cob}} |
|||
=====Divided feminists ===== |
|||
* {{cite news |last1=Bradley |first1=Sian |last2=McLaughlin |first2=Charlotte |title=JK Rowling: I won’t forgive Harry Potter stars over pro-trans views |date=11 April 2024 |work=[[The Times]] |url= https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/jk-rowling-i-wont-forgive-harry-potter-stars-over-pro-trans-views-fp79wpbvn |url-access=subscription}} |
|||
#This [https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/23780231241237662 scholarly source] ("Feminism and Support for the Transgender Movement in Britain", American Sociological Association) cited [https://www.newstatesman.com/long-reads/2020/09/judith-butler-culture-wars-jk-rowling-living-anti-intellectual-times the Ferber piece in the ''New Statesman'' about JKR]. |
|||
[[User:Dtobias|*Dan T.*]] ([[User talk:Dtobias|talk]]) 15:48, 12 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
# Victoria, are you able to look in to this ? "Feminist Lesbians as Anti-Trans Villains: A Comment on Worthen and Elaboration. By: Burt, Callie H., Sexuality & Culture, 10955143, Feb2023, Vol. 27, Issue 1. |
|||
#: "Worthen thus asserts that GC feminists "are opposed to the recognition of trans women as women and instead, opt into sex essentialist beliefs that reinforce cisnormativity," citing Kathleen Stock, J.K. Rowling, and me, among other GC feminists (whom she labels 'TERFs')[15] (p.2). While these may be simple descriptions of our arguments, they are misguided." |
|||
#: "Therefore, any questioning or resistance—or even support for the right of others to raise questions or concerns—about negotiating sex-based and gender-identity-based claims is frequently met with hostile, even threatening, responses and derogation. This should not be unexpected; as Manne explains, misogyny targets and blows out of proportion even small violations, which are made out to be indicative of women's bad character, in general.[32] Thus women, like J.K. Rowling, who explicitly support human rights for transwomen, profess compassion and sympathy, and support non-discrimination protections for transwomen in all sex-neutral contexts (which is most contexts), can be cast as horrible 'hateful TERFs' and subject to harassment, violent threats, no-platforming with wholesale disregard for the actual substance of their beliefs and actions. Remarkably, Worthen's article, like much trans-activist feminist scholarship, is silent about the "anti-GC feminist activism" including activists' publicly expressed physical threats, harassment, and celebration of intimidating sloganeering and signs: "kill TERFs, trans power". This is because of misogyny." |
|||
#::Seems to be available via Springer, which can be found on TWL. [[User:Victoriaearle|Victoria]] ([[User talk:Victoriaearle|tk]]) 17:32, 24 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
===== Freedom of speech and cancel culture ===== |
|||
== Who exactly called Rowling a TERF? == |
|||
# Callie H. Burt above. |
|||
# Keohane, https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/00027642241240337 Cancel Culture Rhetoric and Moral Conflict in Contemporary Democratic Societies |
|||
# Cancel Culture: Myth or Reality? By: Norris, Pippa, Political Studies, 00323217, Feb2023, Vol. 71, Issue 1 |
|||
# You are Cancelled': Emergence of Cancel Culture in the Digital Age. Lokhande, Gayatri; Natu, Sadhana. IAHRW International Journal of Social Sciences Review. 2022, Vol. 10 Issue 2, p252-259. 8p. |
|||
# How Cancel Culture Tarnishes Morals Clauses and What to do About It. Peterson, Jordan M. Vermont Law Review. 2022, Vol. 47 Issue 2, p220-247. |
|||
# Agonism in the arena: Analyzing cancel culture using a rhetorical model of deviance and reputational repair. Academic Journal. Hobbs, Mitchell John; O'Keefe, Sarah. Public Relations Review. Mar2024, Vol. 50 Issue 1, pN.PAG-N.PAG. 1p. DOI: 10.1016/j.pubrev.2023.102420. |
|||
# HARM AND HEGEMONY: THE DECLINE OF FREE SPEECH IN THE UNITED STATES. TURLEY, JONATHAN. Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy. Jul2022, Vol. 45 Issue 2, p571-701 |
|||
# Pape (already cited in article) |
|||
:#Burt should be available via TWL on Springer. |
|||
:#Keohane, ditto but on Sage |
|||
:#Norris shows pdf available (g-scholar) - [https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/00323217211037023 here it is] |
|||
:#Lokande seems to be hosted via Ebsohost. So, again, TWL |
|||
:#Peterson is hosted by HeinOnline - not sure whether TWL has but it's worth looking |
|||
:#Hobbs & O'Keefe >> looks like there's a pdf link right there on g-scholar. |
|||
:#Turley > not sure I'd use him. |
|||
:Sorry am up to my eyeballs, house renovations, health, travel, etc. Hopefully will surface mid-Julyish. [[User:Victoriaearle|Victoria]] ([[User talk:Victoriaearle|tk]]) 17:45, 24 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
===== Relationship of author to fandom ===== |
|||
I know this has been discussed ad nauseam, but [[WP:CCC]], so here we go again. |
|||
# Taylor https://link.springer.com/article/10.1057/s41290-024-00216-w Harry Potter and the ‘Death of the Actor’: reimagining fusion in cultural pragmatics |
|||
Who exactly called her a TERF? |
|||
===== Academic freedom ===== |
|||
How can we use such [[MOS:WEASEL|weaselly]] wording such as: "and she has been referred to as a [[TERF (acronym)|TERF]]"? By whom exactly? This wording is almost Trumpesque in the way that if diffuses attribution to some vacous other. I checked all the inline sources, and not one of them clearly states that either a) she's a TERF or b) other individual or groups who we would consider to be even an echo of a [[WP:RS]] have called her a TERF. If anything, one of the sources clearly identifies the term as a term of abuse.<br> |
|||
# Free Speech in Academia. WOOD, PETER W. Texas Review of Law & Politics. Summer2023, Vol. 27 Issue 3, p761-787. 27p. |
|||
Given how famously litigious Rowling is, how can we possibly justify retaining this wording? Please give me the best policy-based argument for retaining this wording, cause I'm at a loss. [[User talk:Melmann|<strong><span style="font-family:Segoe UI Semilight ; background-color: #ffd166; padding: 1px;"><span style="color: #ef476f;">Mel</span><span style="color: #8c8757;">ma</span><span style="color: #118ab2;">nn</span></span></strong>]] 14:09, 11 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
==== Discussion of paragraph 3 redo proposal ==== |
|||
:The text isn't saying she's a TERF but that she's been called a TERF, something which is described in multiple reliable sources such as the one you mentioned. The people who actually called her a TERF don't need to be reliable sources. The text is not agreeing or disagreeing with the term, people are free do that on their own. [[User:WikiFouf|WikiFouf]] ([[User talk:WikiFouf|talk]]) 22:07, 11 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
That's all for me; I do think once we nail down these few bits, we will be ready for install. {{u|Victoriaearle}} my list of possible sources above could benefit from your scrutiny, choice, etc. I will again be very busy tomorrow and Wednesday, so done for now -- I ran out of time to cough up all the sources I saw earlier, but hope this is enough to capture the idea of just mentioning the spillover enduring issues raised. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 17:09, 24 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*"These few bits"? Well, I'm overwhelmed. Someone else's turn to do draft #9, I think.—[[User:S Marshall|<b style="font-family: Verdana; color: Maroon;">S Marshall</b>]] <small>[[User talk:S Marshall|T]]/[[Special:Contributions/S Marshall|C]]</small> 23:24, 24 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== The "sales increased in 2020" problem == |
|||
== Bias == |
|||
First off, nothing I'm going to say is an attack on anyone's research for Wikipedia. But... there's context that puts really strong doubts on seemingly-sensible interpretations of what are probably true facts. I'm going to focus on the Guardian article first, because Pape uses it as the source for her figures (with a minor mistake): |
|||
{{collapse top|title=no actionable request, just a vague complaint}} |
|||
There is clear bias in this article! I understand you have your own opinion on politics but don't bring it on wiki! I'm not able to edit but if I could I would! [[Special:Contributions/216.6.241.0|216.6.241.0]] ([[User talk:216.6.241.0|talk]]) 11:54, 12 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
I did some checking, and [https://hub.londonbookfair.co.uk/uk-pandemic-reading-trends-revealed-at-the-london-book-fair/ book sales just generally shot up a lot during COVID, and have continued to increase since.] So that sales of her books increased is largely meaningless without comparing it to other trends. This article in particular is from July 2020, which means it's 3 months into the first British lockdown and covers the UK alone, annd is dealing with an increase in purchases during lockdown. That's not a big timescale. It's also ''very'' early in the J.K. Rowling transgender views controversy, so one can question whether she even had enough bad press at that point - while people were distracted by lockdowns - for a noticable change in the first place. |
|||
:Generally it is recommended to make specific comments (which part is biased, also remember Wikipedia follows the notable sources and [[Wikipedia:Bias]] might be a good read). As you have found the talk page I'd recommend looking to see if there's been a discussion on the content you think is biased. Also I'd like you to remember [[Wikipedia:Assume good faith]] In relation to other editors and their work. [[User:LunaHasArrived|LunaHasArrived]] ([[User talk:LunaHasArrived|talk]]) 12:34, 12 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
{{collapse bottom}} |
|||
In short, it's almost certainly true, but it may not be at all meaningful, and, in the absence of comparison with the baseline, probably shouldn't appear here. |
|||
== Whited Source == |
|||
---- |
|||
So, let's go on to Pape. Pape is using the Guardian source from 2020, and (mildly) misquotes her source: she says sales of Harry Potter are up 28%, the actual source is that sales of ''children's books sold by Bloomberg'' - a class that includes Harry Potter - are up 27% - and sales as a whole were up 28%. (Frankly, though, the Guardian article is written in a sufficiently convoluted way that that Pape's mistake is a pretty easy one to make.) More problematic is the timeline aspect: As said above, the Guardian article is from 2020, before Rowling had done that much. Pape may be writing in 2022, but if the source for her statistics is from 2020, and she doesn't have other sources, it doesn't push us beyond 2020, and hits all the issues mentioned above. |
|||
I've also gotten my hands on this source through the Wikipedia library, and I have to say it seems very useful. Several of the essays in here contain some comment on Rowling's comments, though only a few comment on it at length. |
|||
(This doesn't affect Pape as a source much beyond this issue; Pape is a 2022 source, but only cites things from 2021 and earlier. Pape may be out-of-date for some information, but I don't object to using her as a source ''where she's not out-of-date''. |
|||
One of the sections that does is the introduction by Whited herself. It's hard to give good short quotes from this here, but while it's balanced and well-sourced, it is notably harsher on Rowling than our section is, at one point calling her views {{tq|shockingly simplistic}} and saying {{tq|Just as the Harry Potter “Generation Hex” experience was unique to the young readers who inhaled and embodied the series’ original release during their childhood and adolescence, the Era of the Transphobic Tweets is a unique experience for those of us who were not merely enchanted by the series’ magic but deeply invested in building a body of scholarly work around it.}} (On the other hand, it's also a solid scholarly source for Rowling receiving threats.) |
|||
---- |
|||
Another is "21. “Accio Jo!” Woke Wizards and Generational Potter Fandom", by Rebecca Sutherland Borah, an essay about fan-reaction to Harry Potter that gives a brief, but still too long to quote, timeline of Rowling's anti-trans tweets and fan reaction to them. |
|||
The framing of this fact is where everything falls apart: "Despite the controversy, Rowling's work is increasingly successful" - again, this is an interpretation that appears in the Guardian article (it's only implied in Pape) - but we can't possibly put that in present tense. We have no sources for booksales after July 2020. That's in no way enough to make statements about her success. The sourcing is, quite simply, far too outdated. |
|||
Other essays that give brief mentions are: |
|||
* 4. Harry, Aeneas, and the Foundational Text by Mitchell H. Parks: {{tq2|Moreover, assuming a reader-centric viewpoint has become all the more pressing given the growing divergence between Rowling’s perspective on the values of the series and that of many fans, as evidenced by her public statements calling for limitations on trans rights.}} |
|||
* 18. Politics of Suppression and Violence in Fantastic Beasts by Carsten Kullmann, in a footnote on the poor performance of the movies: {{tq2|And third, J. K. Rowling has publicly voiced controversial views on sex and gender on Twitter and in the media since the end of 2019, displaying not only an antiquated understanding of gender identity but also quite overt transphobia on her part. Her statements divided fans, and the controversy led to boycotts of the film series. Actors Daniel Radcliffe and Eddie Redmayne have officially spoken out against Rowling despite continuing their professional relationship with her. For a detailed discussion of this issue, please see Lana A. Whited’s introduction to this volume. As a literary and cultural scholar, I personally find the appeal of the frequently invoked “death of the author” concept greatly diminished when the author in question is vociferously campaigning against transgender people on social media while routinely practicing world-building through the same outlets, and especially if that author prides herself and her works on preaching love, tolerance, and the rejection of bigotry of any kind.}} |
|||
[[User:LokiTheLiar|Loki]] ([[User talk:LokiTheLiar|talk]]) 02:34, 14 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:"divergence between Rowling’s perspective on the values of the series and that of many fans" Rowling's fans are not [[transphobic]]? [[User:Dimadick|Dimadick]] ([[User talk:Dimadick|talk]]) 09:19, 14 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
As for the other bit of that paragraph: As far as I'm aware, the HBO Harry Potter series hasn't even been cast yet, it's not meant to appear until 2026. We have no evidence of it being successful; it doesn't even exist yet. One could instead say something like, "Production of the ''[[Fantastic Beasts]]'' series was cancelled after the third film proved to be the lowest grossing film based on Rowling's work." and use it to imply the exact opposite. |
|||
==[[Wikipedia|The Wikipedia Library]]== |
|||
The Wikipedia Library is really an excellent resource to use. Access seems to be dependent of activity and some may need to apply for access. To access a collection, do the following: |
|||
#Go to the [https://wikipedialibrary.wmflabs.org/search/?q= Wikipedia Library portal] |
|||
#Sign in to access the "My collections" page |
|||
#Scroll through the "My collections" page to find Project Muse (or Ebscohost or any other) |
|||
##If it's not there, then you need to submit an application. |
|||
#Click "Access collection" >> brings you to ProjectMuse (or Ebscohost of any other collection) search page |
|||
This will help to collect the type of sources we need. [[User:Victoriaearle|Victoria]] ([[User talk:Victoriaearle|tk]]) 14:47, 14 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
---- |
|||
:Just signed up, thanks! [[User:WikiFouf|WikiFouf]] ([[User talk:WikiFouf|talk]]) 21:19, 15 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
[https://www.forbes.com/sites/emmapocock/2020/07/19/us-harry-potter-book-sales-underperforming-according-to-recent-industry-figures/ Forbes states] that American sales of Harry Potter in the same period lagged behind increases in other children's book purchases. "As the industry as a whole experiences a surge of print sales, Rowling’s works, and sales of Harry Potter books (including licensed titles), have seen a sudden drop. This reported U.S. print book sales drop in June coincides with controversy around tweets and statements made by Rowling via Twitter from June 6 onward." |
|||
==Proposed text for "Transgender people" section== |
|||
:::: Previous discussions and source dumps in [[Talk:J. K. Rowling/Archive 16]]. |
|||
I've tried to rework the "Transgender people" section. Here's what I came up with, but am not wedded to it, so it's okay if everyone hates it. Working on this section literally gives me migraines, so I've hit a wall for now and leaving up for discussion. The new sources (Whited & Henderson) didn't format as I wanted inside the cot/cob templates so it is as is. If someone knows how to fix, that would be great. I'd suggest we also consider pulling the "Transgender people" section out from the "Views" section and give it it's own level two section as we do with "Philanthropy". Maybe put it above "Philanthropy".{{pb}} Also this page is overly long, but I'm not able to manually archive today. Thanks, [[User:Victoriaearle|Victoria]] ([[User talk:Victoriaearle|tk]]) 19:22, 19 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
It's honestly kind of awkward: Reports of profits by Bloomberg inevitably mention Harry Potter, but then give stats for Bloomberg as a whole. [https://www.fool.com/investing/2023/05/31/harry-potter-publisher-sees-record-sales], say. |
|||
:Continued at [[#Discussion of first draft]]. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 20:19, 19 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
[https://finance.yahoo.com/news/british-publisher-behind-harry-potter-152730894.html?guccounter=1 This] is the best evidence I've seen for any sort of Potter success, but it doesn't include any numbers related to sales, just relative popularity (hit #1 in children's book sales in 2023 for the first time since 2002). - and, again, that's '''only''' British sales. |
|||
=== First draft === |
|||
{| class="wikitable" |
|||
! style="width: 30em;" | [https://w.wiki/9p2j Current] 454 words |
|||
! style="width: 30em;" | Proposed (adds 19 words) |
|||
|- |
|||
|| |
|||
{{Main|Political views of J. K. Rowling#Transgender rights}} |
|||
Rowling's responses to proposed changes to UK gender recognition laws,<ref name= Milne2020>{{cite web|first1= Amber |last1=Milne|first2 = Rachel| last2 =Savage | url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-lgbt-rowling-explainer-trfn-idUSKBN23I3AI | title=Explainer: J. K. Rowling and trans women in single-sex spaces: what's the furore? | publisher=[[Reuters]] | date=11 June 2020 | access-date=6 April 2021 }}</ref><ref name= Brooks2020>{{Cite news|last=Brooks|first=Libby|date=11 June 2020|title=Why is JK Rowling speaking out now on sex and gender debate? |url= http://www.theguardian.com/books/2020/jun/11/why-is-jk-rowling-speaking-out-now-on-sex-and-gender-debate|access-date=14 January 2022 |work= [[The Guardian]] }}</ref>{{efn|The UK laws and proposed changes are the [[Gender Recognition Act 2004]], the [[Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill]] and the related [[Equality Act 2010]].{{sfn|Pedersen|2022|loc=Abstract}}{{sfn|Suissa|Sullivan|2021|pp=66–69}}{{sfn|Duggan|2021|loc=PDF pp. 14–15 (160–161)}} }} and her views on [[sexual identity|sex]] and [[gender identity|gender]], have provoked controversy.{{sfn|Duggan|2021|loc=PDF pp. 14–15 (160–161)}} Her statements have divided [[Feminist views on transgender topics|feminists]];<ref name=Kottasova2019>{{cite news |first1= Ivana |last1= Kottasová |first2= Scottie | last2= Andrew|title= J.K. Rowling's 'transphobia' tweet row spotlights a fight between equality campaigners and radical feminists |publisher= [[CNN]] |date= 20 December 2019 |access-date= 29 March 2022 | url= https://www.cnn.com/2019/12/20/uk/jk-rowling-transgender-explainer-intl-gbr/index.html}}</ref><ref name=BBC2020JKRResponds>{{cite news |url= https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-53002557 |publisher= [[BBC News]] |title= JK Rowling responds to trans tweets criticism |date= 11 June 2020 |access-date= 29 March 2022}}</ref><ref>{{cite news | url=https://www.newstatesman.com/international/2020/09/judith-butler-culture-wars-jk-rowling-and-living-anti-intellectual-times | title=Judith Butler on the culture wars, JK Rowling and living in 'anti-intellectual times'|first=Alona |last=Ferber | work=[[New Statesman]] | date=22 September 2020 | access-date=26 March 2021}}</ref> fuelled<!-- This article uses British spelling --> debates on [[freedom of speech]]{{sfn|Pape|2022|pp=229–230}}<ref>{{cite web|title=BBC nominates J.K.Rowling's controversial essay of trans rights for award|url=https://www.dw.com/en/bbc-nominates-jk-rowlings-controversial-essay-on-trans-rights-for-award/a-56014673|website=[[DW News]]|date=22 December 2020|access-date=22 December 2020}}</ref> and [[cancel culture]];{{sfn|Schwirblat|Freberg|Freberg|2022|pp=367–369}} and prompted declarations of [[Transgender rights movement|support for transgender people]] from the literary,<ref>UK, US, Canada, Ireland: {{cite news |last= Flood |first= Alison |date=9 October 2020|title= Stephen King, Margaret Atwood and Roxane Gay champion trans rights in open letter|url= https://www.theguardian.com/books/2020/oct/09/stephen-king-margaret-atwood-roxane-gay-champion-trans-rights-open-letter-jk-rowling |work= [[The Guardian]] |access-date= 2 April 2022}}</ref> arts<ref>{{cite magazine|last= Rowley |first= Glenn |title= Artists fire back at J.K. Rowling's anti-trans remarks, share messages in support of the community|url= https://www.billboard.com/culture/pride/artists-fire-back-jk-rowling-anti-trans-remarks-9400386/|magazine= [[Billboard (magazine)|Billboard]]|date= 11 June 2020 |access-date= 7 April 2022}}</ref> and culture sectors.<ref>Culture sector: |
|||
* [[Universal Destinations & Experiences]], [[Warner Bros.]] and [[Scholastic Corporation]]: {{cite news |last1= Siegel |first1= Tatiana |last2= Abramovitch |first2= Seth |date= 10 June 2020 |title= Universal Parks responds to J.K. Rowling tweets: 'Our core values include diversity, inclusion and respect' |work= [[The Hollywood Reporter]] |url= https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/lifestyle/lifestyle-news/universal-parks-responds-jk-rowling-tweets-core-values-include-diversity-inclusion-respect-1297845/ |access-date= 3 April 2022|ref=none}} |
|||
* [[Warner Bros. Interactive Entertainment]] president: {{cite news |last= Skrebels |first= Joe |title= WB Interactive president responds to ongoing debate over supporting JK Rowling |date=1 October 2020 |url= https://www.ign.com/articles/wb-interactive-president-responds-to-ongoing-debate-over-supporting-jk-rowling |publisher= [[IGN]] |access-date= 2 April 2022|ref=none}}</ref> |
|||
We need more recent sources on sales of ''Harry Potter'' - which include America and other countries - to say much of anything. <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.118em 0.118em 0.118em; class=texhtml">'''[[User:Adam Cuerden|Adam Cuerden]]''' <sup>([[User talk:Adam Cuerden|talk]])</sup><sub>Has about 8.8% of all [[WP:FP|FPs]].</sub></span> 05:07, 25 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
When [[Maya Forstater]]'s employment contract with the London branch of the [[Center for Global Development]] was not renewed after she tweeted [[Feminist views on transgender topics#Gender-critical feminism and trans-exclusionary radical feminism|gender-critical views]],{{sfn|Pugh|2020|p=7}}<ref name=Stack2019>{{Cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/19/world/europe/jk-rowling-maya-forstater-transgender.html|title=J.K. Rowling criticized after tweeting support for anti-transgender researcher|last=Stack|first=Liam|date=19 December 2019|work=[[The New York Times]]|access-date=13 June 2020| url-access=registration|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200613012737/https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/19/world/europe/jk-rowling-maya-forstater-transgender.html|archive-date=13 June 2020|url-status=live}}</ref> Rowling responded in December 2019 with a tweet that [[transgender]] people should live their lives as they pleased in "peace and security", but questioned women being "force[d] out of their jobs for stating that sex is real".<ref name=Stack2019/>{{efn|A tribunal ruled in 2021 that Forstater's gender-critical views were protected under the 2010 UK [[Equality Act 2010|Equality Act]].<ref name=Faulkner2021>{{cite news |first= Doug |last= Faulkner |url= https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-57426579 |title= Maya Forstater: woman wins tribunal appeal over transgender tweets |publisher= [[BBC News]] |date= 10 June 2021 |access-date= 26 March 2022}}</ref><ref name=Siddique2021>{{cite news |first= Haroon |last= Siddique |date= 10 June 2021 |title= Gender-critical views are a protected belief, appeal tribunal rules|url= https://www.theguardian.com/law/2021/jun/10/gender-critical-views-protected-belief-appeal-tribunal-rules-maya-forstater |work= [[The Guardian]] |access-date= 26 March 2022}}</ref> In July 2022, a new tribunal decision was published (''[[Forstater v Center for Global Development Europe]]'') ruling that Forstater had suffered direct discrimination from her employer.<ref>{{cite web |title=Maya Forstater: Woman discriminated against over trans tweets, tribunal rules|date=6 July 2022 |url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-62061929 |publisher=BBC |access-date=6 July 2022}}</ref>}} In another controversial tweet in June 2020,<ref name=Petter2020>{{Cite web|last= Petter|first=Olivia|date=17 September 2020|title=Mermaids writes open letter to JK Rowling following her recent comments on trans people|url=https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/mermaids-jk-rowling-transphobia-transgender-sexual-abuse-domestic-letter-a9565176.html|access-date=26 March 2022|work=[[The Independent]] |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200615235531/https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/mermaids-jk-rowling-transphobia-transgender-sexual-abuse-domestic-letter-a9565176.html |archive-date=15 June 2020}}</ref> Rowling mocked an article for using the phrase "[[people who menstruate]]",<ref name=Gross2020>{{Cite news|last=Gross|first=Jenny|date=7 June 2020|title=Daniel Radcliffe criticizes J.K. Rowling's anti-transgender tweets|work=[[The New York Times]]|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/07/arts/Jk-Rowling-controversy.html |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200607221400/https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/07/arts/Jk-Rowling-controversy.html |archive-date=7 June 2020 |url-access=subscription |url-status=live|access-date=6 January 2022 }}</ref> and tweeted that [[women's rights]] and "lived reality" would be "erased" if "sex isn't real".{{sfn|Duggan|2021|loc=PDF pp. 14–15}}<ref>{{cite magazine|url=https://variety.com/2020/film/news/jk-rowling-transphobic-tweets-controversy-1234627081/|title=J.K. Rowling gets backlash over anti-trans tweets|last=Moreau|first=Jordan|magazine=[[Variety (magazine)|Variety]]|date=6 June 2020|access-date=13 June 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200607005447/https://variety.com/2020/film/news/jk-rowling-transphobic-tweets-controversy-1234627081/|archive-date=7 June 2020|url-status=live}}</ref> |
|||
*Luckily, the Guardian article doesn't just quote sales figures for the children's books division. The journalist also interviewed the boss of Bloomsbury, hence: {{tq2|The company, which publishes all of the author’s Harry Potter books, said its consumer publishing arm grew sales by 28% to £31.4m. The children’s division grew by 27% to £18.7m, with Bloomsbury highlighting Rowling’s titles as a “bestseller”... Nigel Newton, the Bloomsbury chief executive, said the books had remained bestsellers since Rowling published her views on her website last month. “Harry Potter has been very popular with families at home reading to each other and has been marvellous throughout this period,” he said.}} |
|||
[[LGBT]] charities and leading actors of the [[Wizarding World]] franchise condemned Rowling's comments;<ref name=Waterson2020>{{Cite news|last= Waterson |first= Jim|title= Children's news website apologises to JK Rowling over trans tweet row|url= https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/jul/23/childrens-news-website-apologises-jk-rowling-trans-tweet-day|date= 23 July 2020 |access-date=26 March 2022|work=[[The Guardian]] |quote= Rowling's comments on gender were condemned by LGBT charities and the leading stars of her Harry Potter film franchise.}}</ref><ref name=Lang2020>{{cite magazine |last=Lang |first=Brent |title= Eddie Redmayne criticizes J.K. Rowling's anti-trans tweets |date= 10 June 2020 |url= https://variety.com/2020/film/news/eddie-redmayne-jk-rowling-anti-trans-tweets-harry-potter-fantastic-beasts-1234630226/ |magazine= [[Variety (magazine)|Variety]]|access-date=28 March 2022 |quote= Eddie Redmayne, star of the ''Fantastic Beasts'' franchise, is speaking out against J.K. Rowling's anti-trans tweets, as the controversy surrounding the author and her beliefs continues to swirl.}}</ref>{{efn| [[Daniel Radcliffe]], [[Emma Watson]], [[Rupert Grint]],<ref name= Hibberd2021/> [[Eddie Redmayne]]<ref name=Lang2020/> and others expressed support for the transgender community in reaction to Rowling's comments;<ref>{{cite magazine |first= Maureen |last= Lenker|title= Every Harry Potter actor who's spoken out against J.K. Rowling's controversial trans comments |date= 10 June 2020 |access-date= 1 April 2022 |magazine= [[Entertainment Weekly]]|url=https://ew.com/movies/every-harry-potter-actor-whos-spoken-out-against-j-k-rowlings-controversial-transgender-comments/ }}</ref><ref>{{cite news |first= Maggie |last= Baska|title= Stephen Fry defends 'friendship' with JK Rowling: 'I'm sorry that people are upset' |date= 20 May 2021 |url= https://www.pinknews.co.uk/2021/05/20/stephen-fry-jk-rowling-friend-harry-potter-jordan-b-peterson-podcast-trans/ |publisher= [[PinkNews]] |access-date= 29 March 2022}}</ref> [[Helena Bonham Carter]],<ref name=Evans2022> {{cite news |first= Greg |last= Evans |url= https://deadline.com/2022/11/helena-bonham-carter-johnny-depp-j-k-rowling-1235182523/ |title= Helena Bonham Carter says Johnny Depp 'completely vindicated' in defamation trial, and J.K. Rowling 'hounded' for transgender stance |work= [[Deadline Hollywood]] |access-date= 18 December 2022}}</ref> [[Robbie Coltrane]],<ref>{{cite news |last= Yasharoff |first= Hannah |title= How the 'Harry Potter' reunion addresses author J.K. Rowling's anti-trans controversy |date= 30 December 2021|url= https://www.usatoday.com/story/entertainment/movies/2021/12/30/harry-potter-return-hogwarts-20th-reunion-emma-watson-jk-rowling-controversy/9042955002/ |work= [[USA Today]] |access-date= 2 April 2022}}</ref> and [[Ralph Fiennes]] supported Rowling.<ref name= Hibberd2021>{{cite news |first= James |last= Hibberd |url= https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-news/ralph-fiennes-defends-j-k-rowling-amid-trans-controversy-says-backlash-is-disturbing-4151944/ |title= Ralph Fiennes defends J.K. rowling amid trans controversy, says backlash is 'disturbing' |date= 17 March 2021 |access-date=26 March 2022 |work= [[The Hollywood Reporter]]}}</ref>}} [[GLAAD]] called them "cruel" and "inaccurate".<ref name= Yasharoff2020> {{cite news |last= Yasharoff |first=Hannah|url= https://www.usatoday.com/story/entertainment/celebrities/2020/06/07/j-k-rowling-harry-potter-author-slammed-transphobic-comments/3169833001/ |title= J.K. Rowling reveals she's a sexual assault survivor; Emma Watson reacts to trans comments |work= [[USA Today]] |date= 10 June 2020 |access-date= 27 March 2022}}</ref> Rowling responded with an essay on her website<ref name=RowlingReasons>{{cite web|title=J.K. Rowling writes about her reasons for speaking out on sex and gender issues |url=https://www.jkrowling.com/opinions/j-k-rowling-writes-about-her-reasons-for-speaking-out-on-sex-and-gender-issues/ |publisher=JK Rowling |date=10 June 2020 |access-date=10 June 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200610182056/https://www.jkrowling.com/opinions/j-k-rowling-writes-about-her-reasons-for-speaking-out-on-sex-and-gender-issues/ |archive-date=10 June 2020 |url-status=live}}</ref> in which she stated that her views on women's rights were informed by her experience as a survivor of domestic abuse and [[sexual assault]].<ref name=Shirbon2020>{{cite news |last1=Shirbon |first1=Estelle |title=J.K. Rowling reveals past abuse and defends right to speak on trans issues |url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-rowling/j-k-rowling-reveals-past-abuse-and-defends-right-to-speak-on-trans-issues-idUSKBN23H2XI |publisher=[[Reuters]] |date=10 June 2020 |access-date=13 June 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200611200348/https://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-rowling/j-k-rowling-reveals-past-abuse-and-defends-right-to-speak-on-trans-issues-idUSKBN23H2XI |archive-date=11 June 2020 |url-status=live}}</ref> While affirming that "the majority of trans-identified people not only pose zero threat to others, but are vulnerable ... Trans people need and deserve protection", she believed that it would be unsafe to allow "any man who believes or feels he's a woman" into bathrooms or changing rooms.<ref name= Shirbon2020/><ref>{{cite news |last1=Gonzalez |first1=Sandra |title=J.K. Rowling explains her gender identity views in essay amid backlash |url=https://edition.cnn.com/2020/06/10/entertainment/jk-rowling/index.html |access-date=16 September 2023 |work=[[CNN]] |date=10 June 2020}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |last1=Garrand |first1=Danielle |title=J.K. Rowling defends herself after accusations of making "anti-trans" comments on Twitter |url=https://www.cbsnews.com/news/j-k-rowling-defends-anti-trans-comments-twitter/ |access-date=16 September 2023 |work=[[CBS News]] |date=11 June 2020}}</ref> Writing of her own experiences with [[sexism]] and [[misogyny]],<ref>{{cite news |first= Sian |last= Cain |date= 11 June 2020 |title= JK Rowling reveals she is survivor of domestic abuse and sexual assault |url= https://www.theguardian.com/books/2020/jun/10/jk-rowling-says-survivor-of-domestic-abuse-sexual-assault |work= [[The Guardian]] |access-date= 29 March 2022}}</ref> she wondered if the "allure of escaping womanhood" would have led her to [[Gender transitioning|transition]] if she had been born later, and said that trans activism was "seeking to erode 'woman' as a political and biological class".<ref name=DAlessandro2020>{{cite news |last=D'Alessandro |first=Anthony |title=J.K. Rowling defends trans statements in lengthy essay, reveals she's a sexual assault survivor & says 'trans people need and deserve protection' |url=https://deadline.com/2020/06/j-k-rowling-defends-trans-statements-essay-1202955524/ |access-date=5 January 2022 |publisher=[[Deadline Hollywood]] |date=10 June 2020}}</ref> |
|||
:The claim that these figures aren't meaningful stumbles over the fact that a scholarly source found them meaningful enough to remark on. |
|||
:The claim that these figures are outdated stumbles over the fact that these are the latest figures published by a reliable source. |
|||
:The Forbes article from June 2020 (a) predates the Guardian one, (b) appears in no scholarly source, and (c) doesn't account for audio books or ebooks. The ebook was released for free during this period which will have affected sales.—[[User:S Marshall|<b style="font-family: Verdana; color: Maroon;">S Marshall</b>]] <small>[[User talk:S Marshall|T]]/[[Special:Contributions/S Marshall|C]]</small> 07:56, 25 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*::TL;DR: In the game of Wikipedia, doing your own research to counteract a scholarly source counts as a foul.—[[User:S Marshall|<b style="font-family: Verdana; color: Maroon;">S Marshall</b>]] <small>[[User talk:S Marshall|T]]/[[Special:Contributions/S Marshall|C]]</small> 08:24, 25 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
The book sales sentence could be revised to make it more general; something along the lines of: {{blue|Despite the controversy, the ''Harry Potter'' books have remained popular,<ref>{{cite web |last1=Sweney |first1=Mark |title=Harry Potter books prove UK lockdown hit despite JK Rowling trans rights row |url=https://www.theguardian.com/business/2020/jul/21/jk-rowling-book-sales-unaffected-by-transgender-views-row |website=The Guardian |date=21 July 2020}}</ref> and the game ''[[Hogwarts Legacy]]'' became a commercial success and received favorable reviews and praise from critics despite the calls for boycotts by the trans community.}}<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.cbc.ca/news/entertainment/hogwarts-legacy-controversy-explained-1.6765491}}</ref> (could use some wordsmithing) [[User:Some1|Some1]] ([[User talk:Some1|talk]]) 11:59, 25 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
Rowling's statements – beginning in 2017{{sfn|Duggan|2021|loc=PDF pp. 14–15 (160–161)}}<ref name= Jacobs2023>{{cite news |last= Jacobs |first= Julia |title= Hogwarts legacy can't cast aside debate over J. K. Rowling |url= https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/09/arts/hogwarts-legacy-jk-rowling.html |date= 9 February 2023 |work = [[The New York Times]] |access-date= 14 July 2023}}</ref><ref name= Spangler2023>{{cite news |last= Spangler|first= Todd |title= J.K. Rowling addresses backlash to her anti-trans comments in new podcast: 'I never set out to upset anyone' |url= https://variety.com/2023/digital/news/jk-rowling-anti-trans-comments-podcast-witch-trials-1235522301/ |date= 14 February 2023|work= [[Variety (magazine)|Variety]]|access-date= 14 July 2023}}</ref> – have been called transphobic,<ref name= Breznican2023>{{cite news |last= Breznican |first= Anthony |title= J.K. Rowling will oversee a new streaming ''Harry Potter'' series |url= https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2023/04/jk-rowling-harry-potter-series|date= 12 April 2023 |work= [[Vanity Fair (magazine)|Vanity Fair]] |access-date= 14 July 2023}}</ref><ref name=Rosenblatt2020>{{Cite web|last = Rosenblatt| first =Kalhan |title=J.K. Rowling doubles down in what some critics call a 'transphobic manifesto' |url= https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/j-k-rowling-doubles-down-what-some-critics-call-transphobic-n1229351|date= 10 June 2020 |access-date=19 January 2022|publisher=[[NBC News]] }}</ref> and she has been referred to as a [[TERF (acronym)|TERF]], a "trans-exclusionary radical feminist".<ref name= Rosenblatt2020/>{{sfn|Steinfeld|2020|pp=34–35}}{{sfn|Schwirblat|Freberg|Freberg|2022|pp=367–368}} She has rejected these characterisations and the notion that she holds animosity towards transgender people, saying that her viewpoint has been misunderstood.<ref name=RowlingReasons/><ref name= Breznican2023/><ref name= Spangler2023/> Criticism of Rowling's views has come from the ''Harry Potter'' fansites [[MuggleNet]] and [[The Leaky Cauldron (website)|The Leaky Cauldron]];<ref name=FanSites>{{cite news|url=https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jul/03/harry-potter-fan-sites-distance-themselves-from-jk-rowling-over-transgender-rights|title=Harry Potter fan sites distance themselves from JK Rowling over transgender rights|publisher=[[Reuters]]|work=[[The Guardian]]|date=3 July 2020|access-date=3 July 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200703011204/https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jul/03/harry-potter-fan-sites-distance-themselves-from-jk-rowling-over-transgender-rights|archive-date=3 July 2020|url-status=live}}</ref> and the charities [[Mermaids (charity)|Mermaids]],<ref name=Petter2020/> [[Stonewall (charity)|Stonewall]],<ref>{{cite news | url=https://www.newstatesman.com/long-reads/2021/11/the-battle-for-stonewall-the-lgbt-charity-and-the-uks-gender-wars | title=The battle for Stonewall: the LGBT charity and the UK's gender wars | work=[[New Statesman]]|first=Gaby |last=Hinsliff|date=3 November 2021 | access-date=24 November 2021}}</ref> and [[Human Rights Campaign]].<ref>{{cite news |first= Elise |last= Brisco |title=Dave Chappelle says he's 'Team TERF,' defends J.K. Rowling in new Netflix comedy special|url= https://www.usatoday.com/story/entertainment/tv/2021/10/05/dave-chappelle-terf-defends-j-k-rowling-netflix-special/6002017001/ |work= [[USA Today]] |date= 8 October 2021|access-date= 29 March 2022}}</ref> After [[Kerry Kennedy]] expressed "profound disappointment" in her views, Rowling returned the [[Ripple of Hope Award]] given to her by the Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights organisation.<ref name=RFKAward>{{cite news |last=Flood|first=Alison |url= https://amp.theguardian.com/books/2020/aug/28/jk-rowling-robert-f-kennedy-human-rights-award-trans-views|title=JK Rowling returns human rights award to group that denounces her trans views |work=[[The Guardian]]|date=28 August 2020|access-date=28 August 2020}}</ref> |
|||
{{cot|title= References}} |
|||
After the [[Hate Crime and Public Order (Scotland) Act 2021]] had come into force in April 2024, Rowling, who resides in Edinburgh, tested the law by posting on [[Twitter|X]] a list of transgender women, and wrote that they were "men, every last one of them".<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://deadline.com/2024/04/jk-rowling-scotland-hate-crime-law-1235872981/|title=J.K. Rowling Mocks Trans Women To Defy Scotland’s New Hate Crime Law: “I Look Forward To Being Arrested”|website=deadline.com|access-date=3 April 2024|archive-date=1 April 2024|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240401190451/https://deadline.com/2024/04/jk-rowling-scotland-hate-crime-law-1235872981/|url-status=live}}</ref> [[Police Scotland]] stated it had not received any complaints over the posts<ref>{{Cite news |last=Cook |first=James |date=1 April 2024 |title=JK Rowling in ‘arrest me’ challenge over hate crime law |url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c51j64lk2l8o |work=BBC}}</ref> and that "no action [would] be taken" as they were not illegal.<ref>{{Cite news |last=Bonar |first=Megan |date=2024-04-02 |title=JK Rowling hate law posts not criminal, police say |url=https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-68712471 |access-date=2024-04-02 |work=[[BBC News]] |language=en-GB}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |last=Learmonth |first=Andrew |date=2024-04-03 |title=Police Scotland will not log 'hate incident' against Rowling or FM |url=https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/24229707.police-scotland-will-not-log-hate-incident-jk-rowling/?ref=twtrec |access-date=2024-04-03 |work=[[The Herald (Scotland)]] |language=en-GB}}</ref> |
|||
|| |
|||
{{Main|Political views of J. K. Rowling#Transgender rights}} |
|||
Rowling's views on [[sexual identity|sex]] and [[gender identity|gender]], have provoked controversy.{{sfn|Duggan|2021|loc=PDF pp. 14–15 (160–161)}} When [[Maya Forstater]]'s employment contract with the London branch of the [[Center for Global Development]] was not renewed after she tweeted [[Feminist views on transgender topics#Gender-critical feminism and trans-exclusionary radical feminism|gender-critical views]],{{sfn|Pugh|2020|p=7}}<ref name=Stack2019>{{Cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/19/world/europe/jk-rowling-maya-forstater-transgender.html|title=J.K. Rowling criticized after tweeting support for anti-transgender researcher|last=Stack|first=Liam|date=19 December 2019|work=[[The New York Times]]|access-date=13 June 2020| url-access=registration|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200613012737/https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/19/world/europe/jk-rowling-maya-forstater-transgender.html|archive-date=13 June 2020|url-status=live}}</ref> Rowling responded in December 2019 with a [[Twitter|tweet]] that [[transgender]] people should live in "peace and security", but questioned women being "force[d] out of their jobs for stating that sex is real".<ref name=Stack2019/>{{efn|A tribunal ruled in 2021 that Forstater's gender-critical views were protected under the 2010 UK [[Equality Act 2010|Equality Act]].<ref name=Faulkner2021>{{cite news |first= Doug |last= Faulkner |url= https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-57426579 |title= Maya Forstater: woman wins tribunal appeal over transgender tweets |publisher= [[BBC News]] |date= 10 June 2021 |access-date= 26 March 2022}}</ref><ref name=Siddique2021>{{cite news |first= Haroon |last= Siddique |date= 10 June 2021 |title= Gender-critical views are a protected belief, appeal tribunal rules|url= https://www.theguardian.com/law/2021/jun/10/gender-critical-views-protected-belief-appeal-tribunal-rules-maya-forstater |work= [[The Guardian]] |access-date= 26 March 2022}}</ref> In July 2022, a new tribunal decision was published (''[[Forstater v Center for Global Development Europe]]'') ruling that Forstater had suffered direct discrimination from her employer.<ref>{{cite web |title=Maya Forstater: Woman discriminated against over trans tweets, tribunal rules|date=6 July 2022 |url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-62061929 |publisher=BBC |access-date=6 July 2022}}</ref>}} ''Harry Potter'' scholar Lana Whited writes that in the next six months "Rowling herself fanned the flames as she became increasingly vocal and, in a few cases, flippant about gender identity."{{sfn|Whited|2024|p=6}} In another tweet in June 2020,{{sfn|Whited|2024|p=6}} Rowling mocked the phrase "[[people who menstruate]]",<ref name=Gross2020>{{Cite news|last=Gross|first=Jenny|date=7 June 2020|title=Daniel Radcliffe criticizes J.K. Rowling's anti-transgender tweets|work=[[The New York Times]]|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/07/arts/Jk-Rowling-controversy.html |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200607221400/https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/07/arts/Jk-Rowling-controversy.html |archive-date=7 June 2020 |url-access=subscription |url-status=live|access-date=6 January 2022 }}</ref> and tweeted that [[women's rights]] and "lived reality" would be "erased" if "sex isn't real".{{sfn|Duggan|2021|loc=PDF pp. 14–15}}{{sfn|Pugh|2020|p=7}} Potter scholar Tolanda Henderson, self-described as "gender-queer...non-binary transgender",{{sfn|Henderson|2022|p=223}} writes the June 2020 tweet revealed Rowling's "stance that invalidates nonbinary people like me".{{sfn|Henderson|2022|p=224}} |
|||
Her statements have shocked Rowling fans;{{sfn|Whited|2024|p=6}} divided [[Feminist views on transgender topics|feminists]];<ref name=Kottasova2019>{{cite news |first1= Ivana |last1= Kottasová |first2= Scottie | last2= Andrew|title= J.K. Rowling's 'transphobia' tweet row spotlights a fight between equality campaigners and radical feminists |publisher= [[CNN]] |date= 20 December 2019 |access-date= 29 March 2022 | url= https://www.cnn.com/2019/12/20/uk/jk-rowling-transgender-explainer-intl-gbr/index.html}}</ref><ref name=BBC2020JKRResponds>{{cite news |url= https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-53002557 |publisher= [[BBC News]] |title= JK Rowling responds to trans tweets criticism |date= 11 June 2020 |access-date= 29 March 2022}}</ref><ref>{{cite news | url=https://www.newstatesman.com/international/2020/09/judith-butler-culture-wars-jk-rowling-and-living-anti-intellectual-times | title=Judith Butler on the culture wars, JK Rowling and living in 'anti-intellectual times'|first=Alona |last=Ferber | work=[[New Statesman]] | date=22 September 2020 | access-date=26 March 2021}}</ref> fuelled<!-- This article uses British spelling --> debates on [[freedom of speech]]{{sfn|Pape|2022|pp=229–230}}<ref>{{cite web|title=BBC nominates J.K.Rowling's controversial essay of trans rights for award|url=https://www.dw.com/en/bbc-nominates-jk-rowlings-controversial-essay-on-trans-rights-for-award/a-56014673|website=[[DW News]]|date=22 December 2020|access-date=22 December 2020}}</ref> and [[cancel culture]];{{sfn|Schwirblat|Freberg|Freberg|2022|pp=367–369}} and prompted declarations of [[Transgender rights movement|support for transgender people]] from the literary,<ref>UK, US, Canada, Ireland: {{cite news |last= Flood |first= Alison |date=9 October 2020|title= Stephen King, Margaret Atwood and Roxane Gay champion trans rights in open letter|url= https://www.theguardian.com/books/2020/oct/09/stephen-king-margaret-atwood-roxane-gay-champion-trans-rights-open-letter-jk-rowling |work= [[The Guardian]] |access-date= 2 April 2022}}</ref> arts<ref>{{cite magazine|last= Rowley |first= Glenn |title= Artists fire back at J.K. Rowling's anti-trans remarks, share messages in support of the community|url= https://www.billboard.com/culture/pride/artists-fire-back-jk-rowling-anti-trans-remarks-9400386/|magazine= [[Billboard (magazine)|Billboard]]|date= 11 June 2020 |access-date= 7 April 2022}}</ref> and culture sectors.<ref>Culture sector: |
|||
* [[Universal Destinations & Experiences]], [[Warner Bros.]] and [[Scholastic Corporation]]: {{cite news |last1= Siegel |first1= Tatiana |last2= Abramovitch |first2= Seth |date= 10 June 2020 |title= Universal Parks responds to J.K. Rowling tweets: 'Our core values include diversity, inclusion and respect' |work= [[The Hollywood Reporter]] |url= https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/lifestyle/lifestyle-news/universal-parks-responds-jk-rowling-tweets-core-values-include-diversity-inclusion-respect-1297845/ |access-date= 3 April 2022|ref=none}} |
|||
* [[Warner Bros. Interactive Entertainment]] president: {{cite news |last= Skrebels |first= Joe |title= WB Interactive president responds to ongoing debate over supporting JK Rowling |date=1 October 2020 |url= https://www.ign.com/articles/wb-interactive-president-responds-to-ongoing-debate-over-supporting-jk-rowling |publisher= [[IGN]] |access-date= 2 April 2022|ref=none}}</ref> Rowling's statements{{sfn|Duggan|2021|loc=PDF pp. 14–15 (160–161)}}<ref name= Jacobs2023>{{cite news |last= Jacobs |first= Julia |title= Hogwarts legacy can't cast aside debate over J. K. Rowling |url= https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/09/arts/hogwarts-legacy-jk-rowling.html |date= 9 February 2023 |work = [[The New York Times]] |access-date= 14 July 2023}}</ref><ref name= Spangler2023>{{cite news |last= Spangler|first= Todd |title= J.K. Rowling addresses backlash to her anti-trans comments in new podcast: 'I never set out to upset anyone' |url= https://variety.com/2023/digital/news/jk-rowling-anti-trans-comments-podcast-witch-trials-1235522301/ |date= 14 February 2023|work= [[Variety (magazine)|Variety]]|access-date= 14 July 2023}}</ref> – have been called transphobic,<ref name= Breznican2023>{{cite news |last= Breznican |first= Anthony |title= J.K. Rowling will oversee a new streaming ''Harry Potter'' series |url= https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2023/04/jk-rowling-harry-potter-series|date= 12 April 2023 |work= [[Vanity Fair (magazine)|Vanity Fair]] |access-date= 14 July 2023}}</ref><ref name=Rosenblatt2020>{{Cite web|last = Rosenblatt| first =Kalhan |title=J.K. Rowling doubles down in what some critics call a 'transphobic manifesto' |url= https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/j-k-rowling-doubles-down-what-some-critics-call-transphobic-n1229351|date= 10 June 2020 |access-date=19 January 2022|publisher=[[NBC News]] }}</ref> and she has been referred to as a [[TERF (acronym)|TERF]], a "trans-exclusionary radical feminist".<ref name= Rosenblatt2020/>{{sfn|Steinfeld|2020|pp=34–35}}{{sfn|Schwirblat|Freberg|Freberg|2022|pp=367–368}} Criticism of Rowling's views has come from the ''Harry Potter'' fansites [[MuggleNet]] and [[The Leaky Cauldron (website)|The Leaky Cauldron]];{{sfn|Henderson|2022|p=224}} and the charities [[Mermaids (charity)|Mermaids]],<ref name=Petter2020/> [[Stonewall (charity)|Stonewall]],<ref>{{cite news | url=https://www.newstatesman.com/long-reads/2021/11/the-battle-for-stonewall-the-lgbt-charity-and-the-uks-gender-wars | title=The battle for Stonewall: the LGBT charity and the UK's gender wars | work=[[New Statesman]]|first=Gaby |last=Hinsliff|date=3 November 2021 | access-date=24 November 2021}}</ref> and [[Human Rights Campaign]].<ref>{{cite news |first= Elise |last= Brisco |title=Dave Chappelle says he's 'Team TERF,' defends J.K. Rowling in new Netflix comedy special|url= https://www.usatoday.com/story/entertainment/tv/2021/10/05/dave-chappelle-terf-defends-j-k-rowling-netflix-special/6002017001/ |work= [[USA Today]] |date= 8 October 2021|access-date= 29 March 2022}}</ref> After [[Kerry Kennedy]] expressed "profound disappointment" in her views, Rowling returned the [[Ripple of Hope Award]] given to her by the Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights organisation.<ref name=RFKAward>{{cite news |last=Flood|first=Alison |url= https://amp.theguardian.com/books/2020/aug/28/jk-rowling-robert-f-kennedy-human-rights-award-trans-views|title=JK Rowling returns human rights award to group that denounces her trans views |work=[[The Guardian]]|date=28 August 2020|access-date=28 August 2020}}</ref> [[LGBT]] charities and leading actors of the [[Wizarding World]] franchise condemned Rowling's comments;<ref name=Waterson2020>{{Cite news|last= Waterson |first= Jim|title= Children's news website apologises to JK Rowling over trans tweet row|url= https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/jul/23/childrens-news-website-apologises-jk-rowling-trans-tweet-day|date= 23 July 2020 |access-date=26 March 2022|work=[[The Guardian]] |quote= Rowling's comments on gender were condemned by LGBT charities and the leading stars of her Harry Potter film franchise.}}</ref><ref name=Lang2020>{{cite magazine |last=Lang |first=Brent |title= Eddie Redmayne criticizes J.K. Rowling's anti-trans tweets |date= 10 June 2020 |url= https://variety.com/2020/film/news/eddie-redmayne-jk-rowling-anti-trans-tweets-harry-potter-fantastic-beasts-1234630226/ |magazine= [[Variety (magazine)|Variety]]|access-date=28 March 2022 |quote= Eddie Redmayne, star of the ''Fantastic Beasts'' franchise, is speaking out against J.K. Rowling's anti-trans tweets, as the controversy surrounding the author and her beliefs continues to swirl.}}</ref>{{efn| [[Daniel Radcliffe]], [[Emma Watson]], [[Rupert Grint]],<ref name= Hibberd2021/> [[Eddie Redmayne]]<ref name=Lang2020/> and others expressed support for the transgender community in reaction to Rowling's comments;<ref>{{cite magazine |first= Maureen |last= Lenker|title= Every Harry Potter actor who's spoken out against J.K. Rowling's controversial trans comments |date= 10 June 2020 |access-date= 1 April 2022 |magazine= [[Entertainment Weekly]]|url=https://ew.com/movies/every-harry-potter-actor-whos-spoken-out-against-j-k-rowlings-controversial-transgender-comments/ }}</ref><ref>{{cite news |first= Maggie |last= Baska|title= Stephen Fry defends 'friendship' with JK Rowling: 'I'm sorry that people are upset' |date= 20 May 2021 |url= https://www.pinknews.co.uk/2021/05/20/stephen-fry-jk-rowling-friend-harry-potter-jordan-b-peterson-podcast-trans/ |publisher= [[PinkNews]] |access-date= 29 March 2022}}</ref> [[Helena Bonham Carter]],<ref name=Evans2022> {{cite news |first= Greg |last= Evans |url= https://deadline.com/2022/11/helena-bonham-carter-johnny-depp-j-k-rowling-1235182523/ |title= Helena Bonham Carter says Johnny Depp 'completely vindicated' in defamation trial, and J.K. Rowling 'hounded' for transgender stance |work= [[Deadline Hollywood]] |access-date= 18 December 2022}}</ref> [[Robbie Coltrane]],<ref>{{cite news |last= Yasharoff |first= Hannah |title= How the 'Harry Potter' reunion addresses author J.K. Rowling's anti-trans controversy |date= 30 December 2021|url= https://www.usatoday.com/story/entertainment/movies/2021/12/30/harry-potter-return-hogwarts-20th-reunion-emma-watson-jk-rowling-controversy/9042955002/ |work= [[USA Today]] |access-date= 2 April 2022}}</ref> and [[Ralph Fiennes]] supported Rowling.<ref name= Hibberd2021>{{cite news |first= James |last= Hibberd |url= https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-news/ralph-fiennes-defends-j-k-rowling-amid-trans-controversy-says-backlash-is-disturbing-4151944/ |title= Ralph Fiennes defends J.K. rowling amid trans controversy, says backlash is 'disturbing' |date= 17 March 2021 |access-date=26 March 2022 |work= [[The Hollywood Reporter]]}}</ref>}} [[GLAAD]] called them "cruel" and "inaccurate".<ref name= Yasharoff2020> {{cite news |last= Yasharoff |first=Hannah|url= https://www.usatoday.com/story/entertainment/celebrities/2020/06/07/j-k-rowling-harry-potter-author-slammed-transphobic-comments/3169833001/ |title= J.K. Rowling reveals she's a sexual assault survivor; Emma Watson reacts to trans comments |work= [[USA Today]] |date= 10 June 2020 |access-date= 27 March 2022}}</ref> |
|||
She rejected these characterisations and the notion that she is transphobic,<ref name=RowlingReasons/><ref name= Breznican2023/> in an essay she posted to her website on June 10, 2020,<ref name=RowlingReasons>{{cite web|title=J.K. Rowling writes about her reasons for speaking out on sex and gender issues |url=https://www.jkrowling.com/opinions/j-k-rowling-writes-about-her-reasons-for-speaking-out-on-sex-and-gender-issues/ |publisher=JK Rowling |date=10 June 2020 |access-date=10 June 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200610182056/https://www.jkrowling.com/opinions/j-k-rowling-writes-about-her-reasons-for-speaking-out-on-sex-and-gender-issues/ |archive-date=10 June 2020 |url-status=live}}</ref> where she stated that her views on women's rights were informed by her experience as a survivor of domestic abuse and [[sexual assault]].<ref name=Shirbon2020>{{cite news |last1=Shirbon |first1=Estelle |title=J.K. Rowling reveals past abuse and defends right to speak on trans issues |url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-rowling/j-k-rowling-reveals-past-abuse-and-defends-right-to-speak-on-trans-issues-idUSKBN23H2XI |publisher=[[Reuters]] |date=10 June 2020 |access-date=13 June 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200611200348/https://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-rowling/j-k-rowling-reveals-past-abuse-and-defends-right-to-speak-on-trans-issues-idUSKBN23H2XI |archive-date=11 June 2020 |url-status=live}}</ref> While affirming that "the majority of trans-identified people not only pose zero threat to others, but are vulnerable ... Trans people need and deserve protection",<ref name= Shirbon2020/><ref>{{cite news |last1=Gonzalez |first1=Sandra |title=J.K. Rowling explains her gender identity views in essay amid backlash |url=https://edition.cnn.com/2020/06/10/entertainment/jk-rowling/index.html |access-date=16 September 2023 |work=[[CNN]] |date=10 June 2020}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |last1=Garrand |first1=Danielle |title=J.K. Rowling defends herself after accusations of making "anti-trans" comments on Twitter |url=https://www.cbsnews.com/news/j-k-rowling-defends-anti-trans-comments-twitter/ |access-date=16 September 2023 |work=[[CBS News]] |date=11 June 2020}}</ref> she believes that public spaces, such as restrooms, should only be "same-gender space".{{sfn|Whited|2024|pp=6–7}} Of her own experiences with [[sexism]] and [[misogyny]],<ref>{{cite news |first= Sian |last= Cain |date= 11 June 2020 |title= JK Rowling reveals she is survivor of domestic abuse and sexual assault |url= https://www.theguardian.com/books/2020/jun/10/jk-rowling-says-survivor-of-domestic-abuse-sexual-assault |work= [[The Guardian]] |access-date= 29 March 2022}}</ref> she asks if the "allure of escaping womanhood" would have led her to [[Gender transitioning|transition]] had she been born later, and said that trans activism was "seeking to erode 'woman' as a political and biological class".<ref name=DAlessandro2020>{{cite news |last=D'Alessandro |first=Anthony |title=J.K. Rowling defends trans statements in lengthy essay, reveals she's a sexual assault survivor & says 'trans people need and deserve protection' |url=https://deadline.com/2020/06/j-k-rowling-defends-trans-statements-essay-1202955524/ |access-date=5 January 2022 |publisher=[[Deadline Hollywood]] |date=10 June 2020}}</ref> Whited refers it to as a "public manifesto", which was the "final straw" for fans.{{sfn|Whited|2024|pp=6–7}} Literary scholars suggest that French literary critic [[Roland Barthes]] concept of "[[The Death of the Author]]" (to separate the author from the text) applies to Rowling;{{sfn|Whited|2024|pp=9–10}} Henderson believes the situation does not apply because Rowling "will not shut up" and that "trans-exclusionary themes [are] baked right into the text".{{sfn|Henderson|2022|p=224}} |
|||
|} |
|||
=== Sources === |
|||
{{cot|Sources}} |
|||
{{reflist-talk}} |
{{reflist-talk}} |
||
{{notelist-talk}} |
|||
* {{Cite journal|last=Duggan|first=Jennifer|date=28 March 2021|title=Transformative readings: Harry Potter fan fiction, trans/queer reader response, and J. K. Rowling|journal=[[Children's Literature in Education]]|volume=53 |issue=2 |pages=147–168 |doi=10.1007/s10583-021-09446-9|pmid=35645426 |pmc=9132366 |s2cid=233661189 }} |
|||
*{{cite book |last=Henderson |first=Tolanda |date=2022 |editor-last=Konchar Farr |editor-first=Cecilia |title=Open at the Close: Literary Essays on Harry Potter |publisher=[[University Press of Mississippi ]]|chapter=A Coda: She-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named |isbn=978-1-4968-3931-2}} |
|||
* {{cite journal |first= Madeleine |last= Pape |author-link= Madeleine Pape |title= Feminism, trans justice, and speech rights: a comparative perspective |journal= [[Law and Contemporary Problems]] |pages= 215–240 |url= https://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=5037&context=lcp |date= 2022 |volume= 85 |issue= 1 |access-date= 29 March 2022 }} |
|||
* {{cite journal |first= Sarah |last= Pedersen |title= 'They've got an absolute army of women behind them': the formation of a women's cooperative constellation in contemporary Scotland |journal= [[Scottish Affairs]] |date= 2022 |volume= 31 |issue= 1 |pages= 1–20 |doi= 10.3366/scot.2022.0394 |s2cid= 246762983 |url= https://rgu-repository.worktribe.com/output/1375349 }} |
|||
* {{Cite book|last=Pugh|first=Tison|author-link=Tison Pugh|title=Harry Potter and Beyond: On J. K. Rowling's Fantasies and Other Fictions|publisher=[[University of South Carolina Press]]|year=2020|isbn=978-1-64336-088-1|oclc=1142046769|doi=10.2307/j.ctvs09qwv|s2cid=225791872}} |
|||
* {{cite journal |last1=Steinfeld |first1=Jemimah|title= Not my turf: Helen Lewis argues that vitriol around the trans debate means only extreme voices are being heard |journal= [[Index on Censorship]] |year=2020 |volume=49 |issue= 1 |pages=34–35 |doi= 10.1177/0306422020917609 |s2cid=216495541 |doi-access=free }} |
|||
* {{cite journal |first1= Judith |last1= Suissa |first2= Alice |last2= Sullivan |title= The gender wars, academic freedom and education |journal= [[Journal of Philosophy of Education]] |volume= 55 |issue= 1 |date= February 2021 |pages= 55–82 |doi= 10.1111/1467-9752.12549 |s2cid= 233646159 |doi-access= free |url= https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/10125585/1/Suissa_1467-9752.12549.pdf }} |
|||
*{{Cite book|last=Whited|first=Lana A.|editor-last=Whited|editor-first=Lana A.|title=The Ivory Tower, Harry Potter, and Beyond|chapter = Introduction|publisher=[[University of Missouri Press]]|year=2024|isbn=978-0-8262-2300-5}} |
|||
{{cob}} |
{{cob}} |
||
:Agree with Some1 and S Marshall on the original research aspect of refuting Pape, but also, please reference [[#Paragraph 3 re-do proposal]] in terms of any reframing needed. I would not use the sentence "Despite the controversy, Rowling's work is increasingly successful" at all, and if you track back to my original proposal, the idea was (to maintain neutrality) to convey that plenty of Rowling's work is moving forward (particularly the theme parks moving forward). Without getting in to any OR about book sales etc during Covid, the original sentence stated a simple fact (her products are not losing popularity). [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 12:42, 25 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
=== Discussion of first draft === |
|||
I've (partially) fixed the source listings and the cot cob, and archived some of the long page for starting over (leaving a hat at the top of the new section), but there is still one glitch in the Whited source that will need to be repaired if we cite more than one chapter in the book. As an example, [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=J._K._Rowling&oldid=1218802285#Works_cited see here how we cited multiple chapters in Anatol, and in Berndt], but I am out of time to do that, and it's a lot of typing with sutures in my hand. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 20:16, 19 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:I agree it's OR with Pape, but I'm not suggesting material for the article, I'm reviewing a source. We have a duty to not put misleading or false material into our articles. |
|||
:If the draft sucks it's not relevant and so far only the intro from Whited is used, and Henderson from the other book. I tried with the Anatol templates (harvc) but got lots of errors and either I spend time with text/s or with templates & decided text gets the limited time I have. Thanks a ton for fixing my many many errors - especially with a hand wound. [[User:Victoriaearle|Victoria]] ([[User talk:Victoriaearle|tk]]) 20:44, 19 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:Also, using present tense for facts sourced to 2020 is a problem. I think there's probably some evidence for Harry Potter remaining popular, but we can't use a source from 2020 and use the present tense. As I said, there's evidence they sold really well in 2023 (in Britain); if we could add in a source about America, at least, I'd buy it. <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.118em 0.118em 0.118em; class=texhtml">'''[[User:Adam Cuerden|Adam Cuerden]]''' <sup>([[User talk:Adam Cuerden|talk]])</sup><sub>Has about 8.8% of all [[WP:FP|FPs]].</sub></span> 12:55, 25 June 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::We can fix the trivialities later ... thanks for doing the REAL work !!! [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 20:48, 19 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
{{reflist}} |
|||
:::Thank you {{u|SandyGeorgia|Sandy}} for bailing me out. When I'm less screen blind I'll try to figure out why those harvc templates don't work. I thought it might work better once it's all in mainspace. [[User:Victoriaearle|Victoria]] ([[User talk:Victoriaearle|tk]]) 18:53, 21 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*I feel the sequence of ideas should be: Say her views are controversial -- say in what way they're controversial -- then give the specific examples -- and then give Rowling's rebuttals. I'd also slightly simplify (e.g. "referred to as"--> "called") and somewhat reduce the number of semicolons. For a worked example of how I'd do this, please see my sandbox [[User:S Marshall/sandbox#Transgender people|here]].—[[User:S Marshall|<b style="font-family: Verdana; color: Maroon;">S Marshall</b>]] <small>[[User talk:S Marshall|T]]/[[Special:Contributions/S Marshall|C]]</small> 16:56, 21 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
**Yep, that's exactly how it should be organized. I knew I'd lost perspective at some point & needed extra eyes. Thanks so much {{u|S Marshall}} for redoing it. We can probably paste that in as the next suggested draft. [[User:Victoriaearle|Victoria]] ([[User talk:Victoriaearle|tk]]) 18:53, 21 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
***I have no objections.—[[User:S Marshall|<b style="font-family: Verdana; color: Maroon;">S Marshall</b>]] <small>[[User talk:S Marshall|T]]/[[Special:Contributions/S Marshall|C]]</small> 19:08, 21 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
* This draft does nothing to fix the main issue with this section, which is neutrality. I'm sorry, but we can't ''not'' mention that she consciously and repeatedly misgendered transgender woman in a section on her views on transgender people. It appears flat out dishonest, especially if we're going to spend a whole paragraph quoting her four-year-old essay, using mostly news sources from the day it was published, as the most recent expression of her views. [[User:WikiFouf|WikiFouf]] ([[User talk:WikiFouf|talk]]) 19:14, 21 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
**Hi {{u|WikiFouf}}, so this is an iterative process & eventually we get to the point where everyone agrees. In my view, S Marshall's point re structure/flow is correct, so those changes should be made.{{pb}} As far as the refs for the four-year-old manifesto - that's covered in Whited & Henderson so all the old citations can be dumped & we can source to two 2024 high quality scholarly sources. Because those sources cover the manifesto, we really should too.{{pb}} As for the misgendering, if you're referring to India Willoughby - I thought about adding it, but the RfC seems to be failing. And, well, recentism. But the "She will not shut up" statement does cover the string of comments. We don't need a digest of her comments but an overview. Let's take this a single slow step at a time & see where we get?{{pb}} "Flat out dishonest" seems a bit strong, in my view. Especially given the last three days of migraines, so I'm basically ready to call it quits. You all can take it from here. Or scrub it all and begin new. [[User:Victoriaearle|Victoria]] ([[User talk:Victoriaearle|tk]]) 19:58, 21 April 2024 (UTC) |
Revision as of 12:55, 25 June 2024
J. K. Rowling is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on April 11, 2008, and on June 26, 2022. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This level-5 vital article is rated FA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Death threat
A man has been sentenced for making death threats against J K Rowling and Rosie Duffield. [1] I think this should be added to this article, but I don’t want to interfere with any redrafting, etc. Sweet6970 (talk) 20:17, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
- I agree. Incorporated in draft #7, below.—S Marshall T/C 10:54, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
Draft 7
Suissa and Sullivan are out, and Glenn Mullen is in. As there's no good faith dispute at all over whether J. K. Rowling was insulted and threatened for her views, I've left that in.—S Marshall T/C 10:54, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
Draft 7.1: 403 words | Historical: 429 words |
---|---|
Rowling has [some contributors want to add a qualifier here] gender-critical views.[1][2][3] She resists proposed changes to UK law that would make it simpler to transition without a medical diagnosis. Rowling is concerned that easier transitions could affect access to female-only spaces and legal protections for women.[4][5][6][a] She opposes gender self-recognition[11][12][b] and suggests that children and cisgender women are threatened by trans women and trans-positive messages.[14] In April 2024, responding to Scotland's Hate Crime and Public Order Act, she tweeted a list of trans women, writing that they are "men, every last one of them".[15] Friction over Rowling's gender-critical writings surged in 2019 when she defended Maya Forstater.[16] When Forstater's employment contract was not renewed after Forstater shared gender-critical views,[17] Rowling wrote that trans people should live in "peace and security", but questioned women being "force[d] out of their jobs for stating that sex is real".[18][c] According to Harry Potter scholar Lana Whited, in the next six months "Rowling herself fanned the flames as she became increasingly vocal".[23] In June 2020,[23] Rowling mocked the phrase "people who menstruate",[24] and tweeted that women's rights and "lived reality" would be "erased" if "sex isn't real".[25][17] Rowling's views have affected her reputation.[26] She has been the target of widespread condemnation,[9][27][28] insults, and threats, including death threats.[29][30] Despite the controversy, sales of Harry Potter books grew during the COVID-19 lockdown.[31][32] Criticism came from Harry Potter fansites, LGBT charities, and leading actors of the Wizarding World.[33][34][35] and Human Rights Campaign.[4][36][37][38] After Kerry Kennedy expressed "profound disappointment" in her views, Rowling returned the Ripple of Hope Award given to her by the Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights organisation.[39] Rowling rejects these characterisations and denies being transphobic.[13][40] In an essay posted on her website in June 2020 – which left trans people feeling betrayed[11][33] – Rowling said her views on women's rights sprang from survivorship of domestic abuse and sexual assault.[41][42] While affirming that "the majority of trans-identified people not only pose zero threat to others, but are vulnerable ... Trans people need and deserve protection", she wrote that it would be unsafe to allow "any man who believes or feels he's a woman" into bathrooms or changing rooms.[42][43][44] Whited asserted in 2024 that Rowling's sometimes "flippant" and "simplistic understanding of gender identity" had permanently changed her "relationship not only with fans, readers, and scholars ... but also with her works themselves".[45] |
Rowling's responses to proposed changes to UK gender recognition laws,[4][5][d] and her views on sex and gender, have provoked controversy.[9] Her statements have divided feminists;[6][46][47] fuelled debates on freedom of speech,[48][49] academic freedom[8] and cancel culture;[27] and prompted declarations of support for transgender people from the literary,[50] arts[51] and culture sectors.[52] When Maya Forstater's employment contract with the London branch of the Center for Global Development was not renewed after she tweeted gender-critical views,[17][18] Rowling responded in December 2019 with a tweet that transgender people should live their lives as they pleased in "peace and security", but questioned women being "force[d] out of their jobs for stating that sex is real".[18][e] In another controversial tweet in June 2020,[34] Rowling mocked an article for using the phrase "people who menstruate",[24] and tweeted that women's rights and "lived reality" would be "erased" if "sex isn't real".[54][55] LGBT charities and leading actors of the Wizarding World franchise condemned Rowling's comments;[37][38][f] GLAAD called them "cruel" and "inaccurate".[61] Rowling responded with an essay on her website[13] in which she revealed that her views on women's rights were informed by her experience as a survivor of domestic abuse and sexual assault.[42] While affirming that "the majority of trans-identified people not only pose zero threat to others, but are vulnerable ... Trans people need and deserve protection", she believed that it would be unsafe to allow "any man who believes or feels he's a woman" into bathrooms or changing rooms.[42][62][63] Writing of her own experiences with sexism and misogyny,[64] she wondered if the "allure of escaping womanhood" would have led her to transition if she had been born later, and said that trans activism was "seeking to erode 'woman' as a political and biological class".[65] Rowling's continual statements – beginning in 2017[9][66][67] – have been called transphobic by critics[68][69] and she has been referred to as a TERF.[69][70][71] She rejects these characterisations and the notion that she holds animosity towards transgender people, saying that her viewpoint has been misunderstood.[13][68][67] Criticism of Rowling's views has come from the Harry Potter fansites MuggleNet and The Leaky Cauldron;[72] and the charities Mermaids,[34] Stonewall,[73] and Human Rights Campaign.[74] After Kerry Kennedy expressed "profound disappointment" in her views, Rowling returned the Ripple of Hope Award given to her by the Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights organisation.[39] As Rowling's views on the legal status of transgender people came under scrutiny,[8] she received insults and death threats[75][76] and discussion moved beyond the Twitter community.[77] Some performers and feminists have supported her.[77][78] Figures from the arts world criticised "hate speech directed against her".[79] |
Sources
Sources
|
---|
References
Notes
|
Discussion
- Is that meant to be titled as Draft 6.3, or is it a mistake? Alpha2 5232 (talk) 16:49, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
- Fixed.—S Marshall T/C 17:42, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
- Busy for the rest of today, but I should be able to enter my commentary (as promised weeks ago), by tomorrow. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:41, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
- PS, this might provide an updated source to replace her website essay. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:56, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
- Fixed.—S Marshall T/C 17:42, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
- S Marshall, thanks for doing this & huge apologies for being awol (there's another article where I'm in over my head & my time for Wikipedia keeps shrinking). A couple of comments to get started:
- I have some as-yet-very-muddy-thoughts about the first sentence & the phrase gender-critical so I'll try to flesh those out later.
- Minor point, but there's some repetition of "She, she, she" in the first para that needs wordsmithing.
- For people with no clue, have been wondering whether we should try working in a link to Forstater v Centre for Global Development Europe
- "affected her reputation" should be cited to Whited page 8
- Good to see the draft less wordy; I'm wondering how others feel about putting back the sentence "Her statements have divided feminists... etc., etc." that's in the historical draft? The end of that sentence mentions includes " "lived reality" would be "erased" if "sex isn't real", which is another way of saying sex is immutable. Should that be clarified?
- That's it for now. Victoria (tk) 20:57, 14 June 2024 (UTC)
- In draft 7.1, I've attempted to address points #2, #3 and #4 that you raise, and I await further input on #1 and #5.—S Marshall T/C 21:55, 14 June 2024 (UTC)
- Much appreciated! Agreed that input from others is needed.
Just to spin my thoughts out a bit more. Re the first sentence, I've realized that one reason it's been bugging me is that the term gender-critical may mean something very different in the US than in the UK. Recently I read an article about someone running for congress whose opinions about women are, shall we say, a bit archaic. Beyond that this person claims the LGBQT+ movement was created by radical feminists. So we need to be clear in terms of where links are going & what exactly we mean for a global audience.Regarding the sentence in the historical draft, which begins with ""Her statements have divided feminists... etc., etc." ... it occurred to me the newish literature address these debates & so those points should be made. Also I've not had time for a full examination of the essays in Whited (Project MUSE book 111748} or Konchar Farr {Project MUSE book 99615), which in my view needs to be done. Anyway, let's see what the others say. Victoria (tk) 23:36, 15 June 2024 (UTC)- Yes. On the wildest, most far-flung fringes of the US right, there lurk certain characters who do indeed like to burst out of their swamps, yell things like "the LGBTQ+ movement was created by radical feminists!" and then slide back into the mire, waiting for the next gloriously unhinged thought to turn up. Like you, I'm often refreshed and challenged by their unique perspectives and their idiosyncratic ways of putting things. I think my personal favourite is "blame the gun". Presumably someone who thinks you shouldn't be allowed to drive without a driving licence is "blaming the car".I don't think we can use language the way those people do, and I also don't think we should be trying. Conservapedia is thataway ----->. I feel that as encyclopaedists, it's our task to summarize things in simple and clear terms, even (especially!) when the things we're trying to summarize are complex and difficult; and we should use normal, natural language in its usual meaning; and, despite what the US right might think, it's quite possible to be supportive and tolerant of gay and lesbian people, but intolerant of trans people; and that J.K. Rowling is; and that "gender-critical" is succinct, accurate, and neutral. It's not a pejorative.But I can see that "gender-critical" is an uncomfortable thing to say about someone. Even though it's not a pejorative, it's a pungent term. It reeks of repression and segregation and prejudice. It's scrupulously accurate, though.—S Marshall T/C 09:09, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
- I knew I wouldn't be able to make myself clear & that's why I have trouble engaging here. Being told to go off to Conservapedia doesn't want me to engage. To try to clarify: can we not just say she's a Gender-critical feminist whose views align with Maya Forstater (i.e the #IStandWithMaya tweet) & then tell readers who don't know (or who do know) those views are x, y and z (including that they believe sex is immutable). I think we're close. So just ignore me. Victoria (tk) 14:15, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
- @Victoriaearle If we call J.K. Rowling a gender-critical feminist in the article, do we need to clarify what that means? Surely the page it would link to would give people an idea of what those views are without having to reclarify here? Alpha2 5232 (talk) 14:42, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, I think we should because this is her biography & the article is about her. But I need to step away to refamiliarize myself with the sources & don't have time for that at the moment. Victoria (tk) 16:45, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
- My thought is this: J.K. Rowling uses the term herself, e.g. here. I think we can safely call her gender critical - ideally with an explanation - because it's language she seems to accept as a description of the group she belongs to anyway. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs. 13:46, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
- Basically I was only wondering if we needed to gloss the term & failed to explain myself at all well. Stricken a bunch above. Victoria (tk) 15:58, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
- I have been stalled by real life matters on coming back to this, but I'm concerned that the process is not engaging WP:WIAFA 1c; yes, we're updating to Whited, which is a good thing, but that's only one high quality recent source, and it's not apparent whether we're working towards a "thorough and representative survey of the relevant literature". Instead, we seem to be working towards preferences of individual editors, which won't render this in compliance with FA standards. I don't have easy/full journal access, so can only access that which is freely available, but that (limited) survey continues to support the most NOT-NEWSY, NOT-RECENTISM, and likely to endure statement that was once in the article, and is mentioned by Victoriaearle at 23:56 June 15:
"Regarding the sentence in the historical draft, which begins with 'Her statements have divided feminists... etc., etc.' ... it occurred to me the newish literature address these debates & so those points should be made."
I've been hoping the other FA writers of the FAR version would find time and inclination to weigh in here so we could address the WIAFA issues, including any updates needed to the literary portions of the article based on Whited and more, but I don't feel like I should ping them again. I have other (more minor) concerns about the draft, but if we aren't working towards meeting WIAFA, I'm unsure what the value of time spent here is ... so I haven't yet spelled those out. Ideas ?? Most certainly, that one deleted sentence is warranted by what I can access as a survey of the relevant literature (scholarly articles restricted to 2024), and is likely the most enduring of the section, so I hope it comes back with updated citations. Regards, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:52, 20 June 2024 (UTC)- With all respect, you seem to be objecting to change by holding standards that are not apparent in the original version of the section, which, if anything, is far worse. If this fails WIAFA after the changes, it fails it without the changes. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs. 21:53, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
- I (and others) have explained several times that the FAR was constrained by the results of a very recent, and very well attended, RFC, and that all acknowledged we would have to revisit after some time had elapsed from that RFC ... so I won't repeat all of that again. Please do reread the archives of discussions already had with you. Now that we are revisiting, we should be keeping WIAFA in mind. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:32, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
- From a high quality sourcing point-of-view, I'm not convinced there's enough yet to revisit. The search function at the top of the page of The Wikipedia Library goes to Ebscohost. If sorted by newest the first page shows results only from Daily Mail, Daily Telegraph, Hollywood Reporter, Business Wire, USA Today, and so forth. Sorting by "peer reviewed" does show much and nothing I'm seeing that can be used, on a quick perusal. That said, anyone can search there. Whited is a start, but not much of a start & only published a few months ago. Waiting is not the worst option; agree that the understanding was that the section would be rewritten when high quality sources come available. Victoria (tk) 23:33, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
- I (and others) have explained several times that the FAR was constrained by the results of a very recent, and very well attended, RFC, and that all acknowledged we would have to revisit after some time had elapsed from that RFC ... so I won't repeat all of that again. Please do reread the archives of discussions already had with you. Now that we are revisiting, we should be keeping WIAFA in mind. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:32, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
- With all respect, you seem to be objecting to change by holding standards that are not apparent in the original version of the section, which, if anything, is far worse. If this fails WIAFA after the changes, it fails it without the changes. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs. 21:53, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
- I have been stalled by real life matters on coming back to this, but I'm concerned that the process is not engaging WP:WIAFA 1c; yes, we're updating to Whited, which is a good thing, but that's only one high quality recent source, and it's not apparent whether we're working towards a "thorough and representative survey of the relevant literature". Instead, we seem to be working towards preferences of individual editors, which won't render this in compliance with FA standards. I don't have easy/full journal access, so can only access that which is freely available, but that (limited) survey continues to support the most NOT-NEWSY, NOT-RECENTISM, and likely to endure statement that was once in the article, and is mentioned by Victoriaearle at 23:56 June 15:
- Basically I was only wondering if we needed to gloss the term & failed to explain myself at all well. Stricken a bunch above. Victoria (tk) 15:58, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
- My thought is this: J.K. Rowling uses the term herself, e.g. here. I think we can safely call her gender critical - ideally with an explanation - because it's language she seems to accept as a description of the group she belongs to anyway. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs. 13:46, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, I think we should because this is her biography & the article is about her. But I need to step away to refamiliarize myself with the sources & don't have time for that at the moment. Victoria (tk) 16:45, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
- @Victoriaearle If we call J.K. Rowling a gender-critical feminist in the article, do we need to clarify what that means? Surely the page it would link to would give people an idea of what those views are without having to reclarify here? Alpha2 5232 (talk) 14:42, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
- I knew I wouldn't be able to make myself clear & that's why I have trouble engaging here. Being told to go off to Conservapedia doesn't want me to engage. To try to clarify: can we not just say she's a Gender-critical feminist whose views align with Maya Forstater (i.e the #IStandWithMaya tweet) & then tell readers who don't know (or who do know) those views are x, y and z (including that they believe sex is immutable). I think we're close. So just ignore me. Victoria (tk) 14:15, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
- Yes. On the wildest, most far-flung fringes of the US right, there lurk certain characters who do indeed like to burst out of their swamps, yell things like "the LGBTQ+ movement was created by radical feminists!" and then slide back into the mire, waiting for the next gloriously unhinged thought to turn up. Like you, I'm often refreshed and challenged by their unique perspectives and their idiosyncratic ways of putting things. I think my personal favourite is "blame the gun". Presumably someone who thinks you shouldn't be allowed to drive without a driving licence is "blaming the car".I don't think we can use language the way those people do, and I also don't think we should be trying. Conservapedia is thataway ----->. I feel that as encyclopaedists, it's our task to summarize things in simple and clear terms, even (especially!) when the things we're trying to summarize are complex and difficult; and we should use normal, natural language in its usual meaning; and, despite what the US right might think, it's quite possible to be supportive and tolerant of gay and lesbian people, but intolerant of trans people; and that J.K. Rowling is; and that "gender-critical" is succinct, accurate, and neutral. It's not a pejorative.But I can see that "gender-critical" is an uncomfortable thing to say about someone. Even though it's not a pejorative, it's a pungent term. It reeks of repression and segregation and prejudice. It's scrupulously accurate, though.—S Marshall T/C 09:09, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
- Much appreciated! Agreed that input from others is needed.
- I believe the draft as written constitutes a considerable improvement on the current text. I'm certain it can be improved further, but we ought not to let the perfect be the enemy of the good. I do think the sentence beginning "Rowling rejects these characterizations..." needs some reworking specifically because we've lost the reader on what those characterizations might be. I'm also not certain the statement is broadly true; she denies being transphobic, and rejects the "TERF" label (though nobody really embraces it, do they?), but if there's evidence she rejects "gender critical", I've yet to see it. I'm also noting I don't have time to engage deeply here. Vanamonde93 (talk) 01:55, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
Her statements have divided feminists...
This sentence was cut because:
- It's not about J.K. Rowling's views; and
- There was pressure to cut the word count.
I don't object to restoring it if we feel the extra words are justified in the circumstances.—S Marshall T/C 07:09, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
- The proposed word count now (400-ish) is approaching 10% less than what was in the article historically (430-ish); IIRC, any pressure to reduce the word count was when the section on transgender rights was hovering around or at times above 475 words (eg here, although I think at one point we were near 500). I propose we have room to bring back one sentence, but that if we did, it could be updated and cited to newer scholarly sources. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 12:23, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
- Bastun re this edit, WP:WIAFA is linked in the discussion just above this one. It stands for What Is A Featured Article, also abbreviated as WP:FACR, Featured Article Criteria. It is separate from Featured Article Review; it is not clear to me that S Marshall was suggesting (yet) that we need a trip to FAR. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 12:23, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
- Given the sources for the "divided feminists" sentence are 2019 and 2020, I don't think this should be used without very explicitly putting some context as to WHEN feminists were divided. Though the sourcing then adds additional problems:
- one source is explicitly about her comments on Maya Forstater. It'd be a great source to use in the context of Forstater, but not to use as if it applied to anything else Rowling said. It's also pretty clearly the main source for the statement; neither of the other two have "feminists divided" as a clear reading.
- One source is just probably not very good: A single tweet by (non-academic) blogger Claire Heuchan is literally the only evidence of feminists supporting Rowling presented.
- The third source is... honestly a great article by Judith Butler, but she explicitly says "...I find it worrisome that suddenly the trans-exclusionary radical feminist position is understood as commonly accepted or even mainstream. I think it is actually a fringe movement that is seeking to speak in the name of the mainstream, and that our responsibility is to refuse to let that happen." A source that says gender critical is WP:FRINGE is a poor source to use for a statement that presents the views as equal within feminism.
- ----
- So... aye. I'd probably say that, without modern, mainstream sources talking about a division in feminism, that sentence is dead in the water. And, let's face it: Even if we did find sources, if we kept the text exactly the same, then we wouldn't be summarising modern sources, we'd be using a summary of a source about the reaction to her commentary on Maya Forstater, treating it as if it covered all Rowling's comments since then, and retrofitting sources onto it) Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs. 05:28, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
- Well, this is straightforward. Her statements haven't so much divided feminists, but rather, feminists were already divided on trans issues, and they've split on Rowling according to tribal lines. Those feminists who're gender-critical like Rowling and those who're gender-inclusive dislike her. Her statements have certainly prompted debate about cancel culture and freedom of speech, and they've certainly given rise to declarations of support for trans people from various actors and pressure groups. Nobody who's read the sources could possibly deny any of that, could they?—S Marshall T/C 23:53, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
- I mean, I'm only commenting on that one sentence (as written) and its poor sourcing. I don't disagree with what you just said, but what you just said explicitly rejects the statement I'm commenting on, and what you said, that already gender critical / TERF people supported her, is sky-is-blue stuff that probably doesn't need said. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs. 00:50, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
- Probably does need to be said, though, doesn't it. We're an encyclopaedia. Imagine we're writing for an intelligent and curious, but totally uninformed, teenager from a village in rural India. If you want reliable/recent sources for this stuff, you don't need to look further than the BBC, which has published so many pieces about J.K. Rowling that she has her own dedicated topic page, at https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/topics/c50znx8v82dt.—S Marshall T/C 01:08, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
- I mean, I'm only commenting on that one sentence (as written) and its poor sourcing. I don't disagree with what you just said, but what you just said explicitly rejects the statement I'm commenting on, and what you said, that already gender critical / TERF people supported her, is sky-is-blue stuff that probably doesn't need said. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs. 00:50, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
- Well, this is straightforward. Her statements haven't so much divided feminists, but rather, feminists were already divided on trans issues, and they've split on Rowling according to tribal lines. Those feminists who're gender-critical like Rowling and those who're gender-inclusive dislike her. Her statements have certainly prompted debate about cancel culture and freedom of speech, and they've certainly given rise to declarations of support for trans people from various actors and pressure groups. Nobody who's read the sources could possibly deny any of that, could they?—S Marshall T/C 23:53, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
- Given the sources for the "divided feminists" sentence are 2019 and 2020, I don't think this should be used without very explicitly putting some context as to WHEN feminists were divided. Though the sourcing then adds additional problems:
Wikipedia Featured article criteria (WIAFA)
Without changes to this section the article is outdated. Without the proposed changes it represents a historical version of what J.K. Rowling is famous for, and it's consequently drawing attention from people who want to update it piecemeal. A wholesale rewrite from the best sources available is the least bad option.—S Marshall T/C 07:09, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
- Agreed. Choosing to not update it is basically saying this article should not be an FA. If we're not going to do the best job we can with it, then it's not featurable. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs. 22:12, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
- As it happens, I agree with S Marshall. But I also understand the urge to swap newer sources for those the FA writers used some years ago. I wasn't one of the contributors (except maybe a little around the edges) and tapped out with Wikipedia atm. To keep the process on track, do you have any comments to make regarding S Marshall's most recent draft, Adam Cuerden? That's how we keep going. Victoria (tk) 22:54, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
- I'm fairly happy with it. I'm just not happy with - and forgive me if I'm misunderstanding - SandyGeorgia's suggestion that we change nothing, and go back to the section as is.
- There's bits to argue. I think "She resists proposed changes to UK law that would make it simpler to transition without a medical diagnosis. Rowling is concerned that easier transitions could affect access to female-only spaces and legal protections for women" is absolutely redundant to the clearer and simpler sentences after it, but less coherently phrased. But that's not the worst objection, is it? Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs. 01:45, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
- I guess the bit about female-only spaces might be worth including, but I'd just add it later. Maybe "She opposes gender self-recognition and suggests that children, cisgender women, and female-only spaces are threatened by trans women and trans-positive messages[refs]. Think the "legal protections for women" bit is pretty unclear as to what it means, so - presuming it's not redundant to all the bits on "women's rights" in paragraphs two and four - I'd expand on what legal rights she claims are infringed, and put it in a later paragraph. (It may be that Rowling's never very explicit as to what she means on that; if so... I'd probably be inclined to classify it as mere puffery/sloganing and just leave it out, but if she does say something concrete, then we should say the concrete thing, not summarise to the point of meaninglessness.)
- We're losing two sentences of redundancy to do this, after all, so if we need to put one sentence back to cover the subject well, we still have a sentence spare to use for whatever we want. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs. 04:31, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
- Re
and forgive me if I'm misunderstanding - SandyGeorgia's suggestion that we change nothing, and go back to the section as is
, yes you are misunderstanding -- I've not said (or meant) that at all. As I stated above, this process has not (yet) fully engaged 1c of WP:WIAFA by engaging in a "thorough and representative survey of the relevant literature", and as I've mentioned, there are newer and better sources for redrafting that sentence, which I believe to be one of the most FA-worthy parts of the section (that is, what is the lasting effect, beyond JKR triggering every news cycle, and editors then wanting to insert that NEWS here rather than in the sub-article). My apologies for not having time to delineate them, but repeating, if we aren't engaging the FA criteria, and as most of the FA writers who did engage it originally can no longer engage, I'm unsure where we are headed if we are going to keep filling the talk page discussions with NEWS and RECENTISM. Victoriaearle, when you stated yesterday that you find little new from your scholarly search to incorporate, were you referring to updating the literary portions of the article, or only the transgender rights section? When I browsed the other day (from the car, so couldn't save the sources), I found indications there is plenty for re-drafting that sentence, although I could only access those that were freely available. I'm relieved to have now heard from VM93, but remain concerned we may not be engaging in an overall way that will lead to retaining FA status. I'm not ready to throw in the towel yet, but it's possible we could get more FA-knowledgeable writers to engage the criteria by in fact going back to FAR, where the off-topic RECENTISM is less likely to overtake the discussions. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 12:47, 22 June 2024 (UTC)- This characterization of using material from post-2020 as "off-topic RECENTISM" is disputed.—S Marshall T/C 13:27, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
- As it happens, I agree with S Marshall. But I also understand the urge to swap newer sources for those the FA writers used some years ago. I wasn't one of the contributors (except maybe a little around the edges) and tapped out with Wikipedia atm. To keep the process on track, do you have any comments to make regarding S Marshall's most recent draft, Adam Cuerden? That's how we keep going. Victoria (tk) 22:54, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
- Sandy, I probably misunderstood. I wouldn't call my quick dip-stick search at Ebscohost a scholarly search. I thought you were referring to high-quality scholarly vs. news sources re the transgender section - and no, I didn't see anything that we aren't already using (but I didn't go beyond the first page). Even if you can't save, is it possible to capture links? In terms of updating the rest of the article, there's plenty, but as I mentioned Whited is new & generally lit. articles don't get updated within months of a new publication - at least not the ones I steward. It's always good to wait a bit.As far as the sentence in question, I'm not wedded to it. It would be better to keep the process moving, imo.As for as going back to FAR, don't see the need. The only immediate is need an overhaul of the transgender section & given the suggestions overnight think S Marshall's current version is fine. But ... today's article in the Times will need to get incorporated at some point because of the election.Victoria (tk) 14:45, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
- I'm glad to be wrong. Thanks, Sandy. I think there's a major tension between recentism and outdated here. We need to include some amount of recent content as Rowling's views have pretty clearly moved to more extreme ones, but we also don't want to merely document the most recent three incidents. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs. 20:09, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
- RE, "the most recent three incidents", that is the tricky part of working on this article (she triggers the news cycle weekly, so how to decide which to include). Re Victoria and S Marshall, when I was browsing from the car, what I meant was that I found plenty of scholar.google sources that could be used to update that sentence and that we don't need to go to news sources -- enough so that the still-relevance of the sentence was shown, which is why I think it the most enduring. The reason I didn't save those I found is that I considered my search (without journal access) incomplete. I could find them again, subject to same constraints, if my real life issues would ever settle down and give me a long-enough break to refocus here (sorry :( . SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:16, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
- To some extent, we don't need to be perfect, as long as we cover fairly typical and/or illuminating events. We're trying to give a flavour of her sort of activity. Ideally, analysis that makes the choices for us would be better, but in the absence of that, we have a little editorial perogative to pick and choose. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs. 04:06, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
- RE, "the most recent three incidents", that is the tricky part of working on this article (she triggers the news cycle weekly, so how to decide which to include). Re Victoria and S Marshall, when I was browsing from the car, what I meant was that I found plenty of scholar.google sources that could be used to update that sentence and that we don't need to go to news sources -- enough so that the still-relevance of the sentence was shown, which is why I think it the most enduring. The reason I didn't save those I found is that I considered my search (without journal access) incomplete. I could find them again, subject to same constraints, if my real life issues would ever settle down and give me a long-enough break to refocus here (sorry :( . SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:16, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
This morning's article in The Times
is extraordinarily timely and helpful. I propose that we suspend updating this section for the moment because Rowling's latest little rant will provoke a reaction and, hopefully, some analysis by third parties.—S Marshall T/C 08:13, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
- ...could you please post a link to this article? Or at least the title? Loki (talk) 17:49, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
- Sure.—S Marshall T/C 18:11, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
- @LokiTheLiar, @S Marshall: There's a summary and context at this BBC article. Bazza 7 (talk) 18:57, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
- Everyone agrees the current draft is much better, and nothing says we have to stop work on drafts once we put something up. If we're going to suspend, let's implement the current draft. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs. 04:12, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
- I agree, and would like to point out that while I haven't been a big fan of the allegations of WP:RECENTISM so far, relying heavily on breaking news about Rowling's comments about a currently happening election really would be RECENTISM. Loki (talk) 04:59, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
- Rowling is in the public eye on this matter. Coverage isn't going to miraculously stabilize at any point. It is likely that we will need to periodically revisit this, especially as scholarly sources come out. That isn't a reason not to adjust the present wording, which is sub-optimal and considerably worse than the draft above. I support implementing it, my quibbles above notwithstanding. Vanamonde93 (talk) 05:51, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
- I agree, and would like to point out that while I haven't been a big fan of the allegations of WP:RECENTISM so far, relying heavily on breaking news about Rowling's comments about a currently happening election really would be RECENTISM. Loki (talk) 04:59, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
- Everyone agrees the current draft is much better, and nothing says we have to stop work on drafts once we put something up. If we're going to suspend, let's implement the current draft. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs. 04:12, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
For easy discussion.
I mentioned this above, but:
"She resists proposed changes to UK law that would make it simpler to transition without a medical diagnosis. Rowling is concerned that easier transitions could affect access to female-only spaces and legal protections for women" is absolutely redundant to the clearer and simpler sentences after it, but less coherently phrased.
I guess the bit about female-only spaces might be worth including, but I'd just add it later. Maybe "She opposes gender self-recognition and suggests that children, cisgender women, and female-only spaces are threatened by trans women and trans-positive messages[refs]. Think the "legal protections for women" bit is pretty unclear as to what it means, so - presuming it's not redundant to all the bits on "women's rights" in paragraphs two and four - I'd expand on what legal rights she claims are infringed, and put it in a later paragraph. (It may be that Rowling's never very explicit as to what she means on that; if so... I'd probably be inclined to classify it as mere puffery/sloganing and just leave it out, but if she does say something concrete, then we should say the concrete thing, not summarise to the point of meaninglessness.) We're losing two sentences of redundancy to do this, after all, so if we need to put one sentence back to cover the subject well, we still have a sentence spare to use for whatever we want.
Footnote [a] is mispositioned, if we accept my change, put it with footnote [b], otherwise, it should be a sentence earlier.
These two sentences come right before a remarkably readable and clear statement of her positions (most of the rest of that paragraph). And they are in no way as clear or readable as those statements. At the least, it shouldn't come first. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs. 04:16, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
- I do think it's important to be clear about at least some of the specific bills she opposes, since she does oppose specific bills and not just the general concept of gender self-recognition. But I also agree that sentence 3 should come first: we should say the general thing first, which is that she opposes gender self-recognition and then progress to more specific things she's said, like the specific bills she's opposed. Loki (talk) 15:44, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
Draft 8
I'm starting to see consensus to go ahead and implement this, but it would be a pity to do so without Sandy's forthcoming commentary.—S Marshall T/C 08:53, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
Draft 8.2: 407 words | Draft 8.3, with extra paragraph: 444 words | Historical: 429 words |
---|---|---|
Rowling has gender-critical views.[1][2][3] She opposes the Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill in Scotland, and resists proposed changes to the Equality Act 2010 in the UK that would make it simpler to transition without a medical diagnosis. She opposes gender self-recognition[4][5][a] and suggests that children and cisgender women are threatened by trans women and trans-positive messages.[7] Rowling is concerned that easier transitions could affect access to female-only spaces and legal protections for women.[8][9][10][b] In April 2024, responding to Scotland's Hate Crime and Public Order Act, she tweeted a list of trans women, writing that they are "men, every last one of them".[15] Friction over Rowling's gender-critical writings surged in 2019 when she defended Maya Forstater,[16] whose Forstater's employment contract was not renewed after she shared gender-critical views.[17] Rowling wrote that trans people should live in "peace and security", but questioned women being "force[d] out of their jobs for stating that sex is real".[18][c] According to Harry Potter scholar Lana Whited, in the next six months "Rowling herself fanned the flames as she became increasingly vocal".[23] In June 2020,[23] Rowling mocked the phrase "people who menstruate",[24] and tweeted that women's rights and "lived reality" would be "erased" if "sex isn't real".[25][17] Rowling's views have divided feminists;[10][26][27] fuelled debates on freedom of speech,[28][29] academic freedom[12] and cancel culture;[30] and prompted declarations of support for transgender people from the literary,[31] arts[32] and culture sectors.[33] She has been the target of widespread condemnation,[13][30][34] insults, and threats, including death threats.[35][36] Criticism came from Harry Potter fansites, LGBT charities, leading actors of the Wizarding World,[37][38][39] and Human Rights Campaign.[8][40][41][42] After Kerry Kennedy expressed "profound disappointment" in her views, Rowling returned the Ripple of Hope Award given to her by the Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights organisation.[43] Rowling denies being transphobic.[6][44] In an essay posted on her website in June 2020 – which left trans people feeling betrayed[4][37] – Rowling said her views on women's rights sprang from survivorship of domestic abuse and sexual assault.[45][46] While affirming that "the majority of trans-identified people not only pose zero threat to others, but are vulnerable ... Trans people need and deserve protection", she wrote that it would be unsafe to allow "any man who believes or feels he's a woman" into bathrooms or changing rooms.[46][47][48] Whited asserted in 2024 that Rowling's sometimes "flippant" and "simplistic understanding of gender identity" had permanently changed her "relationship not only with fans, readers, and scholars ... but also with her works themselves".[49]
|
Rowling has gender-critical views.[1][2][3] She opposes the Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill in Scotland, and resists proposed changes to the Equality Act 2010 in the UK that would make it simpler to transition without a medical diagnosis. She opposes gender self-recognition[4][5][d] and suggests that children and cisgender women are threatened by trans women and trans-positive messages.[7] Rowling is concerned that easier transitions could affect access to female-only spaces and legal protections for women.[8][9][10][e] In April 2024, responding to Scotland's Hate Crime and Public Order Act, she tweeted a list of trans women, writing that they are "men, every last one of them".[15] Friction over Rowling's gender-critical writings surged in 2019 when she defended Maya Forstater,[16] whose Forstater's employment contract was not renewed after she shared gender-critical views.[17] Rowling wrote that trans people should live in "peace and security", but questioned women being "force[d] out of their jobs for stating that sex is real".[18][f] According to Harry Potter scholar Lana Whited, in the next six months "Rowling herself fanned the flames as she became increasingly vocal".[23] In June 2020,[23] Rowling mocked the phrase "people who menstruate",[24] and tweeted that women's rights and "lived reality" would be "erased" if "sex isn't real".[25][17] Rowling's views have divided feminists;[10][26][52] fuelled debates on freedom of speech,[28][53] academic freedom[12] and cancel culture;[30] and prompted declarations of support for transgender people from the literary,[54] arts[55] and culture sectors.[56] She has been the target of widespread condemnation,[13][30][34] insults, and threats, including death threats.[35][36] Criticism came from Harry Potter fansites, LGBT charities, leading actors of the Wizarding World,[37][38][57] and Human Rights Campaign.[8][40][41][42] After Kerry Kennedy expressed "profound disappointment" in her views, Rowling returned the Ripple of Hope Award given to her by the Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights organisation.[43] Despite the controversy, Rowling's work is increasingly successful. Sales of Harry Potter books grew during the COVID-19 lockdown.[58][59] In 2023, streaming series Max (formerly HBO) began to develop a television series[60][61] which will be released in 2026.[62] Rowling denies being transphobic.[6][44] In an essay posted on her website in June 2020 – which left trans people feeling betrayed[4][37] – Rowling said her views on women's rights sprang from survivorship of domestic abuse and sexual assault.[45][46] While affirming that "the majority of trans-identified people not only pose zero threat to others, but are vulnerable ... Trans people need and deserve protection", she wrote that it would be unsafe to allow "any man who believes or feels he's a woman" into bathrooms or changing rooms.[46][63][64] Whited asserted in 2024 that Rowling's sometimes "flippant" and "simplistic understanding of gender identity" had permanently changed her "relationship not only with fans, readers, and scholars ... but also with her works themselves".[49] |
Rowling's responses to proposed changes to UK gender recognition laws,[8][9][g] and her views on sex and gender, have provoked controversy.[13] Her statements have divided feminists;[10][26][65] fuelled debates on freedom of speech,[28][66] academic freedom[12] and cancel culture;[30] and prompted declarations of support for transgender people from the literary,[67] arts[68] and culture sectors.[69] When Maya Forstater's employment contract with the London branch of the Center for Global Development was not renewed after she tweeted gender-critical views,[17][18] Rowling responded in December 2019 with a tweet that transgender people should live their lives as they pleased in "peace and security", but questioned women being "force[d] out of their jobs for stating that sex is real".[18][h] In another controversial tweet in June 2020,[38] Rowling mocked an article for using the phrase "people who menstruate",[24] and tweeted that women's rights and "lived reality" would be "erased" if "sex isn't real".[71][72] LGBT charities and leading actors of the Wizarding World franchise condemned Rowling's comments;[41][42][i] GLAAD called them "cruel" and "inaccurate".[78] Rowling responded with an essay on her website[6] in which she revealed that her views on women's rights were informed by her experience as a survivor of domestic abuse and sexual assault.[46] While affirming that "the majority of trans-identified people not only pose zero threat to others, but are vulnerable ... Trans people need and deserve protection", she believed that it would be unsafe to allow "any man who believes or feels he's a woman" into bathrooms or changing rooms.[46][79][80] Writing of her own experiences with sexism and misogyny,[81] she wondered if the "allure of escaping womanhood" would have led her to transition if she had been born later, and said that trans activism was "seeking to erode 'woman' as a political and biological class".[82] Rowling's continual statements – beginning in 2017[13][83][84] – have been called transphobic by critics[85][86] and she has been referred to as a TERF.[86][87][88] She rejects these characterisations and the notion that she holds animosity towards transgender people, saying that her viewpoint has been misunderstood.[6][85][84] Criticism of Rowling's views has come from the Harry Potter fansites MuggleNet and The Leaky Cauldron;[89] and the charities Mermaids,[38] Stonewall,[90] and Human Rights Campaign.[91] After Kerry Kennedy expressed "profound disappointment" in her views, Rowling returned the Ripple of Hope Award given to her by the Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights organisation.[43] As Rowling's views on the legal status of transgender people came under scrutiny,[12] she received insults and death threats[92][93] and discussion moved beyond the Twitter community.[94] Some performers and feminists have supported her.[94][95] Figures from the arts world criticised "hate speech directed against her".[96] |
Sources
Sources
|
---|
References
Notes
|
Discussion of Draft 8
S Marshall, I have another full day today, but hope to be able to look this evening. Quickly though, I did see one comma issue in the first para that may leave a misimpression:
She resists the Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill in Scotland, and proposed changes to the Equality Act 2010 in the UK, which would make it simpler to transition without a medical diagnosis.
It could read to the uninitiated as if she a) resists X, and b) (instead) proposes Y, when what is meant is that she a) resists X, and b) resists proposals to Y. And there's some redundant wording and detail. Not sure how to fix it ... maybe something like ... She resisted the (year?) Gender Recognition Reform Bill in Scotland and changes proposed (in year X) to the UK Equality Act, (both of?) which would make it simpler to transition without a medical diagnosis. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 11:18, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
- I agree with this.
- I would phrase it as
She opposes the Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill in Scotland, and also opposes proposed changes to the Equality Act 2010 in the UK which would make it simpler to transition without a medical diagnosis.
Loki (talk) 15:39, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
Another concern I have is (sentences numbered for discussion purposes):
1. She resists the Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill in Scotland, and proposed changes to the Equality Act 2010 in the UK, which would make it simpler to transition without a medical diagnosis. 2. Rowling is concerned that easier transitions could affect access to female-only spaces and legal protections for women. 3. She opposes gender self-recognition and suggests that children and cisgender women are threatened by trans women and trans-positive messages.
In earlier drafts, we didn't have Sentence 2, so that the "without a medical diagnosis" in Sentence 1 led straight to Sentence 3 (her opposition). Now with the intervening Sentence 2, I'm not sure it's clear what she actually opposes (she said something along the lines, I forget and don't have time to look it up, call yourself what you want, live your life as you please, or whatever that bit was, so it's not self-recognition per se that she opposes); what she seems to oppose is giving access to certain spaces (that she views as necessary to protect women and children) to people who self-identify "without a medical diagnosis". Maybe this can be addressed by fiddling with the word "easier" to something more explicit to her concerns and what she has said (I believe that wording can be found in her essay, or maybe reviewing that New York Times opinion piece from someone who defended Rowling would provide some wording ideas). I hope I can find time to look more closely this evening to suggest wording, but someone else may get to it sooner. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 11:31, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
- PS, I agree we are close to installation, and will try tonight to dig up the newer sources I mentioned in discussion of Draft 7, but no promises; I am coming to sadly realize that the changes in the structure of my free time may be permanent; apologies again. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 11:37, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
- S Marshall thanks again for doing the work! It's great to see this & it looks great. Re the comma, suggest adding a "the" in front of "proposed changes" so as not to confuse that JKR is proposing the changes. SandyGeorgia, re self-recognition, Whited writes, page 7, "In late 2022 and early 2023, as Scotland considered its own gender identity reform, Rowling continued to be a vocal opponent of self-designation, especially for those in early adolescence." Victoria (tk) 13:42, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
- I made a suggestion about sentence 2 in the section above this, which would redistribute it. Does anyone have any commentary on my suggestion? We could keep or lose sentence 1 in my opinion - though I think it's largely redundant to later comments - but sentence 2 is kind of a mess. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs. 14:09, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
- (Also, as said above, footnote [a] is clearly misplaced as things stand. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs. 14:13, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
- Now tweaked to draft 8.1.—S Marshall T/C 16:47, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
- Just passing by, great work by everyone. I noted a small issue on the third paragraph: "Criticism came from Harry Potter fansites, LGBT charities, and leading actors of the Wizarding World. and Human Rights Campaign." There is a punctuation mark after Wizarding World that is misplaced. Maybe also change one "and" to something else then. Vestigium Leonis (talk) 10:20, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
- Fixed in draft 8.1a.—S Marshall T/C 12:03, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
- @S Marshall: I have one more minor point: "is concerned" feels like loaded language. How about just a neutral "says" or "stated". I still think "legal protections for women" is vague, but later in the paragraph it matters less. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs. 17:53, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
- Loaded how? Do you doubt that she's concerned about those things?—S Marshall T/C 23:18, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
- I also share this, uh, concern with Adam.
- My concern here is that "is concerned about X" implies that X is true. So when we say that
we're implicitly saying thatRowling is concerned that easier transitions could affect access to female-only spaces and legal protections for women
, a statement we haven't sourced and couldn't say in Wikivoice. Loki (talk) 23:44, 24 June 2024 (UTC)easier transitions could affect access to female-only spaces and legal protections for women
- Weird. Must be an ENGVAR thing, because "Rowling is concerned about X" doesn't suggest any truth value for X in English English. Anyway, I certainly don't love "says" or "stated". Always use a specific verb in preference to a generic one whenever you can: specific verbs don't just convey more information in a similar word count, they also make your sentence clearer and more engaging. Rowling worries? Fears? Believes?—S Marshall T/C 00:22, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- "Believes" seems better. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs. 00:43, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Weird. Must be an ENGVAR thing, because "Rowling is concerned about X" doesn't suggest any truth value for X in English English. Anyway, I certainly don't love "says" or "stated". Always use a specific verb in preference to a generic one whenever you can: specific verbs don't just convey more information in a similar word count, they also make your sentence clearer and more engaging. Rowling worries? Fears? Believes?—S Marshall T/C 00:22, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Loaded how? Do you doubt that she's concerned about those things?—S Marshall T/C 23:18, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
- @S Marshall: I have one more minor point: "is concerned" feels like loaded language. How about just a neutral "says" or "stated". I still think "legal protections for women" is vague, but later in the paragraph it matters less. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs. 17:53, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
- Fixed in draft 8.1a.—S Marshall T/C 12:03, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
- Just passing by, great work by everyone. I noted a small issue on the third paragraph: "Criticism came from Harry Potter fansites, LGBT charities, and leading actors of the Wizarding World. and Human Rights Campaign." There is a punctuation mark after Wizarding World that is misplaced. Maybe also change one "and" to something else then. Vestigium Leonis (talk) 10:20, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
Forstater times 3
Working on redundancy:
- Current proposal: Friction over Rowling's gender-critical writings surged in 2019 when she defended Maya Forstater. When Forstater's employment contract was not renewed after Forstater shared gender-critical views, Rowling wrote that
- --> Less repetitive: Friction over Rowling's gender-critical writings surged in 2019 when she defended Maya Forstater, whose employment contract was not renewed after she shared gender-critical views. Rowling wrote that
Or something similar to the reduce the repetition of Forstater's name three times. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:24, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
- Fixed in draft 8.2.—S Marshall T/C 14:35, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
- Thx! Still working through ... SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:37, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
But sales of books grew, and more
Why was this sentence cut? There's more, see for example "In fact, book sales increased, Universal Studios is expanding Harry Potter World, a TV series is in the works, Maya Forstater was exonerated, etc ... "
that we discussed, now back in Archive 20. If we need more sources, they can be added, but by leaving out that the popularity of her work continues, while expressing that her image or reputation has been impacted, we are losing some neutrality. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:37, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
- That paragraph wasn't flowing right with that sentence, but on reflection I agree that we need to put it back in... somewhere. Thinking cap on.—S Marshall T/C 14:41, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
- OK, I'll try to revisit this after the rest of my morning work (I finally have a fully free day!). SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:48, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
- I've tentatively added it to a fifth paragraph?—S Marshall T/C 14:57, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
- This format change explodes my brain; could be do this another way ? Like, just add the suggested para here ? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:04, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
- The last sentence of the 8.3 version (
Whited asserted in 2024 that Rowling's sometimes...
) could be split off into its own paragraph (as the fifth and final paragraph of the section), and the new paragraph in the 8.3 version (Despite the controversy, Rowling's work is increasingly successful...
) can then be placed right after the Whited sentence (in the same paragraph). Some1 (talk) 22:50, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
- The last sentence of the 8.3 version (
- OK, now that I think I've been able to pick out the new para, I'm (always) concerned that we're adding text that isn't necessarily scholarly sourced ... the one sentence that was there before was from Pape. Let me continue my perusal of new sources to see what else comes up, but generally, I'm not fond of the new para, and I'm more concerned that by having a three-column proposal, we will confuse subsequent editors/readers of the page. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:07, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
- I also suspect we might find a way to work that one sentence in to the (now) third para, after examining new sources. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:10, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
I don't love the new paragraph, because it feels a little off-topic: it's not about Rowling's views directly, and it's not really comparing Rowling's book sale increase to how COVID-19 affected other book sales. I don't hate it enough to object to the draft, but speculation about a series two years out and book sales increasing (Compared to what, 2019? Because I doubt they reached original release sales numbers) during a pandemic doesn't feel that relevant. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs. 17:57, 24 June 2024 (UTC)- Actually, checking this, I have major objections to the sales increasing language. See below. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs. 05:14, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- After seeing the context below, I also object to this line. It's hard to say what her sales increasing means in a context where everyone's sales increased. If her sales increased less than everyone else's, it's still possible the controversy hurt sales. And we don't get a comparison in the sources we have. Loki (talk) 05:34, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Actually, checking this, I have major objections to the sales increasing language. See below. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs. 05:14, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- I also suspect we might find a way to work that one sentence in to the (now) third para, after examining new sources. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:10, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
- This format change explodes my brain; could be do this another way ? Like, just add the suggested para here ? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:04, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
- I've tentatively added it to a fifth paragraph?—S Marshall T/C 14:57, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
- OK, I'll try to revisit this after the rest of my morning work (I finally have a fully free day!). SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:48, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
Flow issues and redundancy in first para
As discussed above by me, and under Draft 7 by Adam Cuerden, there are still flow problems in the first para, and there is a lot of repetition as well as duplication in footnotes. And that leads to a (slight) misrepresentation of her position. And there are missing links and definitions (eg, we manage to never link transitioning).
I suggest simplifying the whole thing, while by the way, attributing Duggan's opinion, which is slightly at odds with Rowling's own words:
- Concerned that easier gender transitions could affect access to female-only spaces and legal protections for women,[1][2][3] Rowling opposes proposed legislation[a] to advance gender self-recognition and make it simpler to transition without a medical diagnosis.[8][9][b] According to English professor Jennifer Duggan, Rowling suggests that children and cisgender women are threatened by trans women and trans-positive messages.[11]
Sources
|
---|
References
Notes
|
I'll work next on the sources I promised to explore for the third para of Draft 8. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:48, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
- I'd say "Rowling believes" is better than "Rowling suggests" in your last sentence: "suggests" is a little loaded, insofar as it presents the statement after it as a reasonable idea to suggest; we need to avoid any impression that Wikipedia agrees with very explicitly transphobic comments. Like, this is vague connotation stuff, but it still reads very wrong. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs. 04:55, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
Citation overkill ?
How did we end up with four sources citing "human rights campaign"? Did the citations get attached to the wrong bits here ? We shouldn't need four sources to cite criticism from Human Rights Campaign, so could we re-distribute the citations to what they are actually sourcing?
- Criticism came from Harry Potter fansites, LGBT charities, leading actors of the Wizarding World,[37][38][39] and Human Rights Campaign.[8][40][41][42]
SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:58, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
Paragraph 3 re-do proposal
As I've mentioned, there are plenty of new sources to cite this content; since I don't have full journal access, I've only listed some at the end of this section, hoping that others will review and decide which to use. And I'd combine the bit we lost at #But sales of books grew, and more in to this paragraph. My (original) concern was that we not lose the enduring content about the debates the controversy has generated as spillover. Suggest Paragraph 3 thusly (once new sources are chosen from list below and substituted in): SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:09, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
- Rowling's views have fuelled discussions about feminist views on transgender topics,[1][2][3] freedom of speech,[4][5] academic freedom,[6] cancel culture[7] and the relationship of authors to their fandom;[8] and prompted declarations of support for transgender people from the literary,[9] arts[10] and culture sectors.[11] Criticism came from Harry Potter fansites, LGBT charities, leading actors of the Wizarding World,[12][13][14] and Human Rights Campaign.[15][16][17][18] After Kerry Kennedy expressed "profound disappointment" in her views, Rowling returned the Ripple of Hope Award given to her by the Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights organisation.[19] She has been the target of widespread condemnation[20][7][21] and insults, including death threats.[22][23] Despite the controversy, sales of Harry Potter books grew during the COVID-19 lockdown.[24][25] Some performers and feminists have supported her,[26][27] and figures from the arts world criticised "hate speech directed against her".[28]
Sources
|
---|
References
Notes |
Divided feminists
- This scholarly source ("Feminism and Support for the Transgender Movement in Britain", American Sociological Association) cited the Ferber piece in the New Statesman about JKR.
- Victoria, are you able to look in to this ? "Feminist Lesbians as Anti-Trans Villains: A Comment on Worthen and Elaboration. By: Burt, Callie H., Sexuality & Culture, 10955143, Feb2023, Vol. 27, Issue 1.
- "Worthen thus asserts that GC feminists "are opposed to the recognition of trans women as women and instead, opt into sex essentialist beliefs that reinforce cisnormativity," citing Kathleen Stock, J.K. Rowling, and me, among other GC feminists (whom she labels 'TERFs')[15] (p.2). While these may be simple descriptions of our arguments, they are misguided."
- "Therefore, any questioning or resistance—or even support for the right of others to raise questions or concerns—about negotiating sex-based and gender-identity-based claims is frequently met with hostile, even threatening, responses and derogation. This should not be unexpected; as Manne explains, misogyny targets and blows out of proportion even small violations, which are made out to be indicative of women's bad character, in general.[32] Thus women, like J.K. Rowling, who explicitly support human rights for transwomen, profess compassion and sympathy, and support non-discrimination protections for transwomen in all sex-neutral contexts (which is most contexts), can be cast as horrible 'hateful TERFs' and subject to harassment, violent threats, no-platforming with wholesale disregard for the actual substance of their beliefs and actions. Remarkably, Worthen's article, like much trans-activist feminist scholarship, is silent about the "anti-GC feminist activism" including activists' publicly expressed physical threats, harassment, and celebration of intimidating sloganeering and signs: "kill TERFs, trans power". This is because of misogyny."
- Seems to be available via Springer, which can be found on TWL. Victoria (tk) 17:32, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
Freedom of speech and cancel culture
- Callie H. Burt above.
- Keohane, https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/00027642241240337 Cancel Culture Rhetoric and Moral Conflict in Contemporary Democratic Societies
- Cancel Culture: Myth or Reality? By: Norris, Pippa, Political Studies, 00323217, Feb2023, Vol. 71, Issue 1
- You are Cancelled': Emergence of Cancel Culture in the Digital Age. Lokhande, Gayatri; Natu, Sadhana. IAHRW International Journal of Social Sciences Review. 2022, Vol. 10 Issue 2, p252-259. 8p.
- How Cancel Culture Tarnishes Morals Clauses and What to do About It. Peterson, Jordan M. Vermont Law Review. 2022, Vol. 47 Issue 2, p220-247.
- Agonism in the arena: Analyzing cancel culture using a rhetorical model of deviance and reputational repair. Academic Journal. Hobbs, Mitchell John; O'Keefe, Sarah. Public Relations Review. Mar2024, Vol. 50 Issue 1, pN.PAG-N.PAG. 1p. DOI: 10.1016/j.pubrev.2023.102420.
- HARM AND HEGEMONY: THE DECLINE OF FREE SPEECH IN THE UNITED STATES. TURLEY, JONATHAN. Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy. Jul2022, Vol. 45 Issue 2, p571-701
- Pape (already cited in article)
- Burt should be available via TWL on Springer.
- Keohane, ditto but on Sage
- Norris shows pdf available (g-scholar) - here it is
- Lokande seems to be hosted via Ebsohost. So, again, TWL
- Peterson is hosted by HeinOnline - not sure whether TWL has but it's worth looking
- Hobbs & O'Keefe >> looks like there's a pdf link right there on g-scholar.
- Turley > not sure I'd use him.
- Sorry am up to my eyeballs, house renovations, health, travel, etc. Hopefully will surface mid-Julyish. Victoria (tk) 17:45, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
Relationship of author to fandom
- Taylor https://link.springer.com/article/10.1057/s41290-024-00216-w Harry Potter and the ‘Death of the Actor’: reimagining fusion in cultural pragmatics
Academic freedom
- Free Speech in Academia. WOOD, PETER W. Texas Review of Law & Politics. Summer2023, Vol. 27 Issue 3, p761-787. 27p.
Discussion of paragraph 3 redo proposal
That's all for me; I do think once we nail down these few bits, we will be ready for install. Victoriaearle my list of possible sources above could benefit from your scrutiny, choice, etc. I will again be very busy tomorrow and Wednesday, so done for now -- I ran out of time to cough up all the sources I saw earlier, but hope this is enough to capture the idea of just mentioning the spillover enduring issues raised. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:09, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
- "These few bits"? Well, I'm overwhelmed. Someone else's turn to do draft #9, I think.—S Marshall T/C 23:24, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
The "sales increased in 2020" problem
First off, nothing I'm going to say is an attack on anyone's research for Wikipedia. But... there's context that puts really strong doubts on seemingly-sensible interpretations of what are probably true facts. I'm going to focus on the Guardian article first, because Pape uses it as the source for her figures (with a minor mistake):
I did some checking, and book sales just generally shot up a lot during COVID, and have continued to increase since. So that sales of her books increased is largely meaningless without comparing it to other trends. This article in particular is from July 2020, which means it's 3 months into the first British lockdown and covers the UK alone, annd is dealing with an increase in purchases during lockdown. That's not a big timescale. It's also very early in the J.K. Rowling transgender views controversy, so one can question whether she even had enough bad press at that point - while people were distracted by lockdowns - for a noticable change in the first place.
In short, it's almost certainly true, but it may not be at all meaningful, and, in the absence of comparison with the baseline, probably shouldn't appear here.
So, let's go on to Pape. Pape is using the Guardian source from 2020, and (mildly) misquotes her source: she says sales of Harry Potter are up 28%, the actual source is that sales of children's books sold by Bloomberg - a class that includes Harry Potter - are up 27% - and sales as a whole were up 28%. (Frankly, though, the Guardian article is written in a sufficiently convoluted way that that Pape's mistake is a pretty easy one to make.) More problematic is the timeline aspect: As said above, the Guardian article is from 2020, before Rowling had done that much. Pape may be writing in 2022, but if the source for her statistics is from 2020, and she doesn't have other sources, it doesn't push us beyond 2020, and hits all the issues mentioned above.
(This doesn't affect Pape as a source much beyond this issue; Pape is a 2022 source, but only cites things from 2021 and earlier. Pape may be out-of-date for some information, but I don't object to using her as a source where she's not out-of-date.
The framing of this fact is where everything falls apart: "Despite the controversy, Rowling's work is increasingly successful" - again, this is an interpretation that appears in the Guardian article (it's only implied in Pape) - but we can't possibly put that in present tense. We have no sources for booksales after July 2020. That's in no way enough to make statements about her success. The sourcing is, quite simply, far too outdated.
As for the other bit of that paragraph: As far as I'm aware, the HBO Harry Potter series hasn't even been cast yet, it's not meant to appear until 2026. We have no evidence of it being successful; it doesn't even exist yet. One could instead say something like, "Production of the Fantastic Beasts series was cancelled after the third film proved to be the lowest grossing film based on Rowling's work." and use it to imply the exact opposite.
Forbes states that American sales of Harry Potter in the same period lagged behind increases in other children's book purchases. "As the industry as a whole experiences a surge of print sales, Rowling’s works, and sales of Harry Potter books (including licensed titles), have seen a sudden drop. This reported U.S. print book sales drop in June coincides with controversy around tweets and statements made by Rowling via Twitter from June 6 onward."
It's honestly kind of awkward: Reports of profits by Bloomberg inevitably mention Harry Potter, but then give stats for Bloomberg as a whole. [2], say.
This is the best evidence I've seen for any sort of Potter success, but it doesn't include any numbers related to sales, just relative popularity (hit #1 in children's book sales in 2023 for the first time since 2002). - and, again, that's only British sales.
We need more recent sources on sales of Harry Potter - which include America and other countries - to say much of anything. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs. 05:07, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Luckily, the Guardian article doesn't just quote sales figures for the children's books division. The journalist also interviewed the boss of Bloomsbury, hence:
The company, which publishes all of the author’s Harry Potter books, said its consumer publishing arm grew sales by 28% to £31.4m. The children’s division grew by 27% to £18.7m, with Bloomsbury highlighting Rowling’s titles as a “bestseller”... Nigel Newton, the Bloomsbury chief executive, said the books had remained bestsellers since Rowling published her views on her website last month. “Harry Potter has been very popular with families at home reading to each other and has been marvellous throughout this period,” he said.
- The claim that these figures aren't meaningful stumbles over the fact that a scholarly source found them meaningful enough to remark on.
- The claim that these figures are outdated stumbles over the fact that these are the latest figures published by a reliable source.
- The Forbes article from June 2020 (a) predates the Guardian one, (b) appears in no scholarly source, and (c) doesn't account for audio books or ebooks. The ebook was released for free during this period which will have affected sales.—S Marshall T/C 07:56, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- TL;DR: In the game of Wikipedia, doing your own research to counteract a scholarly source counts as a foul.—S Marshall T/C 08:24, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
The book sales sentence could be revised to make it more general; something along the lines of: Despite the controversy, the Harry Potter books have remained popular,[1] and the game Hogwarts Legacy became a commercial success and received favorable reviews and praise from critics despite the calls for boycotts by the trans community.[2] (could use some wordsmithing) Some1 (talk) 11:59, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
References
|
---|
References
|
- Agree with Some1 and S Marshall on the original research aspect of refuting Pape, but also, please reference #Paragraph 3 re-do proposal in terms of any reframing needed. I would not use the sentence "Despite the controversy, Rowling's work is increasingly successful" at all, and if you track back to my original proposal, the idea was (to maintain neutrality) to convey that plenty of Rowling's work is moving forward (particularly the theme parks moving forward). Without getting in to any OR about book sales etc during Covid, the original sentence stated a simple fact (her products are not losing popularity). SandyGeorgia (Talk) 12:42, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- I agree it's OR with Pape, but I'm not suggesting material for the article, I'm reviewing a source. We have a duty to not put misleading or false material into our articles.
- Also, using present tense for facts sourced to 2020 is a problem. I think there's probably some evidence for Harry Potter remaining popular, but we can't use a source from 2020 and use the present tense. As I said, there's evidence they sold really well in 2023 (in Britain); if we could add in a source about America, at least, I'd buy it. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs. 12:55, 25 June 2024 (UTC)