this post was submitted on 26 Apr 2025
563 points (99.3% liked)

LGBTQ+

4645 readers
110 users here now

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
all 37 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Sibshops@lemm.ee 103 points 10 months ago (2 children)

Pedro is turning out to be the next Keanu Reeves.

[–] athairmor@lemmy.world 62 points 10 months ago

He’s a more confrontational Keanu Reeves. I don’t remember Keanu ever speaking out against assholes (I could be wrong?). Keanu seems to just quietly do nice shit.

[–] MummifiedClient5000@feddit.dk 21 points 10 months ago (2 children)

But who is Keanu Reeves going to be then?

[–] Khanzarate@lemmy.world 36 points 10 months ago

The previous Pedro Pascal, I guess.

[–] SkunkWorkz@lemmy.world 2 points 10 months ago

Giving pseudo scientists a platform.

[–] magnetosphere@fedia.io 59 points 10 months ago (3 children)

I read JK Rowling’s first (only?) essay on why she feels the way she does regarding transgender issues. It’s thoughtful, and partially based on personal trauma. While I still didn’t agree with her, I respected the fact that she actually researched and considered the issue, instead of just blindly lashing out at something that made her feel uncomfortable.

I don’t feel that way anymore. It was fine when she was simply explaining her feelings, but now she’s actively spewing hatred and cheering when people have their rights taken away. I lost any kind of respect or empathy for her years ago.

[–] LadyAutumn@lemmy.blahaj.zone 56 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (3 children)

The original essay she wrote was still very transphobic. Even if it seemed she had researched, she hadn't. The 'research' she was doing was following a genuinely insane bigot with a brain tumor who called for genocide of trans women, and a entitled upper middle class woman who really wanted to be able to deadname and misgender trans people at her contract job.

In that very first essay, she stated that trans women are a danger to cis women. She started from a position of hatred. All she has done is become more vulgar and less subtle. She is a threat to the existence of transgender people, and she has been since the very first day. The transgender community was pointing out how far gone she was on day one.

Here's an article that talks about what she said and why it was wrong in depth. The truth of the matter is that the response to that essay should have been a loud and resounding condemnation, but it wasn't.

I have been sexually assaulted before, too. I've never used what happened to me as justification to attack the rights of vulnerable minorities. The studies show overwhelmingly that the majority of women will be sexually abused in one way or another multiple times throughout their lives. And yet not every cis woman feels hate towards trans people. Many cis women support trans women. The majority of my friends are cis women, both queer and not. All of them support my rights. The majority of them have also been assaulted before by men. It's entirely irrelevant to the discussion, trans women are not men. The only possible justification there is that AMAB people are biologically rapists? Like there's something innate to the Y chromosome that makes you a rapist? Which is an absolutely wild way to view the world and the problem of sexual violence against women. Totally ignorant of why men get away with sexual assault so often. It's not genetics. It's entirely our society and culture that allows that to happen.

[–] moonlight@fedia.io 21 points 10 months ago

Yeah I just skimmed the essay, and it's pretty bad. There's a lot of false claims, a lot of misunderstandings and misrepresentations, and a lot of thinly veiled transphobic phrases and remarks.

It just comes across as very dishonest to me. Although maybe she actually thinks she is being fair, thoughtful and caring, who knows.

[–] magnetosphere@fedia.io 11 points 10 months ago

Thank you for pointing out what I didn’t pick up on. I was just beginning to educate myself on transgender issues at the time, so there are probably a lot of problems with the essay that I simply missed. I haven’t reread it since that first time, and I don’t want to.

It may have taken me a bit longer, but at least we’ve come to the same conclusion: Rowling is full of shit.

[–] NickwithaC@lemmy.world 23 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I think most of us if you were asked to name a very evil regime would think of Nazi Germany. … I wanted Harry to leave our world and find exactly the same problems in the Wizarding world. So you have to the intent to impose a hierarchy, you have bigotry, and this notion of purity, which is a great fallacy, but it crops up all over the world. People like to think themselves superior and that if they can pride themselves on nothing else, they can pride themselves on perceived purity. … The Potter books in general are a prolonged argument for tolerance, a prolonged plea for an end to bigotry, and I think it's one of the reasons that some people don't like the books

JK Rowling, 2009

Dress however you please. Call yourself whatever you like. Sleep with any consenting adult who’ll have you. Live your best life in peace and security. But force women out of their jobs for stating that sex is real? #IStandWithMaya #ThisIsNotADrill

JK Rowling 2019

It took 10 years to turn her.

https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/J._K._Rowling

[–] cupcakezealot@lemmy.blahaj.zone 49 points 10 months ago

pedro: people perceive you as somewhat...

jk rowling: tempestuous?

pedro: "heinous bitch" is the term used most often. you might wanna work on that.

[–] OrteilGenou@lemmy.world 32 points 10 months ago (2 children)
[–] massive_bereavement@fedia.io 22 points 10 months ago

Drink more water

[–] mrslt@lemmy.world 10 points 10 months ago

There's a cream for that.

[–] oftheair@lemmy.blahaj.zone 21 points 10 months ago (4 children)

Funny that it's the guardian reporting on this considering how transphobic they are.

[–] ToastedPlanet@lemmy.blahaj.zone 20 points 10 months ago (1 children)

It is the US version. 🤷‍♀️

[–] oftheair@lemmy.blahaj.zone 11 points 10 months ago

Ah, right, yeah, historically interestingly they have been less transphobic. They even called the UK version out once.

[–] VeryInterestingTable@lemm.ee 12 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Who knows, maybe in their mind it makes Pedro look bad?

[–] oftheair@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 10 months ago

Yeah, this was our thinking based on the headline alone.

[–] Glytch@lemmy.world 9 points 10 months ago (2 children)

I think they're trying to smear Pedro. They refer to his tweet as an attack and bring up his trans sister twice, implying that he only cares because his family is affected. The language they use to talk about JKR is, by contrast, much more sympathetic.

[–] oftheair@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 10 months ago

Ah, makes sense. Yeah, we got that feeling from the title alone as it seemed very matter a fact, not really standing up for him. Fuck the guardian.

[–] Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 10 months ago

"haha look at this dolt standing up for his family, what a fucking loser! imagine having empathy lmfaooooooo"

[–] powermaker450@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I missed something didn't I?

[–] oftheair@lemmy.blahaj.zone 12 points 10 months ago

all mainstream newspapers and tv news etc in the UK is transphobic. They may be subtle or more open about it depending on their apparent political leanings, but the UK's guardian has said some pretty transphobic things in the past and we don't have much hope they'll stop doing so, especially now.

[–] apotheotic@beehaw.org 15 points 10 months ago

He's right, you know

[–] birdiebop@lemmy.world 11 points 10 months ago