XPost: alt.buddha.short.fat.guy, alt.transgendered, soc.support.transgendered   
   XPost: alt.fantasy, rec.arts.sf.written   
   From: dalton@nfld.com   
      
   On Jan 18, 2023, Julian wrote on alt.buddha.short.fat.guy   
   (in article ):   
      
   > On 18/01/2023 12:40, Karlok B wrote:   
   > > “Belief in biological sex has been redefined as bigotry. Standing up for   
   > > women’s sex-based rights has been rebranded as transphobia. So   
   > > Rowling’s perfectly normal views, which are likely shared by most people   
   > > out there, can be talked about as hate crimes”. (The Spectator)   
   >   
   > The Speccie is pay-walled and most residents of absfg   
   > have exhausted their free sample so here's the text...   
   >   
   > The crusade to erase JK Rowling continues. The latest ruse of the   
   > Rowlingphobes is to scrub her name from her own books. Yes, they now   
   > want to make even the Harry Potter universe a Rowling-free zone.   
   >   
   > A ‘book artist’ in Toronto by the name of Laur Flom has set himself the   
   > task of memory-holing Rowling. He is rebinding Harry Potter books,   
   > giving them new covers that make no mention of the witch’s name, and   
   > even removing her name from the copyright and title pages inside.   
   >   
   > The aim, he says, is to ‘help out’ people who are fans of Harry Potter   
   > but who have an ethical issue with Ms Rowling. ‘The project is spurred   
   > by her transphobia’, he says. In short, Rowling believes in biological   
   > sex, and thus she must be unpersoned. For a cool £140, you can purchase   
   > one of Flom’s lovingly purged Potter books.   
   >   
   > Imagine the kind of people who’ll be buying these morally disinfected   
   > tomes. Forking out £140 just so you can hold in your hand a Potter novel   
   > that makes no reference to the woman who invented and wrote that entire   
   > world – that’s some serious commitment to cancel culture.   
   >   
   > We are witnessing the unpersoning of JK Rowling. There is a sinister and   
   > authoritarian impulse behind all this   
   >   
   > This might just be the nadir of the safe-space mentality. It seems some   
   > people are so emotionally fragile that they’re willing to spend big   
   > bucks to be forcefielded against any utterance of the name Rowling. She   
   > really has become Voldemort to the right-on – she who must not be named,   
   > lest evil spirits, or just bad feelings, be conjured forth.   
   >   
   > We are witnessing the unpersoning of JK Rowling. Alongside Flom’s   
   > cleansed Potter books, we’ve also seen Rowling being ‘left out’ of a   
   > reunion of the makers and stars of the Harry Potter films. Her   
   > unutterable name was downplayed in a trailer for a Fantastic Beasts   
   > movie, another fantasy franchise she is responsible for.   
   >   
   > The Boswells School in Essex dropped her name from one of its houses. It   
   > had six houses ‘represented by British citizens who have excelled’, but   
   > apparently Rowling’s excelling, her incomparable contribution to modern   
   > British culture and entertainment, counts for nought now that she has   
   > expressed verboten views. Her name was ditched because of her ‘comments   
   > and viewpoints surrounding trans people’.   
   >   
   > Even some of the Quidditch leagues have distanced themselves from   
   > Rowling. Yes, people really do play this Harry Potter sport involving   
   > broomsticks and balls. And last year they changed the name of the game   
   > from Quidditch to Quadball, partly for copyright reasons, and partly   
   > because of Rowling’s ‘anti-trans positions’.   
   >   
   > There is a sinister and authoritarian impulse behind all this Rowling   
   > erasure. It brings to mind Stalin’s airbrushing from photographs of   
   > party officials who had fallen out of favour. Like those problematic   
   > commissars, Rowling is judged to have thought and said unacceptable   
   > things. And so her name and likeness must be deleted.   
   >   
   > Some people really do want to see a great forgetting of JK Rowling. Last   
   > year the New York Times put out an advert that featured one of its   
   > readers ‘imagining Harry Potter without its creator’. This was the   
   > actual NYT saying this; engaging in the warped fantasy of keeping Harry   
   > Potter but erasing JK Rowling.   
   >   
   > There’s a dark urge here – to punish Rowling for her wrongthink. To make   
   > her name mud, to cast this wicked woman from polite society, to save   
   > poor Harry Potter from her demonic clutch, all because she thinks and   
   > says things that ‘good people’ disapprove of. It is remarkable that the   
   > Rowlingphobes seem blissfully unaware of how tyrannical they sound to   
   > the rest of us.   
   >   
   > And just what is it that Rowling has said that deserves such ceaseless   
   > opprobrium from those who fancy themselves on ‘the right side of   
   > history’? This is about her ‘transphobia’, says book defacer Laur Flom.   
   > The problem is her ‘anti-trans’ views, say those Quidditch nerds.   
   >   
   > What transphobia? What anti-trans views? Rowling has uttered not one   
   > hostile word about trans people. Who can forget when the journalist EJ   
   > Rosetta was commissioned to write a piece on the ‘20 Transphobic JK   
   > Rowling Quotes We’re Done With’ but then gave up when she couldn’t find   
   > a single anti-trans comment? ‘You’re burning the wrong witch’, said   
   > Rosetta.   
   >   
   > What has really happened is that belief in biological sex has been   
   > redefined as bigotry. Standing up for women’s sex-based rights has been   
   > rebranded as transphobia. So Rowling’s perfectly normal views, which are   
   > likely shared by most people out there, can be talked about as hate   
   > crimes when they are nothing of the kind.   
   >   
   > This is deeply authoritarian too, this cynical repackaging of dissent as   
   > ‘phobia’. Let’s not forget what a phobia is — a malady of the mind,   
   an   
   > irrational way of thinking. This echoes Stalin’s antics too, when   
   > problematic people were likewise written off as mad and consumed by   
   > spite. Rowling has nothing to be ashamed of, but her intolerant erasers do.   
   >   
   > Brendan O’Neill   
      
   From my “various matches” thread on alt.religion.druid , which is   
   linked to from the Eight Sexual Harmonics subpage of my   
   Salmon on the Thorns webpage if you want to peruse or search it:   
      
   "The Dalai Lama’s Oracle is straight-type-2-M in   
   my species and is a.s.r. and is thus compatible   
   e.g. with bif Zhang Ziyi (Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon),   
   though of course so am I.   
      
   Her husband Wang Feng is straight-type-1-M and   
   compatible e.g, with Santha Faiia, the spouse   
   of Graham Hancock.   
      
   Graham Hancock is bim and compatible e.g.   
   with straight-type-2-F J.K. Rowling, who had   
   an old lock that has been dissolved.   
      
   Her husband Neil Murray is gay so there   
   can be a bridged threesome of   
   J.K.--Graham--Neil. Any age differences   
   shouldn’t be significant after the evolution.”   
      
   New:   
   However her old lock has not yet been dissolved   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)