Firefangledfeathers (talk | contribs) →REACHING CONSENSUS: Reply Tag: Reply |
S Marshall (talk | contribs) Collapse |
||
(929 intermediate revisions by 59 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 = 18 |
||
|minthreadsleft = 1 |
|minthreadsleft = 1 |
||
|minthreadstoarchive = 1 |
|minthreadstoarchive = 1 |
||
|algo = old( |
|algo = old(20d) |
||
|archive = Talk:J. K. Rowling/Archive %(counter)d |
|archive = Talk:J. K. Rowling/Archive %(counter)d |
||
}} |
}} |
||
__TOC__ |
__TOC__ |
||
== |
==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) |
|||
: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) |
|||
So it seems over the last couple of days, some new content has been added to the [[J. K. Rowling#Transgender people|transgender people]] section of the article. Specifically two paragraphs have been added, {{diff2|1211988785|the first}} for a September 2020 incident of Rowling promoting an online store with transphobic merchandise according to the source, and the {{diff2|1211954388|other for}} a March 2024 incident between Rowling and [[India Willoughby]] which was {{diff2|1212413988|later reported}} to the police as a potential hate crime. |
|||
:I hope we'll defer the discussion of changing the structure/flow of the article until we are closer to having a nearly-final draft of the Transgender section (the structure reflects a chronology from the Smith and Kirk sources of how her success led to fame and wealth led to philanthropy led to her being more willing to speak out on issues ... but placement of content can be discussed later). [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 12:04, 22 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
=== First draft === |
|||
Thoughts on whether we should keep one or both of these additions? On the one hand, it goes back to issues raised during the FAR about content being added piecemeal over time, and an undue emphasis on [[WP:RECENTISM]]. On the other, the spate between Rowling and Willoughby does seem to be an escalation of what she's previously been heavily criticised for. I'm somewhat minded to remove the September 2020 incident, as from memory it wasn't remarked on in any of the scholarly sources we reviewed at the FAR. Not so sure about the Willoughby stuff however. |
|||
{| 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> |
|||
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> |
|||
Pinging recently active FAR participants {{re|SandyGeorgia|Hog Farm|Czello|Firefangledfeathers|Bastun|Vanamonde93|Olivaw-Daneel|AleatoryPonderings|Johnbod|DrKay}} [[User:Sideswipe9th|Sideswipe9th]] ([[User talk:Sideswipe9th|talk]]) 19:21, 7 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:I agree about 2020. I think 2024 should go in, but perhaps without the police report, unless the police show any sign of taking the matter up. [[User:Johnbod|Johnbod]] ([[User talk:Johnbod|talk]]) 22:25, 7 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:The 2020 stuff should go. Links to a store that sells stuff is a weak link and AFAICS from the source, the t-shirt said "this witch doesn't burn" and the story would be more relevant if the t-shirt was clearly transphobic. I think the 2024 stuff should remain for now and be monitored. The "reported to police" aspect appeared in the titles of stories in The Times and The Telegraph, so isn't a minor aspect of the story as far as those newspapers consider it. But I agree if the report goes nowhere then that aspect should be dropped in the coming days. If you have several newspaper headlines in the national news that a BBC TV presenter has reported your comments to the police as a "hate crime" I think people would expect Wikipedia to mention that, for now. -- [[User:Colin|Colin]]°[[User talk:Colin|<sup>Talk</sup>]] 08:48, 8 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::Colin said it about as well as I would have. I'd support trimming the 2024 quoted material. [[User:Firefangledfeathers|Firefangledfeathers]] ([[User talk:Firefangledfeathers|talk]] / [[Special:Contributions/Firefangledfeathers|contribs]]) 15:10, 8 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::However, the section seems to be growing into a running commentary of what each side said about the other, which is very much not our purpose. Can we summarise this please. The relevant aspect is a summary of what JK Rowling said (and importantly how they said it) that provoked the complaint to the police. What JK Rowling has tweeted in response to that is pretty irrelevant really. This isn't an article on why these two people hate each other. -- [[User:Colin|Colin]]°[[User talk:Colin|<sup>Talk</sup>]] 16:10, 8 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::I trimmed. [[User:Firefangledfeathers|Firefangledfeathers]] ([[User talk:Firefangledfeathers|talk]] / [[Special:Contributions/Firefangledfeathers|contribs]]) 16:38, 8 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::Looking good. I think [[Special:PermaLink/1212586670#Transgender_people|what's currently in]] the article strikes a reasonable balance. Gives an overview of what the incident entails, and the responses to it from each party without going into too much detail about the particulars. I'm a little uneasy over the {{tq|"a man revelling in his..."}} quotation, but I think that's more to do with my own feelings surrounding the statement in general than whether it should or should not be summarised in some way. [[User:Sideswipe9th|Sideswipe9th]] ([[User talk:Sideswipe9th|talk]]) 18:01, 8 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::::Good. What, at the moment, is the notable aspect to this story? Is it that it escalated to the point where an official police complaint was made? Because surely a twitter spat in this topic domain and non-professionally-legal people making legal-sounding threats or legally iffy boasts is not news never mind [[WP:NOTNEWS]]. -- [[User:Colin|Colin]]°[[User talk:Colin|<sup>Talk</sup>]] 19:38, 8 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::According to a tweet from Willoughby [https://twitter.com/IndiaWilloughby/status/1766219683869450353 last night] the spat has been recorded as a [https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/non-crime-hate-incidents-code-of-practice/non-crime-hate-incidents-code-of-practice-on-the-recording-and-retention-of-personal-data-accessible non-crime hate incident], although that has yet to be reported/confirmed by any reliable sources. If that is confirmed, I suspect this could be perceived as a shift in rhetoric from Rowling, as I don't recall her targeting an individual in this manner before, and that may be picked up in the next round of scholarly sources. |
|||
:::::::Right now though, I think the noteworthiness is that this escalated to the point where a police complaint was made. I believe, from a quick Google search anyway, that this is the first time that her own actions have been reported to the police. It's relatively weak though, and we should probably assess this again at the end of next week to see if there's any indications of enduring coverage of it. |
|||
:::::::That said, from a quick look at Rowling's twitter feed, she's still tweeting about Willoughby so this may all wind up in court one way or the other. Even if we ultimately remove the current paragraph, we should probably keep an eye out for any follow-up actions. [[User:Sideswipe9th|Sideswipe9th]] ([[User talk:Sideswipe9th|talk]]) 22:05, 9 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:I'm the one who added the 2020 paragraph, just wanted to expand a bit and explain my reasoning. I've been following this controversy somewhat closely since the beginning, and I've felt for a while that this section puts a lot of weight (too much, in my opinion) on what she has ''publicly'' ''said'', while discounting the rest. Rowling has repeatedly engaged with people whose views on (against) trans people are much more explicit than hers, while also publicly saying stuff like "I know and love trans people", "My views have been misunderstood", "Trans people deserve peace and security", etc. Are such statements necessary in detailing her views? Absolutely. But, in my opinion, so is the rest. "Views" isn't "statements", and IMO there's more than enough evidence, even before her recent misgendering of India Willoughby, to suggest that her views don't align perfectly with her statements. An example: in 2018, a year before the Forstater case, she liked a tweet referring to trans women as "men in dresses". She later ''stated'' that she had meant to screenshot it, and her spokesperson called it a "middle-aged moment"[https://www.vox.com/culture/23622610/jk-rowling-transphobic-statements-timeline-history-controversy]. The problem with that defence is that, in the following six years, while Rowling's official stance was still somewhat nuanced, she liked, retweeted, followed dozens of other outspoken transphobes. Those can't all be middle-aged moments, and their accumulation is a significant (and, IMO, an underreported) reason as to why she's been criticized and referred to as transphobic. I think they should be treated as part of her views, along with her statements, even (and especially) when the two appear to contradict one another. As it stands now, I think the article is imbalanced and misrepresents, by omission, the criticism directed at her. This isn't me specifically advocating for the return of the 2020 incident (although I do think it's a notable example of what I mentioned), but for this larger issue to be addressed. [[User:WikiFouf|WikiFouf]] ([[User talk:WikiFouf|talk]]) 20:36, 9 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::The thing is, if what you just wrote above was text from a reliable source, we could cite this, but we can't just cite random events to build a case to the reader. The t-shirt thing is very week. She's bought a t-shirt and said where she got it from and that isn't the same as saying she agrees with 100% of all the merchandise and a long step from saying that because the shop is run by someone who is the founding member of something many view as transphobic Rowling actually secretly shares all their views. I've probably bought underpants from a shop run by people who make large donations to the Conservative party in the hope of future knighthoods but it doesn't mean I secretly love Sunak. Your complaint that these accumulated links is "underreported" is a classic [[WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS]] argument. We have to have reliable secondary sources joining these dots and if they don't then we can't just go pushing the dots onto the page in hope a pattern is clear to our reader.. -- [[User:Colin|Colin]]°[[User talk:Colin|<sup>Talk</sup>]] 18:41, 10 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::I agree with Colin here. A stronger argument could, in the future if it's covered by higher quality sources, be made on her recent [https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/jk-rowling-donates-70k-for-legal-challenge-on-defining-a-woman-73tkvwq0b £70,000 donation] to a legal challenge by [[For Women Scotland]] seeking to exclude trans women with gender recognition certificates from being considered as women under the Equality Act when applying the EA to women only shortlists for jobs. To me, that seems like a much stronger example of supporting a cause that many perceive to be transphobic. |
|||
:::However, I think we should wait for this to be covered by higher quality academic sources, as I'm fairly certain that this is the sort of thing that would be covered in an academic source about the change in her expressed viewpoints and actions over time. There have already been several papers published on the controversy surrounding her earlier words and actions on this issue, so this donation seems like the sort of thing that would be covered in a future paper. [[User:Sideswipe9th|Sideswipe9th]] ([[User talk:Sideswipe9th|talk]]) 19:24, 10 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::Oh yes, definitely agree that this is more notable than what I added. [[User:WikiFouf|WikiFouf]] ([[User talk:WikiFouf|talk]]) 23:47, 10 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::As I said myself, sure, her "middle-aged moments" can all be given benefit of the doubt in a vacuum, it's their accumulation that makes them notable. She [https://theweek.com/feature/1020838/jk-rowlings-transphobia-controversy-a-complete-timeline follows transphobes, liked transphobic tweets], and none of that made it into this section, even though that type of stuff formed the beginning of her whole controversy (as Rowling [https://www.jkrowling.com/opinions/j-k-rowling-writes-about-her-reasons-for-speaking-out-on-sex-and-gender-issues/ describes herself]). I agree with the need for quality secondary sources, but let's also not forget that this section should accurately summarize her views. Again, my concern is that, as it stands right now, this section only uses her own statements to reflect those views. |
|||
:::[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9132366/ This source], which is of good quality and is already used in the section, partly documents this accumulated smaller stuff that I'm referring to. Would be a worthy addition, IMO. [[User:WikiFouf|WikiFouf]] ([[User talk:WikiFouf|talk]]) 23:42, 10 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::Is this the right article for that level of detail though? [[Political views of J. K. Rowling]] seems like a more ideal target for that deep a summary. That's not to say there's not room for some sort of updated summary here, if the sourcing allows for that. The sourcing we have for that at the moment is circa 2022/23, so there is another 1 to 2 years of newer sourcing in theory. [[User:Sideswipe9th|Sideswipe9th]] ([[User talk:Sideswipe9th|talk]]) 23:40, 14 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::In the context of better documenting the progression of her views, I think that stuff would only be a detail if it wasn't what started the whole thing. Rowling herself writes about it at the start of [https://www.jkrowling.com/opinions/j-k-rowling-writes-about-her-reasons-for-speaking-out-on-sex-and-gender-issues/ "TERF Wars"] : "All the time I’ve been researching and learning, accusations and threats from trans activists have been bubbling in my Twitter timeline. This was initially triggered by a ‘like’." [[User:WikiFouf|WikiFouf]] ([[User talk:WikiFouf|talk]]) 22:56, 16 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::::Cool, these are points to eventually make in the [[#Second_paragraph_of_Transgender_people_section|discussion below]] on re-writing that part of the transgender people section. For now though, let's focus on finding all of the high quality sourcing that we could potentially use when re-writing that content. [[User:Sideswipe9th|Sideswipe9th]] ([[User talk:Sideswipe9th|talk]]) 00:49, 17 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:Seems we've got another new addition, after Rowling's commentary has moved from the Willoughby stuff to what [[The Forward]] ([https://forward.com/culture/592580/j-k-rowling-holocaust-denial-trans/ source]) [https://www.lgbtqnation.com/2024/03/jk-rowling-denies-transgender-persecution-during-the-holocaust/ LGBTQ Nation], and a few other sources are describing as holocaust denial. At this point, I'm thinking we remove the Willoughby stuff, as from a quick search further sourcing on it hasn't developed, and cautiously look at what sourcing develops for the holocaust denial commentary over the coming days. |
|||
:I'm concerned that the addition of each of these [[WP:RSBREAKING|breaking news]] is slowly bringing us back to the state the article was in, at least in part, prior to the FAR in 2022. There's also the question of, is this really the best article to put this exact content in? [[Political views of J. K. Rowling]] is a better place for that level of detail in the long run per [[WP:SUMMARY|summary style]]. [[User:Sideswipe9th|Sideswipe9th]] ([[User talk:Sideswipe9th|talk]]) 23:36, 14 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::@[[User:Sideswipe9th|Sideswipe9th]] @[[User:Victoria|Victoria]] I really don't get how her explicit denial of someone's transgender identity could be considered accessory in the context of a "Rowling's views on transgender identity" section. I understand that there might not be further sourcing yet, but some things are just inherently relevant, aren't they? It seems like they are, because there's a near full paragraph in the same section detailing the content of her "TERF Wars" essay and its content is exclusively backed by breaking news sources. No one demands further sourcing from that paragraph because it is, of course, inherently relevant to the section, so why are different standards applied elsewhere? [[User:WikiFouf|WikiFouf]] ([[User talk:WikiFouf|talk]]) 19:08, 16 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::The problem is that these are each individual incidents. They tell us nothing about how Rowling's views on transgender issues have developed over time. When we wrote that section [[Wikipedia_talk:Featured_article_review/J._K._Rowling/archive1/Archive_5#Workshopping_the_transgender_section|during the 2022 FAR]] we didn't [[Wikipedia_talk:Featured_article_review/J._K._Rowling/archive1/Archive_3#Transgender_people_section|really have the sources]] to give an overview of how her views had changed over time. So we did the best with what we had available, and that resulted in us highlighting two instances that multiple high quality sources drew attention to. |
|||
:::We're in a different place now, a lot has happened over the last two years, and there seems to be sourcing now available that would potentially let us do what we couldn't do before. As such, I've started a [[#Second_paragraph_of_Transgender_people_section|new discussion below]], with the end goal of re-writing the second paragraph of the transgender people section to one that more fully covers the shift in her views, from that [https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/12/style/jk-rowling-transgender-fans.html middle-aged moment] in 2018, to what we see today. We likely won't be able to cover the most recent demonstration of her views (ie, Willoughby and the Holocaust denial) because those are too recent to have been covered by the highest quality sources, but my instinct is that we will be able to give a broader overview of how her views and expressions have become more extreme over time. [[User:Sideswipe9th|Sideswipe9th]] ([[User talk:Sideswipe9th|talk]]) 19:33, 16 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::''They tell us nothing about how Rowling's views on transgender issues have developed over time.'' Neither does "TERF Wars", doesn't it? As rich a source as it is in the context of this section, it has a specific date on it, just like the Willoughby tweets. And yes, those tweets are an individual incident, but so is, for example, Rowling returning that humanitarian award. That event is backed by a single ''Guardian'' article — no secondary/scholarly source — therefore some editors at some point had to determine that it was relevant to this section. Why can't the same be done for the Willoughby incident, which I would argue is considerably more notable? |
|||
::::Great initiative on the new discussion. I'll just say I think restructuring the whole section, at least a bit, might be necessary when trying to better represent her shift in views. [[User:WikiFouf|WikiFouf]] ([[User talk:WikiFouf|talk]]) 22:46, 16 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::{{tq|Neither does "TERF Wars", doesn't it?}} I defer back to what I said earlier, we wrote that section with the sources we had available in 2022. I believe there is better sourcing available now, and finding and assessing those sources is where we should focus our effort for now. Once we have collated them, we can look at the full scope of the changes that are warranted. [[User:Sideswipe9th|Sideswipe9th]] ([[User talk:Sideswipe9th|talk]]) 22:57, 16 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::::''we wrote that section with the sources we had available'' |
|||
::::::If it was fine to cover other (less significant) topics with even a single reference from a news article, as pointed out, why is the following true? |
|||
::::::''We likely won't be able to cover the most recent demonstration of her views (ie, Willoughby and the Holocaust denial) because those are too recent to have been covered by the highest quality sources'' |
|||
::::::Her comments on Willoughby have been covered by numerous reputable news outlets. Sources covering them have a quality at least as high as those used in several other parts of the article. Surely if the sourcing was good enough to include those other topics, which have been discussed, the sourcing is also good enough to include Rowling's comments on Willoughby too. |
|||
::::::I think you want to use the highest quality sources available as references for new content in the article, and to use academic sources for this reason but also to enable broader coverage and context (including, on trans people, how her comments have changed over time) than would be available from individual news outlets. I completely understand your motivations in this regard. However, lots of the contents of the article at present - including in this section - fail to meet these criteria. It's inherently unfair to require new topics to meet them before being added without them also applying to topics already in the article. |
|||
::::::I think it's good that we're discussing the matter and hearing different views. I think further dialogue on exactly what should be included on this topic and future drafts will help us find a consensus to close the issue. Thanks again for your thoughts! [[User:13tez|13tez]] ([[User talk:13tez|talk]]) 23:45, 16 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::{{tq|It's inherently unfair to require new topics to meet them before being added without them also applying to topics already in the article.}} No. This is the [[Wikipedia_talk:Featured_article_review/J._K._Rowling/archive1/Archive_3#Best_sources_for_Transgender_people_section|exact same process]] we went through in January 2022 when building the content for that section. Every piece of content in that paragraph was driven primarily by a scholarly source. The citations to news sources, like The New York Times, or magazines like Vanity Fair, are used to augment the information from the scholarly sources where they are unclear, or to provide exact quotations where we felt they would be helpful. |
|||
:::::::If you review the [[Wikipedia_talk:Featured_article_review/J._K._Rowling/archive1/Archive_3#Best_sources_for_Transgender_people_section|January 2022 discussion in Archive 3]] you'll see that one of the first things we did was construct a list of all of the sources that would be helpful in writing that section. We then analysed and refined that list, eliminating some sources from consideration as part of that process. I'll quote now from the editor who lead the 2022 FAR {{tq|Since the article should/must employ [[Wikipedia:SS|summary style]], and there is a sub-article at [[Politics of J. K. Rowling#Transgender people]] where detail can be explored, we should not be using tweets or primary sources on this (main) article}}. |
|||
:::::::Now the sources you're discussing on the tweets involving Willoughby and the Holocaust are typically considered primary sources per [[WP:RSBREAKING]]. This is to be expected as the tweets themselves are a few days to a couple of weeks old. We don't know yet how either of those two incidents will be viewed in [[WP:10YT|5 to 10 years time]]. Maybe Rowling will continue on her current trajectory, and make more extreme comments over time. Maybe she'll change her mind, and apologise for these comments. We just don't know. This is why when we add content to an article, we rely on high quality secondary sources, as they typically provide an analysis and help put these events into a broader context. |
|||
:::::::These two incidents are too recent for ''any'' high quality source to have analysed them and put them into a broader context. With scholarly sources there is typically a lag time between when something happens, when an academic can write about it, and when that writing is published. That lag time can vary, I've seen it be as short as 3 months, or as long as 18. The exact duration depends on how long it takes the author to write, and how long it takes the paper to go through the peer-review process. I would not expect any high quality sources on either the Willoughby or Holocaust tweets until at least July-September, if not the end of the year. |
|||
:::::::And this is fine, [[WP:NOTNEWS|Wikipedia is not a breaking news service]]. Though we often have articles about current events, that's not typically what we're here for. |
|||
:::::::The reason why I keep referring back to the 2022 FAR is because, this is a [[WP:FA|featured article]]. That means it is written to a much higher and stricter standard than most of our other content, and that means we're much stricter on what sources can and cannot be used in the article. In 2022 we needed the intensive FAR because, in the [[Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/J._K._Rowling|15 years]] from when the article was first promoted, not only had the FA standards changed but so too had the quality of the content in the article. Countless good faith editors had made significant additions and changes to the article over that time period, and a lot of them weren't written to the FA standard. The quality of the content on Rowling's views on transgender people in particular was quite low, because it inevitably followed the same cycle we're seeing right now. Rowling would say something highly controversial, and editors in good faith would rush to add that to the article based on whatever [[WP:RSBREAKING|breaking news coverage]] was available at the time. |
|||
:::::::The reason why you're seeing resistance on immediate changes from myself and other editors who participated in the 2022 FAR is because, we frankly don't want to have to go through that process again. I was only directly involved with that process for one section, the transgender people section, because LGBT+ issues are where my primary editing focus lies, and that process was exhausting. It took 4 months for the article to be re-written from top to bottom, based on the highest quality sourcing available. We have an interest in keeping the article as a FA, and that means taking a slow, methodical approach when discussing content additions and changes. That's why I've started the various draft discussions, because I'm familiar with that process and know what's involved in keeping this content to a reasonably high quality. |
|||
:::::::Now I realise this may seem frustrating or confusing to newer editors, and those unfamiliar with writing content for featured articles. I went through that confusion myself when I saw the start of the 2022 FAR, and asked myself more than a few times why the standards for inclusion of content and sourcing were suddenly so much higher. Writing FAs is tough, and the reason for all of this is lain out at [[WP:FACR]]. [[User:Sideswipe9th|Sideswipe9th]] ([[User talk:Sideswipe9th|talk]]) 00:38, 17 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::::::Hey @[[User:Sideswipe9th|Sideswipe9th]], thank you for the continued dialogue. |
|||
::::::::''Every piece of content in that paragraph was driven primarily by a scholarly source.'' |
|||
::::::::I think these are the points I didn't understand until now (please correct me if I'm wrong): you think that Rowling's comments on Willoughby should be added, if anywhere, to the second paragraph in the section on her views on transgender people, which is currently foremost supported by academic sources (maybe except "Rowling responded... sex is real"?), and you don't want that point to change because academia can give a broader perspective. You also don't want to change it now, only to have to rewrite it again later? |
|||
::::::::I certainly agree that academia would be preferable and that it would allow broader perspective and deeper analysis than news articles. I've been looking more widely at the article (and section) as a whole, in which news articles are used as the foremost - and sometimes only - source. It seems somewhat artificial to me, however, to hold this particular paragraph to requiring references from academia (maybe except "Rowling responded... sex is real"?) but not the rest of the article. I suppose you think this because you think that paragraph is the natural place for these comments, and you would want to re-write it later to return to academic sourcing, and you don't want to repeat that work? Assuming I'm right there, I think I know understand your position, which is progress. |
|||
::::::::I think my position on this would be that because Wikipedia is [[WP:IMPERFECT]] and a [[WP:Work in progress]], further relevant topics should be added (with consensus) before full re-writes are made. I do, however, recognise the value of a re-write of the type you are proposing, to give the change over time in her comments, up to and including her most recent ones, and give a broader perspective when they're discussed in academia. I also believe, conversely, we shouldn't wait until a topic is discussed in academia, which as has been mentioned will take months, to include if it can already be referenced from other reliable sources. |
|||
::::::::You pointed me to section 1.c of [[WP:FACR]] before while explaining references should come from academia, but it does not say this. It certainly doesn't say (or imply) that articles from reputable news outlets cannot be used. Is this a convention or written somewhere else? News articles are used as the only references in other parts of the same section and article, as I've discussed, and maybe even in this paragraph in "Rowling responded... sex is real". Therefore, I don't think a lack of sources covering this topic from academia are a reason to exclude it from this article, even though it is a featured article. |
|||
::::::::''we should not be using tweets or primary sources on this (main) article. Now the sources you're discussing on the tweets involving Willoughby and the Holocaust are typically considered primary sources per WP:RSBREAKING.'' |
|||
::::::::None of the sources I provided as examples were tweets. They are all news articles. I agree that it makes sense to use secondary sources on her comments to help us provide broader context. I had a look at [[WP:RSBREAKING]], which says: |
|||
::::::::"All breaking news stories, without exception, are primary sources" and "Breaking-news reports often contain serious inaccuracies...It is better to wait a day or two after an event before adding details to the encyclopedia, than to help spread potentially false rumors. This gives journalists time to collect more information and verify claims, and for investigative authorities to make official announcements." |
|||
::::::::The implication here is that news reports released within a day or two of an event are considered primary sources on that event. Secondary sources would include news reports released after this amount of time, when the facts will have become clear, and articles written beforehand which journalists have had time to review and correct as required. I think this policy makes sense for the reasons described, and I also think it makes sense that featured articles are stricter about requiring sources to be secondary or tertiary in this manner. |
|||
::::::::JK Rowling's first tweets in which she misgendered Willoughby were made on {{Date|4 March 2024}}, {{time interval|4 March 2024|abbr=off|show=d}} ago. This is comfortably past the timescale [[WP:RSBREAKING]] sets out to define breaking news and the time needed to review facts. I think, therefore, that news articles covering these comments have now had ample time for review and correction, so should not be considered breaking news (and therefore a primary source). We should also consider that this topic is not an event passed by word of mouth (which could lead to inaccuracies): Rowling's statements were publicly available for every journalist to review personally. This contrasts with some of the examples set out in [[WP:RSBREAKING]]. Moreover, [https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/jk-rowling-reported-to-police-for-misgendering-trans-tv-newsreader-6bzj0llwb The Times covered Rowling's comments after this two-day threshold], so, per [[WP:RSBREAKING]], their article(s) wouldn't be considered breaking news so wouldn't be considered a primary source. Therefore, we do have sources that are both reliable and secondary to use as references for her comments on Willoughby. |
|||
::::::::''Now the sources you're discussing on the tweets involving Willoughby and the Holocaust'' |
|||
::::::::I'm not discussing her comments on trans people in Nazi Germany. As I've said elsewhere, although I think they are significant, they haven't received sufficient coverage to warrant their inclusion here. All the articles I have shown here as examples cover her comments on Willoughby. |
|||
::::::::''The reason why you're seeing resistance on immediate changes from myself and other editors who participated in the 2022 FAR is because, we frankly don't want to have to go through that process again.'' |
|||
::::::::That makes sense. I just see a contrast between news articles being accepted to substantiate other topics currently in the article, no strict requirement or even preference for academic sources in [[WP:FACR]], that there are now secondary and reliable sources available per [[WP:RSBREAKING]], and that changes should be made when this is the case per [[WP:IMPERFECT]] and a [[WP:Work in progress]] rather than waiting for a paragraph/section re-write to make any update to the article. I hope you understand my position and my reasoning behind it, and apologies if I'm misunderstanding or ignorant of the guidelines. |
|||
::::::::Thanks again for your thoughts! [[User:13tez|13tez]] ([[User talk:13tez|talk]]) 16:12, 17 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::::''I defer back to what I said earlier, we wrote that section with the sources we had available in 2022.'' I also want to insist on that point: if this is a good explanation for using those sources then, why can't it also be used now? And I don't advocate using these sources lightly, at all: my view is that the Willoughby stuff is particular because it's inherently notable, just like "TERF Wars" is. That series of comments is objectively transphobic in a way that no prior Rowling statement was. How could it possibly be omitted? |
|||
::::::As a fairly new editor, I genuinely feel a lot of admiration for all the hard work that goes into writing FAs. At the same time, I think valuing meeting the FA criteria over the completeness of the article is mistaking the finger for the moon. At the end of the day it should come down to: if a reader comes to Wikipedia for information on a given topic, what do they need to know about said topic? You must have asked yourselves some version of that question when you determined that the "TERF Wars" stuff had to be included in the section, right? Why are the standards now different? [[User:WikiFouf|WikiFouf]] ([[User talk:WikiFouf|talk]]) 06:59, 17 March 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 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> |
|||
I've removed everything about March in [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=J._K._Rowling&diff=1213767308&oldid=1213765386 this edit]. The purpose of this article is to present a biography of Rowling's ''entire'' life and body of work, complete with literary analysis of her work, all within a reasonable number of words. Because this is a [[WP:Featured article]] it needs to adhere to strict secondary sourcing requirements - in other words limited to scholarly commentary. Furthermore, because it's a top level biography with many sub- or daughter articles, it needs to be written in [[WP:Summary style]]. Finally it must adhere to [[WP:Biography of living persons]] policies and care must be taken because it falls within [[WP:Contentious topics]]. We have to avoid [[WP:Recentism]] and [[WP:Undue]]. If and when better quality sources are available to replace the material I removed, then we can use those and present it in a couple of sentences written in summary style. [[User:Victoriaearle|Victoria]] ([[User talk:Victoriaearle|tk]]) 01:03, 15 March 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> |
|||
:Thanks, and I agree. After some thinking, what I think would be most useful here is if we can find a source that documents and summarises the progression of Rowling's views over the last few years. How they've moved from that mistakenly favourited tweet, through to her current misgendering of Willoughby and what some sources are describing as holocaust denial. We don't need to document every instance, and summarising the progression of her views is more encyclopaedic. |
|||
:We have some of that already, the sources for the Forstater stuff through to the June 2020 "people who menstruate" tweet. We likely won't be able to find anything particularly high quality on the stuff that's happened this month for a short while, but replicating that summary with the more recent developments should be the end goal. [[User:Sideswipe9th|Sideswipe9th]] ([[User talk:Sideswipe9th|talk]]) 01:14, 15 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::I think we should wait until all the recent stuff is picked up by a better source. I've not seen it mentioned in the New York Times (which I usually read daily - though I could have missed it). We're only half way through March and there's a new entry every day. This article is not a digest or compendium of her X/Twitter posts. Ideally some of the mentions from earlier years can all trimmed down too, the more recent ones added, and it all be presented in a succinct summary. But it's really best to wait until a good secondary source exists. In the meantime there's [[Political views of J. K. Rowling]], and I've noticed that the Willoughby post/s is/are linked in that article to here, which is appropriate. I think basically we agree. [[User:Victoriaearle|Victoria]] ([[User talk:Victoriaearle|tk]]) 01:26, 15 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:I think the article should include a summary of Rowling's comments on Willoughby because they [https://ground.news/article/jk-rowling-trans-newsreader-india-willoughby-calls-comments-by-harry-potter-author-grotesque-transphobia_16d089 received significant coverage in the media], including from many reliable sources, and are a clear escalation of her comments on trans people. The article gives the same amount of detail to topics on which the media gave less coverage and are less significant. For example, her prior comments saying people's "lived reality" would be "erased" if "sex isn't real" [https://ground.news/article/4df8d93d-a760-4d91-a2b8-0abaf37fd2ea received less coverage] and aren't as overtly combative as publicly misgendering and insulting a trans woman, but this article does include them. Furthermore, her donating money to help lawyers flee the Taliban [https://ground.news/article/harry-potter-author-jk-rowling-helped-afghan-lawyers-flee-the-taliban hardly received any news coverage], but that too is still included without dispute. Quite a few people don't want to bloat the article, so they're opposed to adding anything to it on this particular topic. But, by the standards currently being set to add it, much of the present contents of the article should be removed. |
|||
:Therefore, I propose we include (only) the following summary of her comments on Willoughby in the article. It is a short, well-referenced summary of events and only covers the main point. We won't go into any follow-on events; they can stay in [[Political views of J. K. Rowling]]. In so doing, we'll avoid commentating on further developments. A few people have said they are worried about this happening. Please let me know what your thoughts are on this proposed edit: |
|||
:In March 2024, Rowling faced criticism after posting several [[Tweet (social media)|tweets]] in which she deliberately [[misgender|misgendered]] the broadcaster [[India Willoughby]], a [[transgender woman]]. Rowling called her "a man revelling in his misogynistic performance of what he thinks 'woman' means".<ref>{{cite web |last1=Murray |first1=Tom |title=JK Rowling deliberately misgenders trans activist India Willoughby |url=https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/news/jk-rowling-twitter-india-willoughby-trans-b2506793.html |website=[[The Independent]] |access-date=4 March 2024 |archive-url=http://archive.today/HLlTw |archive-date=4 March 2024 |language=en |date=4 March 2024 |url-status=live}}</ref><ref name="sky-news-india-willoughby-misgendering">{{cite web |title=JK Rowling: Trans newsreader India Willoughby calls comments by Harry Potter author 'grotesque transphobia' |url=https://news.sky.com/story/jk-rowling-trans-newsreader-india-willoughby-calls-comments-by-harry-potter-author-grotesque-transphobia-13087709 |website=[[Sky News]] |access-date=5 March 2024 |archive-url=https://archive.is/9JoDb |archive-date=5 March 2024 |language=en |date=5 March 2024 |url-status=live}}</ref><ref name="pink-news-india-willoughby-misgendering">{{cite web |last1=Baska |first1=Maggie |title=JK Rowling misgenders trans journalist India Willoughby in 'grotesque' post |url=https://www.thepinknews.com/2024/03/05/jk-rowling-misgenders-india-willoughby-anti-trans-comments-online/ |website=[[PinkNews]] |access-date=5 March 2024 |archive-url=https://archive.is/Hna2M |archive-date=5 March 2024 |language=en |date=5 March 2024 |url-status=live}}</ref> |
|||
:@[[User:Victoriaearle|Victoriaearle]] Hi, I hope you're doing well. Judging from your reply in this thread and comments in your previous edit, your objections to adding this topic to the article seem to be: |
|||
:* adhere to the edit notice |
|||
:** The edit notices for this article refer to [[WP:BLP]], [[WP:CTOP]], and [[WP:FA]]. These are all discussed below. |
|||
:* use reliable sources |
|||
:** The sources I used ([[The Independent]], [[Sky News]], and [[PinkNews]]) are all listed at [[WP:RSPSOURCES]], where they are all rated as being reliable. |
|||
:* write in [[WP:Summary style]] |
|||
:** My proposed edit is a trimmed-down, two-sentence version of [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=J._K._Rowling&oldid=1213740415#Transgender_people the prior content] on Rowling's comments on Willoughby that only covers the main point. It does not go into further details, even though reliable sources also covered them, which are in the spin-off [[Political views of J. K. Rowling]] article. |
|||
:* Because this is a [[WP:Featured article]] it needs to adhere to strict secondary sourcing requirements - in other words limited to scholarly commentary |
|||
:** As well as being reliable, the sources in my proposed edit are secondary. The primary source was Twitter/Rowling's tweets. These news articles discuss the tweets, so they are secondary sources. There is no mention of sources needing to be scholarly in [[WP:FACR]]. Nor are all the other points in the article supported by scholarly commentary. For example, her comments on Israel/Netanyahu were referenced from articles in reliable news sources. My proposed edit is referenced in the same manner. |
|||
:* adhere to [[WP:Biography of living persons]] policies |
|||
:** Every point in my proposed edit is verifiable from its references to reliable sources. Per [[WP:PSTS]], and as previously discussed, these reliable sources are secondary sources. Therefore, it is not original research. My proposed edit factually describes what Rowling said and its significance. It does not opine, for example, about whether Rowling is a transphobe. Therefore, as far as possible with disputes, which Wikipedia aims to describe, it adheres to [[WP:NPOV]]. |
|||
:* fall within [[WP:Contentious topics]] |
|||
:** There aren't really any specific guidelines here. |
|||
:* avoid [[WP:Recentism]] |
|||
:** I am not arguing that the article should cover Rowling's comments on Willoughby because they are recent. If that was true, I would be arguing for the inclusion of her comments on transgender people in Nazi Germany, which are more recent. Rowling's comments on Willoughby should be in the article because they received significant coverage and represent an important development and escalation in her public statements on trans people. As I highlighted, they received more coverage in the news than several other topics that are in this article without dispute, including (but not limited to) other comments on trans people. |
|||
:* avoid [[WP:Undue]] |
|||
:** Although my proposed edit doesn't criticise Rowling, it mentions she was criticised for her comments. Coverage in reliable sources includes this fact. Therefore, my proposed edit doesn't give a fringe view disproportionately large coverage. My proposed edit above is short and only covers the main point, which received significant coverage. Therefore, it doesn't give undue weight through a disproportionately large depth of detail or quantity of text. My proposed edit is not prominently placed, juxtaposed with any other statement, nor uses any imagery to gain undue weight. Therefore, it adheres to [[WP:WEIGHT]]. |
|||
:[[User:13tez|13tez]] ([[User talk:13tez|talk]]) 16:40, 15 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::The amount of text you're proposing for this one, brief incident is disproportionate to the scope of the section. You're proposing what amounts to a short paragraph for one incident. That level of detail you're proposing is likely due for the [[Political views of J. K. Rowling]] sub-article, because that dedicated articles is where you can go into that level detail about single key instances, but for this article it seems like overkill. |
|||
::If we're to include even the briefest summary of the spat between Rowling and Willoughby, and by that I mean a few words total, I think we need to put that into context of how her views have shifted since 2017. Rather than highlight individual incidents in isolation, what we should be doing here is describing how her views have developed over time, and in the eyes of many become more extreme. Now within that, there would likely be scope for highlighting a couple of key instances or milestones. Moments where the highest quality sources available recognise them as tonal shifts. When we wrote the [[J._K._Rowling#Transgender_people|transgender people]] section during the FAR in 2022, the sourcing didn't really exist at that time to give an adequate summary of the tonal shifts in her commentary. But I think it might now, at least for events up to 2023. |
|||
::I think what we should be doing now is to identify the highest quality sourcing available, ideally scholarship, that'll allow us to replace the second paragraph of the transgender people section with one that'll more accurately document the shift in Rowling's views over time. Sources that remark on how she's gone from the [https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/12/style/jk-rowling-transgender-fans.html "middle-aged moment"] in 2018, to (eventually) what some sources are describing today as Holocaust denial. [[User:Sideswipe9th|Sideswipe9th]] ([[User talk:Sideswipe9th|talk]]) 17:32, 15 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::Hey @[[User:Sideswipe9th|Sideswipe9th]], thanks for your thoughts. |
|||
:::''The amount of text you're proposing for this one, brief incident is disproportionate to the scope of the section. You're proposing what amounts to a short paragraph for one incident. That level of detail you're proposing is likely due for the Political views of J. K. Rowling sub-article, because that dedicated articles is where you can go into that level detail about single key instances, but for this article it seems like overkill.'' |
|||
:::I don't think it's disproportionate at all. The edit I proposed above is two lines long (42 articles: 2 lines). Other topics present in the article such as [https://ground.news/article/d91744c8-e37a-42ea-b1bd-b5dc0e9c8974 her essay] (35 articles: ~1.5 lines) have a similar ratio of press coverage to their text in the article. |
|||
:::''If we're to include even the briefest summary of the spat between Rowling and Willoughby, and by that I mean a few words total, I think we need to put that into context of how her views have shifted since 2017. Rather than highlight individual incidents in isolation, what we should be doing here is describing how her views have developed over time, and in the eyes of many become more extreme. Now within that, there would likely be scope for highlighting a couple of key instances or milestones. Moments where the highest quality sources available recognise them as tonal shifts. When we wrote the transgender people section during the FAR in 2022, the sourcing didn't really exist at that time to give an adequate summary of the tonal shifts in her commentary. But I think it might now, at least for events up to 2023.'' |
|||
:::Yeah, including only a couple of key instances in her main article makes sense. Part of my reasoning for including this instance in particular is because it's such a clear escalation. I don't think we need a commentary on how her stance has slowly shifted over time; to be honest her comments do that for themselves and everything is supposed to be concise anyway. What do you mean "the FAR in 2022"? |
|||
:::''I think what we should be doing now is to identify the highest quality sourcing available, ideally scholarship, that'll allow us to replace the second paragraph of the transgender people section with one that'll more accurately document the shift in Rowling's views over time. Sources that remark on how she's gone from the "middle-aged moment" in 2018, to (eventually) what some sources are describing today as Holocaust denial.'' |
|||
:::I agree. I think that it would probably be best to re-write and summarise the section entirely when new articles come out summarising the change in her views, from her initial likes to her more recent statements. Thanks again. [[User:13tez|13tez]] ([[User talk:13tez|talk]]) 18:16, 15 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::{{tq|What do you mean "the FAR in 2022"?}} The [[Wikipedia:Featured_article_review/J._K._Rowling/archive1|Featured Article Review]] from December 2021-April 2022. During that four month period, the article content was extensively reworked to bring it back up to the standard of a [[WP:FA|featured article]]. There were five ([[Wikipedia_talk:Featured_article_review/J._K._Rowling/archive1/Archive_1|archive 1]], [[Wikipedia_talk:Featured_article_review/J._K._Rowling/archive1/Archive_2|archive 2]], [[Wikipedia_talk:Featured_article_review/J._K._Rowling/archive1/Archive_3|archive 3]], [[Wikipedia_talk:Featured_article_review/J._K._Rowling/archive1/Archive_4|archive 4]], [[Wikipedia_talk:Featured_article_review/J._K._Rowling/archive1/Archive_5|archive 5]]) separate sub-pages to the review where every paragraph and sentence was reviewed in some way. Where changes were needed, they were extensively workshopped prior to being installed in the article and subject to a strong consensus. |
|||
::::The current text of the second paragraph of the transgender people represents what sourcing was available at the time of the review. It's imperfect because the sourcing at the time was imperfect, and there wasn't really any timelines within high quality sources (ie scholarship level) to summarise the shift in her expressions over time. It's possible we might have some now, though given the lag time it takes for scholarship to pass peer-review and get published, we won't be able to cover the most recent stuff. But if the sourcing does exist, we would be able to summarise what reliable sources consider to be the important moments, rather than whatever the current controversy of the week/month is. |
|||
::::The text on Willoughby that you've proposed represents last week's controversy of the week. This week it's been the comments that have been described as Holocaust denial. We don't know yet how those comments are going to be assessed in the broader context of her expressed views on this topic. Maybe they are important, maybe not. We won't know for some time until it's covered by high quality sourcing, instead of the more [[WP:RSBREAKING|breaking news]] style sources we have at the moment. They have their place in the ''political views'' sub-article, but it is unclear whether or not they have their place here. |
|||
::::I think the best thing that anyone here can do right now is to start looking at research papers that were published within the last year, and try to identify any that describe a tonal shift in her views over time. Once we have those sources, we can look at potentially re-writing the second paragraph of the transgender people section, to give a broader overview of how her views have changed over time. [[User:Sideswipe9th|Sideswipe9th]] ([[User talk:Sideswipe9th|talk]]) 19:10, 15 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::Thanks for your reply. |
|||
:::::''What do you mean "the FAR in 2022"? The Featured Article Review from December 2021-April 2022. During that four month period, the article content was extensively reworked to bring it back up to the standard of a featured article. There were five (archive 1, archive 2, archive 3, archive 4, archive 5) separate sub-pages to the review where every paragraph and sentence was reviewed in some way. Where changes were needed, they were extensively workshopped prior to being installed in the article and subject to a strong consensus.'' |
|||
:::::Thank you for clarifying. |
|||
:::::''The current text of the second paragraph of the transgender people represents what sourcing was available at the time of the review. It's imperfect because the sourcing at the time was imperfect, and there wasn't really any timelines within high quality sources (ie scholarship level) to summarise the shift in her expressions over time. It's possible we might have some now, though given the lag time it takes for scholarship to pass peer-review and get published, we won't be able to cover the most recent stuff. But if the sourcing does exist, we would be able to summarise what reliable sources consider to be the important moments, rather than whatever the current controversy of the week/month is.'' |
|||
:::::That makes sense. It'll of course be better sourced when someone publishes an article about all this, up to and including her most recent comments. I think the news has been carried by outlets which would be accepted in peer-review. [https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/jk-rowling-reported-to-police-for-misgendering-trans-tv-newsreader-6bzj0llwb The Times], [https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/news/jk-rowling-india-willoughby-twitter-gender-b2507309.html The Independent], and [https://www.reuters.com/world/uk/transgender-broadcaster-reports-jk-rowling-police-over-social-media-comments-2024-03-07/ Reuters] are all scrupulous enough that they'd be accepted as factual sources in research, and they all carried the story. Realistically, [https://news.sky.com/story/jk-rowling-trans-newsreader-india-willoughby-calls-comments-by-harry-potter-author-grotesque-transphobia-13087709 Sky News] and [https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/03/07/jk-rowling-reported-police-trans-india-willoughby/ The Telegraph] would also be accepted as a source in plenty of articles too. Regardless, other parts of the article are supported by similar sources that are reliable but not scholarly or "high-quality" (though the latter term is vague and seems subjective). In fact, all the outlets I listed are already used in references in the article. It wouldn't be fair to exclude this topic from inclusion because of a lack of such better sources without also removing the content in the article supported by these outlets. |
|||
:::::''The text on Willoughby that you've proposed represents last week's controversy of the week. This week it's been the comments that have been described as Holocaust denial. We don't know yet how those comments are going to be assessed in the broader context of her expressed views on this topic. Maybe they are important, maybe not. We won't know for some time until it's covered by high quality sourcing, instead of the more breaking news style sources we have at the moment. They have their place in the political views sub-article, but it is unclear whether or not they have their place here.'' |
|||
:::::I don't disagree that Rowling has had her share of controversies, including on trans people. I think that these two instances are distinguished from others by the fact they're clearly an escalation of her anti-trans stance. Unless she goes even further, this should make them distinct from her other trans commentary for a while. I think her comments on Willoughby are different from those on trans people in Nazi Germany because they also had significant coverage in the media. Her comments on trans people in Nazi Germany didn't, so aren't notable enough to warrant their inclusion in her main article. |
|||
:::::''I think the best thing that anyone here can do right now is to start looking at research papers that were published within the last year, and try to identify any that describe a tonal shift in her views over time. Once we have those sources, we can look at potentially re-writing the second paragraph of the transgender people section, to give a broader overview of how her views have changed over time.'' |
|||
:::::That would certainly be useful to give context to the change in her views, but again I don't think it's reasonable to require new content to have references in academia or "high quality" sources when this same criterion is not met by a lot of the article at present. Thanks again though! [[User:13tez|13tez]] ([[User talk:13tez|talk]]) 20:07, 15 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::::{{tq|I think the news has been carried by outlets which would be accepted in peer-review.}} So the thing with The Times, Independent, Reuters, and the rest, is that they're not scholarship. They're journalism and journalism can have its place in articles, but in general Wikipedia tends to [[WP:SCHOLARSHIP|prefer scholarship]] especially for featured articles. For the type of content we'd eventually be workshopping here, scholarly sources would be most helpful as they can put it into a much broader context than the readership of any one news organisation. |
|||
::::::{{tq|I think that these two instances are distinguished from others by the fact they're clearly an escalation of her anti-trans stance.}} Personally I don't disagree that her commentary over the last two weeks represents an escalation of her views, however we don't write our articles based on [[WP:NOR|editor's personal opinion]]. We write our articles based on what [[WP:RS|reliable sources]] say on any given topic. We could only ever include content about it being an escalation of her views if reliable sources state it. |
|||
::::::{{tq|I don't think it's reasonable to require new content to have references in academia or "high quality" sources}} See [[WP:FACR]]#1c. What we're covering in the transgender people section of the article is highly contentious topic matter. Per [[WP:BLP]] we have to be extremely cautious with writing biographies in general, and the contentiousness of the topic matter only increases the need for caution. Currently in that section, a lot of the content is cited to academic sources first, and non-academic sources secondarily. We cite papers by [https://doi.org/10.1007%2Fs10583-021-09446-9 Duggan], [https://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=5037&context=lcp Pape], [https://doi.org/10.2307%2Fj.ctvs09qwv Pugh], [https://doi.org/10.1111%2F1467-9752.12549 Sussa and Sullivan], and [https://doi.org/10.1108%2F978-1-80071-597-420221021 Schwirblat et al.] as the basis for a lot of the content. Where necessary we then also use lower quality journalism sources to expand briefly upon or to otherwise support the scholarly sources when clarity is needed. [[WP:BESTSOURCES|Policy tell us]] to use the highest quality and most authoritative sources when writing an article. As this is a featured article, and this is highly contentious topic matter, it is quite reasonable to require the rewrite of a section to cite and reflect the highest quality sources available. [[User:Sideswipe9th|Sideswipe9th]] ([[User talk:Sideswipe9th|talk]]) 20:41, 15 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::Thanks for getting back to me again. |
|||
:::::::''I think the news has been carried by outlets which would be accepted in peer-review. So the thing with The Times, Independent, Reuters, and the rest, is that they're not scholarship. They're journalism and journalism can have its place in articles, but in general Wikipedia tends to prefer scholarship especially for featured articles. For the type of content we'd eventually be workshopping here, scholarly sources would be most helpful as they can put it into a much broader context than the readership of any one news organisation.'' |
|||
:::::::I agree that scholarship would probably have a broader analysis than any one source and would be better than news sources. I did read [[WP:FACRITERIA]], including the section you mentioned later on, and it doesn't say that scholarship is preferred. Maybe it implies it by mentioning "survey of the relevant literature" and "high-quality reliable sources", but high-quality is vague, reliable already has a meaning on Wikipedia ([[WP:RSPSOURCES]]) met by the news sources I've mentioned, and it certainly doesn't say to exclude news articles anywhere. |
|||
:::::::''I think that these two instances are distinguished from others by the fact they're clearly an escalation of her anti-trans stance. Personally I don't disagree that her commentary over the last two weeks represents an escalation of her views, however we don't write our articles based on editor's personal opinion. We write our articles based on what reliable sources say on any given topic. We could only ever include content about it being an escalation of her views if reliable sources state it.'' |
|||
:::::::That's true, but the fact her comments on Willoughby received significant coverage and were unprecedented can be objectively substantiated. |
|||
:::::::''I don't think it's reasonable to require new content to have references in academia or "high quality" sources See WP:FACR#1c. What we're covering in the transgender people section of the article is highly contentious topic matter. Per WP:BLP we have to be extremely cautious with writing biographies in general, and the contentiousness of the topic matter only increases the need for caution. Currently in that section, a lot of the content is cited to academic sources first, and non-academic sources secondarily. We cite papers by Duggan, Pape, Pugh, Sussa and Sullivan, and Schwirblat et al. as the basis for a lot of the content. Where necessary we then also use lower quality journalism sources to expand briefly upon or to otherwise support the scholarly sources when clarity is needed. Policy tell us to use the highest quality and most authoritative sources when writing an article. As this is a featured article, and this is highly contentious topic matter, it is quite reasonable to require the rewrite of a section to cite and reflect the highest quality sources available.'' |
|||
:::::::Besides what I said before, I agree that it makes sense to use sources of the highest available quality here. Again, however, news sources are already used in this contentious topic, sometimes as the only references for contents. Therefore, it wouldn't be fair to exclude new content for the same reason. Thanks again! [[User:13tez|13tez]] ([[User talk:13tez|talk]]) 21:41, 15 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
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> |
|||
I agree that within in this article that section should be a short summary style and not being sidetrecked by recentism or various individual claim. In addition when I read holocaust comparisons above, I can only say an encyclopedic article as general guideline should stay away from the hyperbole and not everything (potentially outrageous) somebody out there claims about LGBTQ and Rowlings needs to be in the article in this article. There is only a need to include something if there is a larger reception in serious media (rather than social media bibbles). In addition for various details there is in doubt a separate article on Rowling's political views where that belongs.--[[User:Kmhkmh|Kmhkmh]] ([[User talk:Kmhkmh|talk]]) 05:33, 15 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
|| |
|||
:Yes, agree. The mistake that's being made, is that the sourcing bar is higher on a featured article - hence statements need to be cited to ''high quality'' reliable sources or to scholarly sources. In terms of Willoughby, a few words cited to [https://www.reuters.com/world/uk/transgender-broadcaster-reports-jk-rowling-police-over-social-media-comments-2024-03-07/ this Reuters article] (it's the best quality I can find) at the end of the "Maya Forsteter" paragraph might work. The longer we wait the better chance the story is picked up by higher quality sources and it can be revisited; if it's not, then it does suffer from recentism. There's really no rush. Generally we workshop wording changes and achieve consensus, ie. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:J._K._Rowling/Archive_15#Draft_proposal_to_reflect_discussion_and_new_sources_above this proposal]. This comment applies to the thread below as well. [[User:Victoriaearle|Victoria]] ([[User talk:Victoriaearle|tk]]) 18:37, 15 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
{{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: |
|||
=== Reflist=== |
|||
* [[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}} |
|||
|} |
|||
{{cot|Sources}} |
|||
{{reflist-talk}} |
{{reflist-talk}} |
||
{{notelist-talk}} |
|||
{{cob}} |
|||
=== |
==== 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) |
|||
{{cot|Draft 1}} |
|||
: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) |
|||
Bringing this to a draft, to see what consensus there is to add this in the interim while we look at sources to re-work the paragraph in the future. |
|||
::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) |
|||
:::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) |
|||
*** For clarity, I wasn't saying that your intentions appear dishonest but that the text does, something which I stand by. If you missed it, she [https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/news/jk-rowling-misgender-trans-snp-b2521530.html tweeted a list of transgender women] weeks ago, including India Willoughby (again), [[Munroe Bergdorf]] as well as a handful of convicted sex offenders (for good measure), and wrote that they were "men, every single last one of them". Again, this is a section titled "Views [of J. K. Rowling] on transgender people". Misgendering is not just an insult towards an individual but a flat out rejection of transgender identity; that I even need to argue for its inclusion here is beyond me. [[User:WikiFouf|WikiFouf]] ([[User talk:WikiFouf|talk]]) 20:38, 21 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
**** Although I'm not delighted with WikiFouf's level of rhetoric, I do agree that Rowling's tendency to misgender trans people bears mentioning as a separate point. I'll add something to that effect to the draft.—[[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> 21:11, 21 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
****:The point I made was that omitting J. K. Rowling misgendering transgender people, in a section titled "Views [of J. K. Rowling] on transgender people", would appear dishonest. This is my honest concern. I did not call [[User:Victoriaearle|Victoria]] dishonest, I don't think that they are, I don't think being frank is low rhetoric. [[User:WikiFouf|WikiFouf]] ([[User talk:WikiFouf|talk]]) 21:53, 21 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
******Don't worry, nobody here has any trouble at all understanding your point. For future reference: you can also say things less dramatically.—[[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> 22:37, 21 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
****Wikipedia articles strive to reflect the highest quality sources and avoid [[WP:RECENTISM|recentism]] and [[WP:NOTNEWS|news-style blow-by-blow reporting]]. That's what Victoria-- an experienced [[WP:FA|FA]] writer-- is striving for, so let's aim for constructive criticism and concrete draft proposals rather than wording that can be easily misunderstood on the internet. I see no consensus on this page for bringing in blow-by-blow news-style unencyclopedic recent newsy issues; text that will endure is the goal. Thank you Victoria; your first draft work is appreciated! [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 23:24, 21 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
****:@[[User:SandyGeorgia|SandyGeorgia]] ''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. LGBT charities and leading actors of the Wizarding World franchise condemned Rowling's comments; GLAAD called them "cruel" and "inaccurate".'' |
|||
****:This whole bit is backed only by breaking news sources, I don't see anyone here asking for its removal. |
|||
****:As for [[Wikipedia:RECENTISM|recentism]], "writing without an aim toward a long-term, historical view", it isn't a blanket ban on anything recent. As far as I know, we have to actually talk about it, case by case. On my end, I have repeatedly explained why I believe her misgendering of trans women is important. If you believe it to be unimportant, please explain why. [[User:WikiFouf|WikiFouf]] ([[User talk:WikiFouf|talk]]) 03:23, 22 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
****::WikiFouf, I'm fairly certain I already explained that on this page, but I understand if it was lost in the volume, so please pardon my repetition. During the FAR, several editors read all the scholarly sources. We strove to cover that which was covered by scholarly or the highest quality sources, and give that material its due weight, although there were some places where the FAR was constrained by the result of a poorly conceived but well attended RFC, and we were stuck with some bits. And we all acknowledged then that those bits would need to be rewritten as better sources become available. Because some of the scholarly sources aren't freely accessible, at times we also substituted in a high quality news source ''when the material we were citing was also due weight according to scholarly or high quality sources''. I hope that, along with Victoria's response, answers the question. Perhaps you will read all five archives of the FAR to understand how the collaborative editing process worked towards consensus in a collegial environment that developed once people understood it was an iterative process. Have you accessed and read all the scholarly sources ? I believe your other concerns are being addressed in the second draft below, which is headed now in the right direction, but we need to make sure our content conforms closely to the sources. You can see below concrete suggestions for text changes and improvements. Robert F. Kennedy was Rowling's hero and role model; do you think her giving back the award is misplaced in the article? Do you want GLAAD removed? Then say so in the next draft with concrete suggestions and see if you can find consensus. The Willoughly issue has been on the page for days and has not found consensus; there is a better way to write encyclopedic content than RECENTISM, and much content can still be expanded at the sub-article, [[Political views of J. K. Rowling]], keeping this article conforming with [[WP:SS|summary style]] for a broad overview article of a very large topic. Have you been able to do some expansion over there? [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 03:59, 22 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*****Not SandyGeorgia, but as the author of the draft & the person who read the sources the section you quote ''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. LGBT charities and leading actors of the Wizarding World franchise condemned Rowling's comments; GLAAD called them "cruel" and "inaccurate",'' is all covered in the three or four 2024 sources I read. The Kennedy Award is covered; Daniel Radcliffe's comments are covered (leading actor); GLAAD is mentioned. I don't have the sources all open at the moment, but we can swap out the sources just as the sources for the other section you mentioned can be swapped. Personally I'd prefer to swap them as long as people okay with using far fewer sources. It's fine to put these things up for discussion in a collaberative and collegial manner. As for misgendering, I believe that's been added in the subsequent draft, so we can move on to that discussion and point out deficiencies there. [[User:Victoriaearle|Victoria]] ([[User talk:Victoriaearle|tk]]) 03:41, 22 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*****:I sorta/kinda prefer leaving in freely accessible sources at times, for the benefit of readers, but that's not at all a sticking point for me. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 04:03, 22 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*****::Maybe a bit of both would work? There are some sources I'd marked for removal, so let's add it to the list of things to do for the next draft & see where we end up. [[User:Victoriaearle|Victoria]] ([[User talk:Victoriaearle|tk]]) 17:37, 22 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*****::I took the actors out of the notes, and actioned some other of {{u|WikiFouf}}'s comments - will elaborate later. Am going blind again. [[User:Victoriaearle|Victoria]] ([[User talk:Victoriaearle|tk]]) 21:25, 22 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
===Second draft=== |
|||
{{tq2| |
|||
{{Main|Political views of J. K. Rowling#Transgender rights}} |
|||
Rowling has controversial views on [[sexual identity|sex]] and [[gender identity|gender]].{{sfn|Duggan|2021|loc=PDF pp. 14–15 (160–161)}} 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 called a [[TERF (acronym)|TERF]] ("trans-exclusionary radical feminist").<ref name= Rosenblatt2020/>{{sfn|Steinfeld|2020|pp=34–35}}{{sfn|Schwirblat|Freberg|Freberg|2022|pp=367–368}} Her statements have shocked her 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 has said she would rather go to jail than use a trans woman's preferred pronouns.<ref>{{cite news |last=Chilton |first=Louis |date=19 October 2023 |title=JK Rowling claims she would ‘happily’ spend two years in prison for misgendering a trans person |url=https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/news/jk-rowling-trans-prison-b2432406.html |work=[[The Independent]] |access-date=21 April 2024}}</ref> |
|||
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}} |
|||
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 denies being 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 calls this 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 this 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}} |
|||
}} |
|||
{{cot|Sources}} |
|||
{{reflist}} |
|||
{{cob}} |
|||
==== Discussion of second draft ==== |
|||
{{u|S Marshall}} the template that we used during the FAR for viewing drafts side-by-side is at [[User:SandyGeorgia/sandbox5#Draft_proposals]]; it makes it much easier to compare where we are versus what is being proposed. (Also, word count matters :) [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 23:21, 21 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:I get 466 words, compared to the 429 that were in the article before the edit warring, newsy edits started last month. I suspect 466 words can be justified as due weight relative to the new scholarly sources, and [[WP:SIZE]] would still be reasonable, but it would be good to hear from others on the size relative to her overall bio and work. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 23:40, 21 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
Suggestions (it would be much easier to see the original and the proposed side-by-side): |
|||
#The original Duggan wording (her views on sex and gender have provoked controversy) was changed to "Rowling has controversial views on sex and gender." That's a significant difference: What does the source say? [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 23:48, 21 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
#Words can be trimmed and the issue above can be addressed by switching: |
|||
#* Rowling has controversial views on sex and gender.[1] Rowling's statements[1][2][3] have been called transphobic,[4][5] and she has been called a TERF ("trans-exclusionary radical feminist").[5][6][7] Her statements have shocked her fans,[8] divided feminists,[9][10][11] fuelled debates on freedom of speech[12][13] and cancel culture,[14] and ... |
|||
#*: to ... (controversy is implied by rest of context) |
|||
#** Rowling's stance on sex and gender[1][2][3] has been called transphobic[4][5] and she has been called a TERF ("trans-exclusionary radical feminist").[5][6][7] Her statements have shocked her fans,[8] divided feminists,[9][10][11] fuelled debates on freedom of speech[12][13] and cancel culture,[14] and ... [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 23:52, 21 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
# Is it possible to reduce overquoting here, without losing the thought? "Rowling herself fanned the flames as she became increasingly vocal and, in a few cases, flippant about gender identity." We should strive as much as possible to keep Featured articles in our own words (not always possible, and I'm terrible at it, but others might have ideas). [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 23:56, 21 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
# Rejig this to avoid tweet ... tweeted redundancy in the same sentence: "In another tweet in June 2020,[8] 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][19]" [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 23:58, 21 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
# Potter scholar Tolanda Henderson, <s>self-described as "gender-queer...non-binary transgender",</s> ... not necessary. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 23:59, 21 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
# New paragraph, so ... She rejected these characterisations --> Rowling rejected these characterisations ... [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 00:02, 22 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
# (redundant) writes the <s>June 2020</s> tweet revealed Rowling's [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 00:04, 22 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
# Serial commas were decided against in the FAR ... and denies being transphobic,[40][4] in an essay she posted to her website on June 10, 2020,[40] where she stated that her views ... can be adjusted in next draft. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 00:03, 22 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
# Vague "literary scholars" ... one source is cited, so is it Whited suggesting this, or is Whited citing others ? "Literary scholars suggest that French literary ... " [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 00:06, 22 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
# The [https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/news/jk-rowling-trans-prison-b2432406.html source says]: Rowling commented: “I’ll happily do two years if the alternative is compelled speech and forced denial of the reality and importance of sex.” Our text says: "Rowling has said she would rather go to jail than use a trans woman's preferred pronouns.") This needs work to better conform source-to-text integrity; if not possible, this might be an area where we might resort to a direct quote. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 00:59, 22 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:{{u|SandyGeorgia|Sandy}} these changes are fine, with a couple of caveats: |
|||
::*The "fanned the flames" quote can maybe be trimmed and should be attributed. I understand re overquoting but in this case a Rowling scholar is making the statement, which in my view holds some weight. If you or others disagree, maybe we can just delete that sentence |
|||
::*Tolanda Henderson's voice, in my view, is important, not only because they are a talented young scholar but because they are transgender, yet immersed in Rowling's work. That should somehow be signaled. |
|||
::*"literary scholars" >> Barthes is mentioned in Whited's "Introduction" and also in her volume by the author of "Accio, Jo" (the one who did the survey of fan fiction); in Henderson's "A Coda", published in Cecilia Konchar Farr's ''Open at the Close: Literary Essays on Harry Potter"'', and in Konchar Farr's "Introduction" to that volume. Of the four essays I read it was mentioned four times. We can cite all four if needed. Or none. Or something. |
|||
::*I didn't add the quote from the Independent, so leaving that for now. |
|||
:I'm scheduled for a brain scan tomorrow, so don't know when I can get back to all of this. If I'm not back tomorrow, they're easy fixes that anyone else can do. [[User:Victoriaearle|Victoria]] ([[User talk:Victoriaearle|tk]]) 02:06, 22 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::I hope your brain comes out pretty :). My sutures come out Tuesday; maybe there will be a third draft up, consolidating all commentary, by Wednesday (too much typing for me until the hand works). On ''The Independent'' bit, I think the intent is heading the right direction (generalize), but she said something different. Hope you have good news in a few days! [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 02:11, 22 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::I haven't had a headache for two years or more but something about Rowling seems to spark them. It happened during the FAR too. I'm sure all is well, but the dr doesn't want to hear about the Wikipedia/Rowling/dense mark-up in the edit window excuses :) I will be back when possible. Good luck with the sutures. [[User:Victoriaearle|Victoria]] ([[User talk:Victoriaearle|tk]]) 02:38, 22 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*Ah, yes, that's reminded me why I don't touch featured articles. FA is its own subculture where everything I'd do elsewhere is always against some convention or guideline. Personally I prefer considering the new draft as a piece of writing in its own right rather than in comparison to a previous text, but going forward I will use the format.{{pb}}On the substance, I fully agree with both of you except:{{pb}}On point 1, I would defend my revision of the first sentence. Its purpose is to say what the issue is in simple terms and introduce the rest of the paragraph. It ought to be a simple declarative sentence in the active voice. The source is writing for scholars; but we're writing for curious, uninformed teenagers whose first language might not be English.{{pb}}On point 8, definitely don't string that many semicolons together. We're not writing eighteenth century literary fiction. If some authority has mandated "no serial commas there" then I'd tend to contest its reasoning.{{pb}}On point 10, I'm not summarizing Rowling's tweet. I'm summarizing the article about Rowling's tweet. We need a sentence about misgendering transwomen (nb: Rowling doesn't detectably do it to transmen).{{pb}}I'm happy to redraft if nobody else gets to it first!—[[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> 08:00, 22 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*:On point 1, we can avoid asserting something as fact in WikiVoice (which might not be supported by the source) by just rephrasing the whole construct as in point 2.{{pb}}On point 8, I'm not fussed about serial commas, but as we move towards a final draft, just something to keep in mind. Rephrasing usually resolves too many clauses. {{pb}} On point 10, we have a neutraility issue, since we're not reflecting what she actually said, or apparently thinks, if we take the context of her earlier statements together with that one quoted. What she seems to have said, in context, has been lost by some of the earlier deletions of content, which is why it's helpful to see side-by-side the last FA version (before the non-consensual changes started). The context of the quote in point 10 is about being "compelled" (by changes in law) to deny the reality of sex (wording she used earlier). This context of the change in laws was deleted by the non-consensual changes in the article, and by the time we reach point 10, we've now lost all context ... continued in response to Andrew below ... [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 11:45, 22 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
* The second draft does not seem neutral because it is one-sided – it presents criticism of the subject's views but fails to balance this with prominent support such as [https://variety.com/2024/politics/global/jk-rowling-uk-prime-minister-scotland-hate-crime-act-arrest-me-1235957584/ U.K. Prime Minister Backs J.K. Rowling...]. {{pb}}The last word is not given to a VIP like [[Rishi Sunak|Sunak]] but instead to some quotes by Henderson. But who is Henderson? The reader has look back to find that this is [[Tolonda Henderson]] who is not sufficiently notable to have a Wikipedia article. Their quoted views seem to be given [[WP:UNDUE|undue]] weight because they are just cited to their own work rather than third parties.{{pb}} [[user:Andrew Davidson|Andrew]]🐉([[user talk:Andrew Davidson|talk]]) 10:14, 22 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*:Well, I do think Victoriaearle's draft is right to give the last word to an academic study by an accredited Rowling scholar, rather than to a transparently politically motivated off the cuff remark by our unelected and totally-unqualified-in-sociology Prime Minister. In fact I see Victoriaearle's draft as excellent, needing only reordering and a few tweaks.—[[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> 10:48, 22 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*::@[[User:S Marshall|S Marshall]]: No prime ministers in the United Kingdom have been elected as such; being at all qualified in sociology is <ins>not</ins> a required qualification for the post. [[User:Bazza_7|Bazza <span style="color:grey">7</span>]] ([[User_talk:Bazza_7|talk]]) 11:50, 22 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*:::Thank you for grasping my point.—[[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> 13:17, 22 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*::Accredited Rowling scholar? The draft gets the name wrong but they seem to be [https://tolondahenderson.org/ this person]. They are still working on their PhD but have several masters degrees in a variety of fields such as religious studies. None of their theses seems to be about or related to Rowling and they declare that they are "no longer a Harry Potter scholar". [[user:Andrew Davidson|Andrew]]🐉([[user talk:Andrew Davidson|talk]]) 15:50, 22 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*:::I believe the text says ''Harry Potter'' scholar. The metric in literature is whether someone gets publishing and Henderson is being published very very early in their career. Whited cites them in the "Introduction" to her volume, so we can use her quote of Henderson's quote or just quote from Henderson. Fwiw, very view literary scholars have Wikipedia pages - not vastly published scholars such as Michael Reynolds who I use for Hemingway pages, so that's not a great metric. In my view Henderson's voice is valuable, so if consensus is needed to do so that process should begin before the next draft goes up. [[User:Victoriaearle|Victoria]] ([[User talk:Victoriaearle|tk]]) 17:47, 22 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*:Andrew gives another example of why we should see the last consensus version side-by-side. {{pb}} The context of the criticism (changes in the law) and support has been lost in the rapid-fire, non-consensual editing that begin in March. The [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=J._K._Rowling&oldid=1202117364#Transgender_people last good version I can find before all these changes is here]; the context of changes in law, and the fact that Rowling's views also have support in some sectors got dropped and those were not cuts that gained consensus, rather that stuck because others didn't edit war them back in. I suggest in Draft 3 putting that version side-by-side with the new proposal for discussion purposes. {{pb}} I don't pay much attention to "who gets the last word"; prose flow is more relevant. But I do agree that we've lost some neutrality that was reflected in earlier versions, and points 1/2 and 10 need particular work to more closely reflect sources and context. {{pb}} It might help to keep in mind that this page has many watchers who remain silent while we are drafting and until we get closer to a consensual draft; when we do, if the text is non-neutral, watchers do speak up, and it won't gain support for insertion, so working collaboratively towards compromise is key. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 12:07, 22 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*::I'd like better clarity on the "Literary scholars" line and otherwise think this constitutes a significant improvement. [[User:Simonm223|Simonm223]] ([[User talk:Simonm223|talk]]) 13:39, 22 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
I have some issues with the way this new version seems to present Rowling's perspective nand Whited's quote on the subject. This seems to set up an idea that the disagreement with Rowling is the views that she is at times flippant, rather than presenting the description set out by Whited (or something like that) as a relatively NPOV descriptor, while also noting what the actual criticism of Rowling that has been presented is. At present, this draft somewhat increases the existing issue that this section seems to be rather from Rowling's POV, more than neutral -- missing out that she's posting personal attacks on trans people seems somewhat crucial. (On a more minor point: I feel like the sentence talking about Forsttaer would do better by being phrased as "In December 2019, Rowling commented [on Maya who had...]" would frame things more accurately than starting a sentence with "When Maya's employment contract was not renewed, Rowling Responded", because the currently suggested phrasing implied Rowling's comments were a response to Forstater's contract not being renewed (Feb 2019) as opposed to responding to the outcome of the employment tribunal (December 2019). [[User:WorthPoke2|WorthPoke2]] ([[User talk:WorthPoke2|talk]]) 17:20, 22 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:Yes, I agree re Forstater, we need to explain that Forstater was let go for misgendering. That's in one of the sources I used. The "flippant phrase" will be cut for the next iteration. Thanks for posting these remarks - very helpful. [[User:Victoriaearle|Victoria]] ([[User talk:Victoriaearle|tk]]) 17:40, 22 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
====First sentence==== |
|||
{| class="wikitable" |
{| class="wikitable" |
||
! style="width: 30em;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=J._K._Rowling&oldid=1165322330 Current] |
|||
! style="width: 30em;" | Proposed (adds 18 words) |
|||
|- |
|- |
||
! Historic (20 words) !! Proposed (8 words) |
|||
|| 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> |
|||
|- |
|||
|| 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> In March 2024 [[India Willoughby]] reported Rowling to the police for a hate crime based on Twitter posts.<ref>{{cite news |title=Transgender broadcaster reports J.K. Rowling to police over social media comments |url=https://www.reuters.com/world/uk/transgender-broadcaster-reports-jk-rowling-police-over-social-media-comments-2024-03-07/ |access-date=15 March 2024 |work=[[Reuters]] |date=7 March 2024}}</ref> |
|||
| 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)}} || Rowling has controversial views on [[sexual identity|sex]] and [[gender identity|gender]].{{sfn|Duggan|2021|loc=PDF pp. 14–15 (160–161)}} |
|||
|- |
|||
|} |
|} |
||
{{cot|Sources}} |
|||
{{reflist}} |
|||
{{cob}} |
{{cob}} |
||
My position is that the version to the right is the better opening sentence. It's a topic sentence. It's a simple declarative sentence. It simply and accurately summarizes the paragraph that follows. And I don't see how anyone who's read the sources could possibly dispute it? A reasonable alternative could be "Rowling's views on sex and gender are controversial".—[[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> 13:42, 22 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:Quick comment and fwiw, my sandbox shows the first sentence as "Rowling's views on sex and gender, have provoked controversy", which is nice & declarative. It does look as though the gender recognition laws got cut b/c of word count, but it should probably go back in. It it mentioned on the sources. But I agree w/ S Marshall that it should start with a good declarative general topic sentence. [[User:Victoriaearle|Victoria]] ([[User talk:Victoriaearle|tk]]) 13:47, 22 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::It's declarative but personally I might tend to prefer the active voice for a topic sentence? On the gender recognition laws—yes, you're right. How about two sentences? "Rowling has controversial views on sex and gender. She uses {{abbr|X|twitter}} and her blog to share her thoughts about them, where she has been particularly outspoken about changes to gender recognition laws."—[[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> 14:03, 22 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::I'm thinking it might be worth going back to the drawing board - reread the sources, take more notes, then try again with the first sentence. There are some good suggestions landing on this page. [[User:Victoriaearle|Victoria]] ([[User talk:Victoriaearle|tk]]) 17:35, 22 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:The Duggan source is attached to this sentence, but it's not very clear to me how "controversial" is all we're getting from that source for this opening sentence ([[MOS:CONTROVERSIAL]]), especially when this ''2021'' peer-reviewed article unequivocally states "Rowling’s personal, conservative views on sex and gender have recently been made abundantly clear through her repeated and escalating anti-trans commentary". |
|||
:If NPOV is the concern for not using "anti-trans" or "anti-transgender" as a descriptor for the years of continuous activism that the paragraphs that follow describe (despite the Duggan source using the term), we should at least consider [[gender-critical]] (which has been used by high quality news sources and herself to describe her views). [[User:Umdlye|Umdlye]] ([[User talk:Umdlye|talk]]) 16:28, 22 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::Thanks, that's useful. I made a mental note to reread Duggan and to make notes. Whited does use [[gender-critical]], so that can easily be slipped in. [[User:Victoriaearle|Victoria]] ([[User talk:Victoriaearle|tk]]) 17:35, 22 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::Reiterating my thanks to {{u|Umdlye}} for checking the source for this. The words "controversy/contreversial" are not used in Duggan & the commentary (as frankly it is also to some extent in other critics) is framed in regards to the Rowling/Harry Potter fandom. The most relevant sentence is the one Umdlye mentions above {{tq|Rowling’s personal, conservative views on sex and gender have recently been made abundantly clear through her repeated and escalating anti-trans commentary}} which only goes to 2020. So, yes, I think we should rethink how to start. [[User:Victoriaearle|Victoria]] ([[User talk:Victoriaearle|tk]]) 19:59, 22 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
; Second try |
|||
{| class="wikitable" |
|||
|- |
|||
! Historic (20 words) !! Proposed (5 words) |
|||
|- |
|||
| 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)}} || Rowling is a [[gender-critical feminist]].{{sfn|Duggan|2021|loc=PDF pp. 14–15 (160–161)}} |
|||
|- |
|||
|} |
|||
{{cot|Sources}} |
{{cot|Sources}} |
||
{{reflist |
{{reflist}} |
||
{{notelist-talk}} |
|||
{{cob}} |
{{cob}} |
||
Easy enough. :)—[[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> 22:02, 22 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
====Discussion of Willoughby proposal ==== |
|||
:I think we should have more sources but I also think that this is the best starting sentence proposed so far, and it's not close. [[User:LokiTheLiar|Loki]] ([[User talk:LokiTheLiar|talk]]) 22:38, 22 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
This added sentence was based on {{diff2|1213903528|this edit}} by {{u|Victoriaearle}}. It's a small mention, placed into the context of some of her previous views. Thoughts on this as an interim addition, while we look at what sourcing supports a broader rewrite on the overall progression of her views over the last few years? [[User:Sideswipe9th|Sideswipe9th]] ([[User talk:Sideswipe9th|talk]]) 20:51, 15 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:Not working for me, as I explained in the third draft section. Removes context, and we already work in gender critical later in the text. Restore context first-- Rowling's statements refer to changes in laws. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 09:13, 23 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*I'm sorry, Sandy, I'm stuck on this. Could you be more specific, please? Is your position: |
|||
:I don't think there's much point in including it without explaining or showing (with a quote) why it's significant: it was the first time she publicly misgendered a trans person. This is a more important point than the subsequent police report for an alleged hate crime. Currently, news articles (The Times, The Independent, Reuters, etc) are the only available references. They'd provide sufficient verification to either approach to show why these comments were significant. However, there would have to be a consensus that the articles are OK to use in the article. However, quotes immediately above reference sources like Variety, the Independent, and the NYT, so I don't think this should be an issue. [[User:13tez|13tez]] ([[User talk:13tez|talk]]) 21:15, 15 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
# That Rowling isn't a feminist? |
|||
::This article, and particularly the transgender people section is written in [[WP:SS|summary style]]. This is because we have a whole article dedicated just to Rowling's political views; [[Political views of J. K. Rowling]]. The political views article is the one where we can go into the specific detail of what was said on Twitter that you're proposing. [[User:Sideswipe9th|Sideswipe9th]] ([[User talk:Sideswipe9th|talk]]) 21:22, 15 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
# That she isn't gender-critical? |
|||
:::Here's an alternative summary with only 1 more character than the one currently proposed: "In March 2024 Rowling deliberately [[Misgender|misgendered]] broadcaster [[India Willoughby]], a [[trans woman]], on [[Twitter]]." The advantage of this summary is that it covers the main point here: Rowling misgendered Willoughby. The subsequent police report, as well as other details and further developments are less important and so are included in [[Political views of J. K. Rowling]]. Several people have said they don't wish to have the minutiae included in this article. If anything on the topic is included here, surely the main point (Rowling misgendered Willoughby) should be what is included. [[User:13tez|13tez]] ([[User talk:13tez|talk]]) 21:52, 15 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
# That she's gender-critical and feminist, but not a gender-critical feminist? |
|||
:I think the way this is worded is fairly misleading. India Willoughby isn't reporting her to the police for anything that happened in 2020, she's reporting Joanne to the police for misgendering her by calling her "a man reveling in a misogynistic performance" and saying that she was merely "cosplaying" womanhood [https://www.advocate.com/news/jk-rowling-transphobia-journalist] [[User:Snokalok|Snokalok]] ([[User talk:Snokalok|talk]]) 21:23, 15 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
# That she's a gender-critical feminist but we shouldn't just come out and say it? |
|||
::That's a very good point. Willoughby didn't report Rowling for an alleged hate crime for what she said in 2020 (the time period of the text currently immediately before the proposed change) or for no reason (if this proposed change was moved to a separate paragraph). [[User:13tez|13tez]] ([[User talk:13tez|talk]]) 21:44, 15 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
# That she's a gender-critical feminist and it's okay to say so if we add more context? |
|||
:::Cool, give me a few and I'll make a second draft with this feedback for consideration. [[User:Sideswipe9th|Sideswipe9th]] ([[User talk:Sideswipe9th|talk]]) 22:25, 15 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:Thanks.—[[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> 13:05, 25 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
=== |
====Misgendering==== |
||
*Context: A newspaper writes a speculative article about how a future Labour government could make misgendering into an aggravated offence, carrying a maximum sentence of two years at His Majesty's pleasure. |
|||
*Rowling tweet: {{tq|I'll happily do two years if the alternative is compelled speech and forced denial of the reality and importance of sex.}} |
|||
*A different newspaper covers the tweet, using the headline: {{tq|JK Rowling claims she would ‘happily’ spend two years in prison for misgendering a trans person.}} |
|||
*Proposed sentence about this: {{tq|Rowling has said she would rather go to jail than use a trans woman's preferred pronouns.}} |
|||
What's the NPOV issue 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> 14:29, 22 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:It's not what she said, although it's what a (clickbait?) newspaper headline claimed. And context is missing. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 17:56, 22 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:It looks fine to me. It's accurate. [[User:Simonm223|Simonm223]] ([[User talk:Simonm223|talk]]) 17:59, 22 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::If the sentence is prefaced with "Rowling has said" (as it is), it is false as written: she did not say that.[https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/news/jk-rowling-trans-prison-b2432406.html] She said “I’ll happily do two years if the alternative is compelled speech and forced denial of the reality and importance of sex.” It would be true if attributed, for example, {{tq2|''The Independent'' wrote that "Rowling has suggested that she would 'happily' spend two years in prison for misgendering a transgender person".}} (It's still not what she said, and may not even be what she meant or believes, but we can't know, so attribute this as ''The Independent'' interpretation of her actual words, which were ''much'' more qualified than implied in the news report -- and that's why we have to take care with news reports.) [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 18:07, 22 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:* It's not a matter of NPOV; it's a matter of accuracy. [[WP:QUOTEUSE]] recommends that "''Editors of controversial subjects should quote the actual spoken or written words to refer to the most controversial ideas.''" So, it's best to quote such tweets verbatim rather than paraphrasing them. [[user:Andrew Davidson|Andrew]]🐉([[user talk:Andrew Davidson|talk]]) 20:06, 22 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::*I've just read the ''Independent'' article. The tweet itself is quite long & there isn't much context if only the tweet is quoted. Suggest we find something better. [[User:Victoriaearle|Victoria]] ([[User talk:Victoriaearle|tk]]) 20:32, 22 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*I'm a big fan of writing everything in [[WP:OUROWNWORDS]]. I think that we have to mean what the sources mean, but we don't have to say what the sources say.{{pb}}The sources are writing for their audiences—often scholars, with the best sources—but we're writing for ''our'' audience which is the general public. A decent Wikipedia article manages down its [[Flesch–Kincaid readability tests|Flesch-Kincaid score]]. We ought to write ''clearly'', using topic sentences, and preferring short words and simple indicative or declarative constructions. Let's not feel constrained to crib sources' wording. Our job is to summarize the source, not repeat 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> 22:20, 22 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
* I agree, there's a nuance. The phrasing makes it sound as if she would rather be jailed than use any trans woman's pronouns. Her tweet doesn't say anything about "any". Not to be the broken record but we have a much clearer, more widely covered and more meaningful quote to include: she tweeted a list of trans women and wrote that they were "men, every single last one of them". You can't get more concise than that —[[User:WikiFouf|WikiFouf]] ([[User talk:WikiFouf|talk]]) 02:56, 23 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*:I wouldn't be opposed to developing that idea instead ... at least it reflects exactly what she said. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 08:28, 23 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
; Rephrase #1 |
|||
{{tq2|{{abbr|Rowling sees transwomen as men, and she often uses her twitter account and blog to say so|Topic sentence}}. She has shared a list of transwomen with her followers, writing that they were "men, every single last one of them".<ref>{{cite news |last=Harrison |first=Ellie |date=1 April 2024 |title=JK Rowling could be investigated by police for misgendering trans people, SNP minister says |url=https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/news/jk-rowling-misgender-trans-snp-b2521530.html |work=[[The Independent]] |access-date=23 April 2024}}</ref> She [[Transphobia#Misgendering|declines to use feminine pronouns]] for transwomen.<ref>{{cite news |last=Chilton |first=Louis |date=19 October 2023 |title=JK Rowling claims she would ‘happily’ spend two years in prison for misgendering a trans person |url=https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/news/jk-rowling-trans-prison-b2432406.html |work=[[The Independent]] |access-date=21 April 2024}}</ref>}} |
|||
{{reflist}} |
|||
I know, it's bloating again.—[[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> 07:27, 23 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:This doesn't provide context, and is still not what she said. The context, repeatedly, has been about changes in laws. That context was in the previous versions and should be restored, and we have to take great care to not put words in her mouth she hasn't said. It's possible to use preferred personal pronouns in one's daily personal interaction and not be opposed to doing so, yet still be opposed to laws that criminalize language. In the olden days, it was referred to as "freedom of speech". [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 08:27, 23 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::We have to explain why the trans community and allies are annoyed with Rowling. We can't do that fairly and accurately unless we discuss her refusal to stop misgendering people. We shouldn't give her tweet in full with all its weaselly self-justification because we only have 475 words. We have to reduce it to a hard-boiled nugget of telling it like it is.{{pb}}Hate speech isn't protected speech, and rightly so. Your freedom of speech doesn't extend to racism, sexism or homophobia. Whether it should extend to transphobia is a live debate and I can see both sides of that, but if your position is that Rowling's fundamentalism about it should be protected speech, then I respectfully join issue with you.—[[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> 10:35, 23 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::I think "freedom of speech" is a red herring here because the facts are pretty clear that Rowling regularly does say transphobic things, including misgendering specific people, on Twitter and that's a big part of why people are annoyed at her. It doesn't matter if she is legally right that she can't be punished for it. That is not the notable part of her statement. [[User:LokiTheLiar|Loki]] ([[User talk:LokiTheLiar|talk]]) 13:46, 23 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:From the sources it seems that she's reacting to the [[Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill]] and saying she'll misgender whomever she wants. Is this a correct reading? If so, then we have a scholarly source for the first part (Whited) and would need one for the second. [[User:Victoriaearle|Victoria]] ([[User talk:Victoriaearle|tk]]) 20:59, 23 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::I think it's more general than the Gender Reform Bill? The Independent article is about Rowling's reaction to the Gender Reform Bill, but it says at paragraph 8: {{tq|Harry Potter author Rowling has frequently argued online that trans women are not women and last week vowed to continue “calling a man a man” despite what she called the “ludicrous law”.}} This is accurate: she has frequently argued this online in several different contexts. In fact Rowling's gender-critical tweets go back before the Bill was passed. (It passed in 2021, but the law wasn't enforced until 2024 to allow time for enforcement training. Rowling's gender-critical behaviour goes back to December 2019, although at that time she was speaking much more mildly and hesitantly than she does now.)—[[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> 22:12, 23 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::Yes, I understand that it's not new but because there are proposed sanctions my sense from across the pond is that it's escalating. Can we write something like, {{tq|Rowling continues to oppose gender self-designation,(cited to Whited p. 7)}} and last week {{tq|vowed to continue “calling a man a man” despite what she called the “ludicrous law”.}} (Independent) Basically the post about people who menstruate says it all, but I'm getting the sense it has to be spelled out? Maybe? I thought the Henderson quote that it invalidate "People like me" spelled it out, but maybe not? Word count is always a problem ... [[User:Victoriaearle|Victoria]] ([[User talk:Victoriaearle|tk]]) 23:31, 23 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
===Third draft (3.2)=== |
|||
{| class="wikitable" |
{| class="wikitable" |
||
! style="width: 30em;" | [https:// |
! style="width: 30em;" | [https://w.wiki/9p2j Current] 454 words |
||
! style="width: 30em;" | Proposed |
! style="width: 30em;" | Proposed<!-- 534 --> 472 words |
||
|- |
|- |
||
|| |
|||
|| 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> |
|||
{{Main|Political views of J. K. Rowling#Transgender rights}} |
|||
|| 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> In March 2024 [[India Willoughby]] reported Rowling to the police for an alleged hate crime based on a series of Tweets where Rowling misgendered Willoughby.<ref>{{cite news |title=Transgender broadcaster reports J.K. Rowling to police over social media comments |url=https://www.reuters.com/world/uk/transgender-broadcaster-reports-jk-rowling-police-over-social-media-comments-2024-03-07/ |access-date=15 March 2024 |work=[[Reuters]] |date=7 March 2024}}</ref> |
|||
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> |
|||
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> |
|||
[[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> |
|||
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> |
|||
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 has controversial views on [[sexual identity|sex]] and [[gender identity|gender]].{{sfn|Duggan|2021|loc=PDF pp. 14–15 (160–161)}} She has 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> called a [[TERF (acronym)|TERF]] ("trans-exclusionary radical feminist") and a [[gender-critical feminist]].{{sfn|Whited|2024|p=7}}{{sfn|Steinfeld|2020|pp=34–35}}{{sfn|Schwirblat|Freberg|Freberg|2022|pp=367–368}} particularly since 2019 when she expressed support for [[Maya Forstater]] which sparked controversy, shocked her fans,{{sfn|Whited|2024|pp=6-8}} 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 has said she would rather go to jail than use a trans woman's preferred pronouns.<ref>{{cite news |last=Chilton |first=Louis |date=19 October 2023 |title=JK Rowling claims she would ‘happily’ spend two years in prison for misgendering a trans person |url=https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/news/jk-rowling-trans-prison-b2432406.html |work=[[The Independent]] |access-date=21 April 2024}}</ref> Rowling wrote that she stood with Forstater, whose employment contract with the London branch of the [[Center for Global Development]] was not renewed after she expressed 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><!-- and misgendered colleagues.{{sfn|Henderson|2022|p=223}} --> Rowling went on to write 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".{{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|loc=PDF pp. 14–15}}{{sfn|Pugh|2020|p=7}} Potter scholar Tolanda Henderson writes the June 2020 post revealed Rowling's "stance that invalidates nonbinary people like me".{{sfn|Henderson|2022|p=224}} |
|||
There have been substantial negative effects to Rowling's reputation: fans turned away from her work, boycotted events, and publishers became reticent to accept her work.{{sfn|Whited|2024|p=8}} 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>{{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> [[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> [[LGBT]] charities the [[Wizarding World]] spoke out against her stance.<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> [[Daniel Radcliffe]], [[Emma Watson]], [[Rupert Grint]], and [[Eddie Redmayne]] and others expressed support for the transgender community.{{sfn|Borah|2024|p=375}} [[GLAAD]] called the the comments "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> 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> |
|||
Rowling rejects these characterisations and denies being 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]].{{sfn|Duggan|2021|loc=PDF pp. 14–15 (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",<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]],{{sfn|Duggan|2021|loc=PDF pp. 14–15 (160–161)}}<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 calls this a "public manifesto", which was the "final straw" for fans.{{sfn|Whited|2024|pp=6–7}} Beginning in 2020, literary scholars, including [[Tison Pugh]] and Whited 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|Pugh|2020|p=8}}{{sfn|Whited|2024|pp=9–10}} Henderson believes this 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}} |
|||
|} |
|} |
||
Line 260: | Line 343: | ||
{{cob}} |
{{cob}} |
||
====Discussion |
====Discussion of third draft==== |
||
I've actioned many of the comments made on this page and encorporated into the next draft. There are still issues to be worked out & the text is growing, but this keeps it moving. [[User:Victoriaearle|Victoria]] ([[User talk:Victoriaearle|tk]]) 23:09, 22 April 2024 (UTC) P.s if anyone is interested, my work can be seen [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Victoriaearle/Rowling&action=history here]. [[User:Victoriaearle|Victoria]] ([[User talk:Victoriaearle|tk]]) 23:12, 22 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:I think this draft is a lot better than past drafts as far as [[WP:NPOV]] and covering recent sources goes, but a lot of the wording is awkward. I'd rather split up some of the longer sentences here. [[User:LokiTheLiar|Loki]] ([[User talk:LokiTheLiar|talk]]) 03:16, 23 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
Okay, draft 2. Based on the feedback above, I've made it clearer why Willoughby reported Rowling. I'm hesitant to use the world deliberately here however, as Reuters does not say that directly, they only include that as part of a quotation from Willoughby. I've also kept it as alleged, as it remains to be seen what (if anything) will happen with this going forward. Thoughts? [[User:Sideswipe9th|Sideswipe9th]] ([[User talk:Sideswipe9th|talk]]) 22:37, 15 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:#The Hate Crimes para doesn't belong in the current; it is not a consensual change, and we should be comparing to where we started before all those changes.[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=J._K._Rowling&oldid=1202117364#Transgender_people]. |
|||
:# I'm thrilled that you pushed forward, but the word count is simply too high in relation to the overall size and weight of sources on her entire life and work. I agree with Loki on splitting some sentences, but first trimming will be needed. |
|||
:# The context (changes of laws) has been eliminated, and stating Duggan's opinion as fact, before explaining the context and evolution of statements, could be leading the reader. We repeat gender-critical later, so that leading sentence isn't needed. Get the context first (changes in laws), then in to opinions of the scholars whose focus is on gender issues. |
|||
:# I'm not sure we should use our precious word count on a laundry list of he said-she said, which was previously rejected; dropping that entire sentence will help contain the bloat. |
|||
:# Pending still is to work out the sentence that she did NOT say; how about if we delete that sentence entirely, and the "lived reality" tweet in favor of the more recent tweet suggested by Wikifouf at [[#Misgendering]]? We might use the Hate Crimes para in some form to incorporate that tweet, which I agree with Wikifouf is a better way of summing up her most recent stance. |
|||
:# How about if we trim some of her older statements like the "lure of womanhood" bit ? |
|||
: Overall, tightening is needed to this version, as well as getting back the context and keeping under 475 words. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 08:55, 23 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::Re: point 3: when "gender-critical" is repeated in the first paragraph it is in the context of Forstater's views, not Rowling's. |
|||
::The draft writer was aiming for a simple declarative sentence to open the section. If we're considering the Duggan source not enough context for this declaration, shouldn't we be aiming to back it up more instead of returning to vagueness? I would like to stress that "gender-critical" in the context of the Duggan article is already nuancing the language used there, and it is a term Rowling has used to describe her own views. [[User:Umdlye|Umdlye]] ([[User talk:Umdlye|talk]]) 13:04, 23 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::Thanks, yes, agree with your comments. [[User:Victoriaearle|Victoria]] ([[User talk:Victoriaearle|tk]]) 14:48, 23 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
Just wanted to comment that the reference in this draft to Forstater misgendering a colleague is incorrect. I am unable to see the source quoted, so unsure where this comes from, but a reading of the court documents [https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5e15e7f8e5274a06b555b8b0/Maya_Forstater__vs_CGD_Europe__Centre_for_Global_Development_and_Masood_Ahmed_-_Judgment.pdf] [https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/60c1cce1d3bf7f4bd9814e39/Maya_Forstater_v_CGD_Europe_and_others_UKEAT0105_20_JOJ.pdf] would show this was not the case as confirmed in this interview with her solicitor [https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/lawyer-in-the-news/lawyer-in-the-news-peter-daly-doyle-clayton/5108912.article]. [[User:Daff22|Daff22]] ([[User talk:Daff22|talk]]) 09:50, 23 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::Thanks, I wondered about that. It's gone now. [[User:Victoriaearle|Victoria]] ([[User talk:Victoriaearle|tk]]) 14:48, 23 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:I'll admit I like the first sentence less in version three than in version two but it is, in general, very good. [[User:Simonm223|Simonm223]] ([[User talk:Simonm223|talk]]) 13:17, 23 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:We're now at version 3.1. I've commented out a few things [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User%3AVictoriaearle%2FRowling&diff=1220386280&oldid=1220301026 here] & will clean up later. It's easier for me to action quickly before comments get lost on talk. I went with the first sentence until we get consensus on it (speaking for myself, I like it), but, yeah, maybe the change in laws should be put back in. It's not in Duggan. I also went with misgendering as it was until we get a better source & agree on wording. Sandy which sentence/section are you referring to re "he said, she said"? [[User:Victoriaearle|Victoria]] ([[User talk:Victoriaearle|tk]]) 14:48, 23 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:That's certainly better. It hits the main point now, and the police report isn't seemingly in a vaccum. You can substantiate the misgendering being deliberate.<ref>{{cite web |last1=Murray |first1=Tom |title=JK Rowling deliberately misgenders trans activist India Willoughby |url=https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/news/jk-rowling-twitter-india-willoughby-trans-b2506793.html |website=[[The Independent]] |access-date=4 March 2024 |archive-url=https://archive.today/20240304210900/https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/news/jk-rowling-twitter-india-willoughby-trans-b2506793.html |archive-date=4 March 2024 |language=en |date=4 March 2024 |url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |last1=Bradley |first1=Sian |title=JK Rowling reported to police for ‘misgendering’ trans TV newsreader |url=https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/jk-rowling-reported-to-police-for-misgendering-trans-tv-newsreader-6bzj0llwb |website=[[The Times]] |access-date=7 March 2024 |archive-url=https://archive.today/20240307164905/https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/jk-rowling-reported-to-police-for-misgendering-trans-tv-newsreader-6bzj0llwb |archive-date=7 March 2024 |language=en |date=7 March 2024 |url-status=live |url-access=subscription}}</ref> Is there a particular reason why you are citing Reuters and not other sources? Since the whole argument against including this topic was to avoid extraneous detail, should the fact Rowling was reported to the police be included? If so, should it not be the minor point, with the misgendering being the main one? The misgendering itself is the most prominent and widely-reported part of this topic. I think explaining Willoughby is a trans woman and linking to relevant articles, like I did when proposing an alternative to the first proposal, helps people understand when they might not otherwise. The police won't be taking the report any further.<ref>{{cite web |last1=Bradley |first1=Sian |title=JK Rowling’s misgendering of India Willoughby was no crime, say police |url=https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/jk-rowlings-misgendering-of-india-willoughby-was-no-crime-say-police-tfmj5g00v |website=[[The Times]] |access-date=15 March 2024 |archive-url=http://archive.today/bIgr1 |archive-date=2024-03-15 |language=en |date=15 March 2024 |url-status=live |url-access=subscription}}</ref> [[User:13tez|13tez]] ([[User talk:13tez|talk]]) 22:57, 15 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::The bit about which actors support her or not ... we went over that several times during the FAR and decided it wasn't a good use of word count. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 16:47, 23 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::@[[User:Sideswipe9th|Sideswipe9th]] please could you let me know what you think of this alternative version? I left out the police report because I think it's less important than her comments themselves, and it didn't go anywhere. I've included a few different sources that cover the topic so that those deemed most suitable could be selected for use in the article. Thanks! |
|||
:::I mean it certainly presents a pretty clear picture of an age-divide with regard to reactions to her antics; and I think it's also relevant that the three actors who were the central stars of the movie adaptation of her books all distanced themselves from her. [[User:Simonm223|Simonm223]] ([[User talk:Simonm223|talk]]) 17:30, 23 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::In March 2024, Rowling faced criticism after [[misgendering]] the broadcaster [[India Willoughby]], a [[transgender woman]], several times on [[Twitter]]. Rowling called her "a man revelling in his misogynistic performance of what he thinks 'woman' means".<ref>{{cite web |last1=Murray |first1=Tom |title=JK Rowling deliberately misgenders trans activist India Willoughby |url=https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/news/jk-rowling-twitter-india-willoughby-trans-b2506793.html |website=[[The Independent]] |access-date=4 March 2024 |archive-url=http://archive.today/HLlTw |archive-date=4 March 2024 |language=en |date=4 March 2024 |url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |last1=Bradley |first1=Sian |title=JK Rowling reported to police for ‘misgendering’ trans TV newsreader |url=https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/jk-rowling-reported-to-police-for-misgendering-trans-tv-newsreader-6bzj0llwb |website=[[The Times]] |access-date=16 March 2024 |archive-url=http://archive.today/Di8K6 |archive-date=2024-03-07 |language=en |date=16 March 2024 |url-status=live |url-access=subscription}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |last1=Tait |first1=Albert |last2=Sanderson |first2=Daniel |title=JK Rowling reported to police by trans activist India Willoughby for misgendering |url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/03/07/jk-rowling-reported-police-trans-india-willoughby/ |website=[[The Daily Telegraph]] |access-date=17 March 2024 |archive-url=http://archive.today/s7fBc |archive-date=2024-03-08 |language=en |date=7 March 2024 |url-status=live}}</ref><ref name="sky-news-india-willoughby-misgendering">{{cite web |title=JK Rowling: Trans newsreader India Willoughby calls comments by Harry Potter author 'grotesque transphobia' |url=https://news.sky.com/story/jk-rowling-trans-newsreader-india-willoughby-calls-comments-by-harry-potter-author-grotesque-transphobia-13087709 |website=[[Sky News]] |access-date=5 March 2024 |archive-url=https://archive.is/9JoDb |archive-date=5 March 2024 |language=en |date=5 March 2024 |url-status=live}}</ref><ref name="pink-news-india-willoughby-misgendering">{{cite web |last1=Baska |first1=Maggie |title=JK Rowling misgenders trans journalist India Willoughby in 'grotesque' post |url=https://www.thepinknews.com/2024/03/05/jk-rowling-misgenders-india-willoughby-anti-trans-comments-online/ |website=[[PinkNews]] |access-date=5 March 2024 |archive-url=https://archive.is/Hna2M |archive-date=5 March 2024 |language=en |date=5 March 2024 |url-status=live}}</ref> [[User:13tez|13tez]] ([[User talk:13tez|talk]]) 00:10, 17 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::I think we need to reconsider the decision made during the FAR. In my view it's important to have at least Radcliffe mentioned b/c his comments made to [[The Trevor Project]] are covered in sources, and probably we should have Watson too. We could maybe slit the difference, mention some, shove others into a note. I hadn't considered Simonm223's point, but that's valid too. I'll add to unresolved issues. [[User:Victoriaearle|Victoria]] ([[User talk:Victoriaearle|tk]]) 19:58, 23 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::Frankly, it's too long. We don't need to have that extensive, lengthy quote in this article. This article is written in [[WP:SS|summary style]], and quotes of that length have their place in [[Political views of J. K. Rowling]]. And as I said to Snokalok below in this subsection, given that the police have dropped this matter with nothing more than recording it as a non-crime hate incident, it just does not seem that notable of a single event in the broader topic of Rowling's views on trans people. |
|||
::::My opinion is that the responses of Radcliffe, Watson and Grint are particularly relevant because of their prior position as something of mentees of Rowling's. However including that some of the older Potter actors supported Rowling would allow for some balance and neutrality rather than making it look like all the actors distanced themselves. So basically I'd strongly defend keeping in mention of the younger stars and would support mention of the older actors in the spirit of balance but don't see them as being as critical from a [[WP:DUE]] perspective. [[User:Simonm223|Simonm223]] ([[User talk:Simonm223|talk]]) 20:02, 23 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::Given that we're looking at re-writing that entire paragraph anyway in [[#Second_paragraph_of_Transgender_people_section|the discussion below]] to better summarise the progression of Rowling's views over time, instead of just highlighting three events, I don't really see that much of a reason to put this much effort into something that we're very likely going to replace anyway. [[User:Sideswipe9th|Sideswipe9th]] ([[User talk:Sideswipe9th|talk]]) 00:45, 17 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::I think you're right. When I was thinking about this, it seemed to me that having Harry, Hermione ''and'' Bellatrix agreeing is something. So if anything, I'd want to see [[Helena Bonham Carter]], but the list as is seems ok. Let's see what others say. [[User:Victoriaearle|Victoria]] ([[User talk:Victoriaearle|tk]]) 20:13, 23 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::Hey @[[User:Sideswipe9th|Sideswipe9th]], thanks again for your feedback. |
|||
:::::@[[User:Simonm223|Simonm223]] @[[User:Victoriaearle|Victoriaearle]] I would maybe suggest using the framing used by Sutherland Borah in ''Ivory Tower'', who writes: "The films’ millennial-age stars—Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Watson, Rupert Grint, Bonnie Wright, Katie Leung, and Eddie Redmayne—expressed their support for the trans community." Mentions the three most relevant actors of HP (+ main actor of FB) without implying a consensus from the cast against Rowling's rhetoric, because it singles out the millennials. [[User:WikiFouf|WikiFouf]] ([[User talk:WikiFouf|talk]]) 21:40, 23 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::''Frankly, it's too long.'' |
|||
::::::Perfect! Thanks so much. Do you have a page number off hand? If not I'll access it a bit later. [[User:Victoriaearle|Victoria]] ([[User talk:Victoriaearle|tk]]) 21:45, 23 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::Here's a shorter version we might be able to agree on. Please let me know what you think. |
|||
:::::::Perfect, thanks! [[User:Simonm223|Simonm223]] ([[User talk:Simonm223|talk]]) 22:12, 23 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::In March 2024, Rowling faced criticism after repeatedly [[misgendering]] the broadcaster [[India Willoughby]], a [[transgender woman]], on [[Twitter]].<ref>{{cite web |last1=Murray |first1=Tom |title=JK Rowling deliberately misgenders trans activist India Willoughby |url=https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/news/jk-rowling-twitter-india-willoughby-trans-b2506793.html |website=[[The Independent]] |access-date=4 March 2024 |archive-url=http://archive.today/HLlTw |archive-date=4 March 2024 |language=en |date=4 March 2024 |url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |last1=Bradley |first1=Sian |title=JK Rowling reported to police for ‘misgendering’ trans TV newsreader |url=https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/jk-rowling-reported-to-police-for-misgendering-trans-tv-newsreader-6bzj0llwb |website=[[The Times]] |access-date=16 March 2024 |archive-url=http://archive.today/Di8K6 |archive-date=2024-03-07 |language=en |date=16 March 2024 |url-status=live |url-access=subscription}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |last1=Tait |first1=Albert |last2=Sanderson |first2=Daniel |title=JK Rowling reported to police by trans activist India Willoughby for misgendering |url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/03/07/jk-rowling-reported-police-trans-india-willoughby/ |website=[[The Daily Telegraph]] |access-date=17 March 2024 |archive-url=http://archive.today/s7fBc |archive-date=2024-03-08 |language=en |date=7 March 2024 |url-status=live}}</ref><ref name="sky-news-india-willoughby-misgendering">{{cite web |title=JK Rowling: Trans newsreader India Willoughby calls comments by Harry Potter author 'grotesque transphobia' |url=https://news.sky.com/story/jk-rowling-trans-newsreader-india-willoughby-calls-comments-by-harry-potter-author-grotesque-transphobia-13087709 |website=[[Sky News]] |access-date=5 March 2024 |archive-url=https://archive.is/9JoDb |archive-date=5 March 2024 |language=en |date=5 March 2024 |url-status=live}}</ref><ref name="pink-news-india-willoughby-misgendering">{{cite web |last1=Baska |first1=Maggie |title=JK Rowling misgenders trans journalist India Willoughby in 'grotesque' post |url=https://www.thepinknews.com/2024/03/05/jk-rowling-misgenders-india-willoughby-anti-trans-comments-online/ |website=[[PinkNews]] |access-date=5 March 2024 |archive-url=https://archive.is/Hna2M |archive-date=5 March 2024 |language=en |date=5 March 2024 |url-status=live}}</ref> |
|||
:::::::p. 375 [[User:WikiFouf|WikiFouf]] ([[User talk:WikiFouf|talk]]) 22:31, 23 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::''We don't need to have that extensive, lengthy quote in this article. This article is written in summary style, and quotes of that length have their place in Political views of J. K. Rowling.'' |
|||
:::::::: I don't mean to rain on the parade, but I'm not at all satisfied with Draft 3, but don't have time to weigh in for a few more days. If I had time, I'd put up a Draft 4, but can't get to it just yet ... please remember that we need to come up with something that a broader audience will approve when we get to a point of putting it forward via something final, and I don't think we're headed that way just yet. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 01:00, 24 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::Well, the quote I included is 79 characters long. The quote "the majority of trans-identified people not only pose zero threat to others, but are vulnerable ... Trans people need and deserve protection", used in the same section, is 142 characters long. The quote "[safeguard] the press from political interference while also giving vital protection to the vulnerable" is 104 characters long and can be found in the Views -> Press section. Quotes longer than this one are used in the article, so it's not fair to say this one is too long in and of itself. |
|||
:::::::::That's fine. I just put up the final one I'll work on. I wanted to do something with the reading I'd done, so jumped in while I could. We do need to work in the UK gender recognition laws (which needs linking), the misgendering needs to be sorted, and I'm not crazy about the stucture, but I'm a big believer in working the content until it's right. If it's going in the wrong direction, then we've discovered what we don't what. So it's all good. [[User:Victoriaearle|Victoria]] ([[User talk:Victoriaearle|tk]]) 02:20, 24 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::''And as I said to Snokalok below in this subsection, given that the police have dropped this matter with nothing more than recording it as a non-crime hate incident, it just does not seem that notable of a single event in the broader topic of Rowling's views on trans people.'' |
|||
::::That's fair. I think it's subjective, and we just disagree on the matter. I think it's such a clear escalation of her rhetoric that its inclusion is warranted. We probably just need to vote on whether it's important/significant enough to warrant inclusion. Maybe it makes sense to make a most agreeable draft for inclusion, then put it down to a vote? |
|||
::::''Given that we're looking at re-writing that entire paragraph anyway in the discussion below to better summarise the progression of Rowling's views over time, instead of just highlighting three events, I don't really see that much of a reason to put this much effort into something that we're very likely going to replace anyway.'' |
|||
::::That makes sense. I understand not wanting to redo work when the second paragraph is re-written, assuming that, were Rowling's comments on Willoughby to be included in the article, that they would be in that paragraph. However, since Wikipedia is [[WP:IMPERFECT]] and a [[WP:Work in progress]], I still think that (barring any other reason) this topic should be included before then. We shouldn't wait to include a topic because reliable but not yet ideal/academic (as seems to be the desire) sources are available to support it. I think the same reasoning was used in the past, as you've said: |
|||
::::''The current text of the second paragraph of the transgender people represents what sourcing was available at the time of the review. It's imperfect because the sourcing at the time was imperfect'' |
|||
::::Thanks again for your thoughts! [[User:13tez|13tez]] ([[User talk:13tez|talk]]) 13:06, 17 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:This is much better, though I'm also wondering - if we're time-skipping from 2024 to now, is the Willoughby misgendering the most notable thing in those four years? I mean personally I think the slightly more recent event regarding the Hirschfeld Institute would be a stronger contender,[https://www.themarysue.com/j-k-rowling-holocaust-denial-nazi-transphobic/] but I recognize that the media sourcing isn't as strong right now, so with that in mind I'd ask whether we should be looking at events from 2022 and 2023. Because while Joanne misgendering a trans newscaster is not un-notable, I wonder if there aren't more notable and equally well covered events. For that matter, I'm wondering to some degree why we are - with such a strong number of incidents, singling out a bare few and not instead rewriting it as "Since then, Rowling has consistently advocated X, Y, Z". There are after all, as we saw from the post below, plenty of RSP sources that present it as a longstanding pattern rather than a few isolated events. [[User:Snokalok|Snokalok]] ([[User talk:Snokalok|talk]]) 23:32, 15 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::{{tq|if we're time-skipping from 2024 to now, is the Willoughby misgendering the most notable thing in those four years?}} See my comment opening the discussion for draft 1. This is an interim proposal, while we try to identify sourcing for a broader rewrite of that paragraph. [[User:Sideswipe9th|Sideswipe9th]] ([[User talk:Sideswipe9th|talk]]) 23:35, 15 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::Fair. In that case, regarding Willoughby alone, I'd like to put forth the possibility of removing or reducing the space given to police involvement and replacing it with a quote of the misgendering. Because, as @[[User:13tez|13tez]] said, the police aren't going any further with this, it doesn't seem like a major detail in the grand scheme of things, but the nature in which the misgendering was done I believe moreso is. This wasn't simply a case of deliberately using the wrong pronouns, this was calling her "a man reveling in a misogynistic performance", which is a significantly more intense statement than just "I refuse to acknowledge this person as a woman"; and I worry that simply reducing it to "misgendering" might mislead a reader to some degree. What are your thoughts? [[User:Snokalok|Snokalok]] ([[User talk:Snokalok|talk]]) 23:40, 15 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::{{tq|the police aren't going any further with this, it doesn't seem like a major detail in the grand scheme of things}} If that's the case, then none of this is really notable, and I don't see a particularly compelling reason for us to highlight what she's said in this manner. The police recording it as a non-crime hate incident per [https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/jk-rowlings-misgendering-of-india-willoughby-was-no-crime-say-police-tfmj5g00v The Times] article from a couple of hours ago is more notable for the purposes of this article to me than the exact words that lead to that. Reuters and other higher quality sources might pick up on that tomorrow or over the weekend, but as some low quality unreliable sources have noted that was recorded 4 days ago, so it's also possible no further sourcing on this from high quality sources will develop. [[User:Sideswipe9th|Sideswipe9th]] ([[User talk:Sideswipe9th|talk]]) 23:48, 15 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:We're now at version 3.2, which has only small changes in response to today's comments. I've tweaked the first sentence a bit. [[User:Victoriaearle|Victoria]] ([[User talk:Victoriaearle|tk]]) 02:20, 24 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== Any objections to modifying final sentence in lede in the following way == |
|||
::I very strongly prefer "Rowling is a gender-critical feminist" to "Rowling has controversial views on sex and gender". The second version does not give any relevant information about what her views actually are, and also violates [[MOS:CONTROVERSIAL]]. [[User:LokiTheLiar|Loki]] ([[User talk:LokiTheLiar|talk]]) 03:22, 24 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::I agree, starting with ''something'' about ''what'' her actions ''are'' (or at the very least, ''why'' they're controversial) is more encyclopedic than ''just'' saying "her views are controversial". [[User:-sche|-sche]] ([[User talk:-sche|talk]]) 20:12, 24 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::Disagree, "gender-critical feminist" is one of various labels that have been used to characterize her views and singling it out wouldn't be NPOV. I think we should write something along the lines of "Her views have been associated with transphobia and gender-critical feminism" [[User:WikiFouf|WikiFouf]] ([[User talk:WikiFouf|talk]]) 22:30, 24 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::I'm treading carefully here because my personal opinion of what to call Rowling would probably violate BLP standards; which is why I've mostly left this distinction alone. But I think we may be over-thinking this a bit. I guess where I'd start would be an examination of how Wikipedia frames the TERF occupation of the term. And the answer is that Wikipedia frames the TERF occupation of the term quite well. As such I'd weakly support "gender-critical feminist," notwithstanding my personal misgivings regarding the incompatibility of gender-essentialism with feminism, provided the designation has a wikilink on it to the associated Wikipedia article. [[User:Simonm223|Simonm223]] ([[User talk:Simonm223|talk]]) 12:50, 25 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::The various responses ("sparked controversy, shocked her fans ..."): were they to her comments generally or her support of Forstater in 2019 specifically? [[User:Firefangledfeathers|Firefangledfeathers]] ([[User talk:Firefangledfeathers|talk]] / [[Special:Contributions/Firefangledfeathers|contribs]]) 20:20, 24 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::Good question. First of all, I put that in as placeholder and changed from [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AJ._K._Rowling&diff=1220486242&oldid=1220477482 from this version] because in my view we have to be careful re what goes in Wiki voice & at this point it's best for someone else to come up with the next draft. As to your question: recent scholarly sources say her support of Forstater shocked/alienated and to muddy waters even more, framed in terms of fans vs broader population. [[User:Victoriaearle|Victoria]] ([[User talk:Victoriaearle|tk]]) 20:35, 24 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
* The third draft concentrates on how Rowling's views have been received in the Harry Potter community and by diversity activists. But it says nothing at all about how this is playing in the wider world of mainstream UK politics. This is proving quite significant as the latest development is that the [[Humza Yousaf|SNP leader]] now faces a vote of no confidence in which [[Ash Regan]] holds the balance of power. And Regan is very much an ally of Rowling. See ''[https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/04/25/jk-rowling-have-last-laugh-snp-obsession-with-trans-rights/ JK Rowling may have the last laugh...]'' |
|||
I don't know if we need a formal RfC for this change but here we go: |
|||
: This follows prominent statements of support for Rowling by both Conservative and Labour representatives – [https://variety.com/2024/politics/global/jk-rowling-uk-prime-minister-scotland-hate-crime-act-arrest-me-1235957584/ U.K. Prime Minister Backs J.K. Rowling...], [https://www.thepinknews.com/2024/04/25/shadow-justice-secretary-shabana-mahmood-jk-rowling/ Labour’s shadow justice secretary ‘agrees’ with JK Rowling’s ‘gender-critical’ views]. It appears that Rowling is getting support across the political spectrum and so is quite influential. |
|||
: [[user:Andrew Davidson|Andrew]]🐉([[user talk:Andrew Davidson|talk]]) 06:55, 26 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::Not sure we can assume that's because "Rowling is influential" rather than just because both transgender rights supporters and gender criticals span the political spectrum, despite what the culture warriors would have us believe. – [[user:filelakeshoe|filelakeshoe]] ([[user talk:filelakeshoe|t]] / [[special:contributions/filelakeshoe|c]]) [[user:filelakeshoe/kocour|🐱]] 08:47, 26 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:{{tq|Potter scholar Tolanda Henderson writes the June 2020 post revealed Rowling's "stance that invalidates nonbinary people like me"}} garden-pathed me the first few times I read it, how about {{tq|Potter scholar Tolanda Henderson wrote that Rowling's June 2020 post revealed a "stance that invalidates nonbinary people like me"}}. Also I don't think there's any need for the information about Forstater to be cleft in two by the "would rather go to jail" thing. – [[user:filelakeshoe|filelakeshoe]] ([[user talk:filelakeshoe|t]] / [[special:contributions/filelakeshoe|c]]) [[user:filelakeshoe/kocour|🐱]] 09:04, 26 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::Discussion seems to have petered out now. Can we confirm that 3.2 is how we want to go? I still don't love it using wiki voice to call Rowling any kind of feminist but, as I was saying before, I'll accept it as long as it wiki-links to [[Gender critical feminist]] [[User:Simonm223|Simonm223]] ([[User talk:Simonm223|talk]]) 01:18, 1 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::We could probably do some more work on it. I don't think that it's perfect yet, though it's definitely a large improvement. [[User:LokiTheLiar|Loki]] ([[User talk:LokiTheLiar|talk]]) 01:50, 1 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::It needs more work in my view. I'm tied with some spring projects & can't get back here immediately but I've been letting it percolate. I'm thinking it's gone too far in the direction of what others think of Rowling rather than focusing on what Rowling believes. Ideally, since this is her bio & a BLP, the latter should come first. When my time frees up, I can take another crack at it, but in the meantime more than happy if someone else gives it a try. [[User:Victoriaearle|Victoria]] ([[User talk:Victoriaearle|tk]]) 02:28, 1 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
{{Use dmy dates|date=May 2024}} |
|||
"These views have been criticised as transphobic by LGBT rights organisations and '''<del>some</del>''' feminists, but have received support from other feminists'''<del> and individuals</del>'''" - I don't think "individuals" helps inform the reader of anything as for any given issue, some individuals will support/oppose it. This sentence in the lede should suggest what the major positions of involved parties to the issues are, not the thoughts of indivudals generally. Additionally, "some" should be removed as it implies that it is the minority of feminists who are critical of Ms. Rowling, while we really can't say that for certain and I suspect it might be the opposite, regardless "some" is not necessary as we already make it clear by also including "other feminists." |
|||
===Fourth draft=== |
|||
Sincere apologies for the delay in posting this. I've re-ordered the ideas as well as cutting and rewriting.—[[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> 11:28, 1 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
If I don't hear any objections I'll [[WP:BEBOLD]] and change it in like a week or so. [[User:LegalSmeagolian|LegalSmeagolian]] ([[User talk:LegalSmeagolian|talk]]) 22:25, 12 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:I think we still need to include "some" as otherwise it suggests she has been criticized by all feminists. I think we also need to include "and individuals" to make it clear that it's not just feminists who have supported her. [[User:BilledMammal|BilledMammal]] ([[User talk:BilledMammal|talk]]) 22:36, 12 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::Then why don't we have it say "some other feminists?" I think either way it expresses a viewpoint unless you remove some from the equation, and the fact that the second part says "other feminists" is fine. And who, if not just "other feminists" have supported her? The lack of precision is what concerns me. [[User:LegalSmeagolian|LegalSmeagolian]] ([[User talk:LegalSmeagolian|talk]]) 22:39, 12 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::I don't see how that fixes the issues. |
|||
:::According to the article, it includes performers and figures from the art world. [[User:BilledMammal|BilledMammal]] ([[User talk:BilledMammal|talk]]) 22:44, 12 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::What makes those figures opinions [[WP:DUE]] to issues revolving around feminism, gender, and sexuality? Based off my reading of the citations the citation regarding [[Eddie Izzard]] is probably DUE as she is genderfluid, but I'm not sure why we should be giving weight in the lede to "figures from the art world". [[User:LegalSmeagolian|LegalSmeagolian]] ([[User talk:LegalSmeagolian|talk]]) 22:52, 12 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:So we've discussed that particular piece of content heavily [[Wikipedia_talk:Featured_article_review/J._K._Rowling/archive1/Archive_4|during the FAR]] in 2022, and some of our wording was defined by a large but poorly executed RfC from [[Talk:J._K._Rowling/Archive_11|November 2021-January 2022]]. At the moment we're kinda beholden to some of that phrasing, though the FAR drafting did try to work around it as best we could. For now I'd suggest reading [[Wikipedia_talk:Featured_article_review/J._K._Rowling/archive1/Archive_3#Another_initial_query:_status_of_the_lead|this pre-drafting discussion]] on the status of the lead, and the [[Wikipedia_talk:Featured_article_review/J._K._Rowling/archive1/Archive_4#Tackling_the_lead|the FAR drafting discussion for the lead]], as that'll provide a great deal of insight for why it's phrased in the way that it is. |
|||
:I'm not opposed to changing it in principle, though we do have to be careful when changing it to make sure it reflects the content in the body. It might be possible to rephrase it a little more radically based on the body content though, if we can find a consensus for changing it. We're far enough away from the RfC that in theory, we could just come to a consensus here for a change without needing to have another one. Something like {{tq|These views have been described as transphobic by critics and LGBT rights organisations, divided feminists, fuelled debates on freedom of speech, academic freedom, and cancel culture, and prompted declarations of support for transgender people from the literary, arts, and culture sectors|q=y}} might be a good starting point for a more radical of revision it, as it's far more directly supported by the article's actual content. [[User:Sideswipe9th|Sideswipe9th]] ([[User talk:Sideswipe9th|talk]]) 22:54, 12 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::{{tq|These views have divided feminists, fuelled debates on freedom of speech, academic freedom, and cancel culture, and have been described as transphobic by critics and LGBT rights organisations.|q=y}} |
|||
::I would support this version; in your version it's unclear what the subject of "divided feminists" is, while the last line seems [[WP:UNDUE]] compared to coverage in the body. [[User:BilledMammal|BilledMammal]] ([[User talk:BilledMammal|talk]]) 22:58, 12 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::90% of this is taken from the first paragraph of [[J. K. Rowling#Transgender people]] section which says {{tq|Her statements have divided feminists; fuelled debates on freedom of speech, academic freedom and cancel culture; and prompted declarations of support for transgender people from the literary, arts and culture sectors.}} The remaining bit at the start is a juxtaposition of that against the third paragraph of the section, which states {{tq|LGBT charities and leading actors of the Wizarding World franchise condemned Rowling's comments}}, and the fourth paragraph of the section, which {{tq|Rowling's statements – beginning in 2017 – have been called transphobic by critics, and she has been referred to as a TERF.}} |
|||
:::As for the subject of "divided feminists" being unclear, some of that could be my choice of punctuation. How about {{tq|These views have been described as transphobic by critics and LGBT rights organisations'''. They have''' divided feminists, fuelled debates on freedom of speech, academic freedom, and cancel culture, and prompted declarations of support for transgender people from the literary, arts, and culture sectors|q=y}} (changes in bold)? [[User:Sideswipe9th|Sideswipe9th]] ([[User talk:Sideswipe9th|talk]]) 23:05, 12 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::That's better, but I would prefer to keep it in a single sentence (two, in my opinion, are [[WP:UNDUE]] emphasis on a relatively minor aspect of Rowling's life and works), and I remain unconvinced that the declarations of support are sufficiently relevant to the lede of Rowling's article. [[User:BilledMammal|BilledMammal]] ([[User talk:BilledMammal|talk]]) 23:07, 12 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::Again, the declarations of support piece comes from the first paragraph of the transgender people section. I don't really see any issue with that minimal mention in the lead. When it was discussed during the FAR, the biggest concern with that sentence was making sure that it didn't deviate from the massively imperfect version the 2021 RfC left us with. If we now consider ourselves free of that particular burden, then re-writing it to better reflect what we actually say in the body |
|||
:::::As for the length and two sentences, 43 words from a lead that contains 400 others prior to the current version of the sentence, for a section that currently takes up 505 words doesn't really seem that undue to me. A two sentence structure more neatly addresses your concern about the subject of "divided feminists" being unclear. And I think that your one sentence version has a similar problem in that it's not directly explaining why the views have divided feminists. The division is because the majority of feminists and feminist bodies consider the views to be transphobic, and I think we kinda need say that descriptor up front before we can say that the views have divided feminists. Otherwise we leave open the question of "why have they divided feminists?" [[User:Sideswipe9th|Sideswipe9th]] ([[User talk:Sideswipe9th|talk]]) 23:27, 12 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::::If I may respond to the last sentence there? It's absolutely fine not to answer that question in the lede. The point of the lede isn't to present all the relevant information contained in an article, but to give the reader an accurate representation of what the article contains. Why her statements divided feminists is explained in the relevant section of the page as a whole. [[User:Robrecht~enwiki|Robrecht]] ([[User talk:Robrecht~enwiki|talk]]) 17:58, 14 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::I think Sideswipe9th was objecting to the order of BilledMammal's sentence (which mentions a division before explaining that the views have been described as transphobic by..) and we may have gone a bit too deeply thinking about "why have they divided feminists" because in fact neither proposed sentence explains that at all, nor does the body. It isn't for this article to explain why some feminists are pro trans and some are trans exclusionary, why some think some attitudes are transphobic and some don't. The word we are looking for is "what". ''What'' is it that the feminists are divided about, wrt supporting or criticising Rowling. -- [[User:Colin|Colin]]°[[User talk:Colin|<sup>Talk</sup>]] 19:44, 14 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::::::Yeah, what Colin just said. I think I just explained my thoughts on that poorly. [[User:Sideswipe9th|Sideswipe9th]] ([[User talk:Sideswipe9th|talk]]) 19:56, 14 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::That is 100% better than what I proposed kudos to you for whipping up such great language in like two seconds flat. [[User:LegalSmeagolian|LegalSmeagolian]] ([[User talk:LegalSmeagolian|talk]]) 22:58, 12 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::Thanks! Mostly I'm just [[kitbashing]] the content that's already in the article's body. [[User:Sideswipe9th|Sideswipe9th]] ([[User talk:Sideswipe9th|talk]]) 23:08, 12 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::I also think Siwdeswip9th's summary is better and agree that this is actually a small number of words for something that has come to dominate any discussion of Rowling (no review of her books, films or TV programmes fails to mention this, particularly wrt young audiences). I see that it is taken/summarising the body and I would question the "academic freedom" clause. I looked at the source and although it mentions Rowling, nowhere AFAICS does it say her comments have "fuelled debate" on that matter. The academics have had plenty of their own kind fuelling debate without considering the twitter comments of a children's fantasy author. So I propose those two words are dropped from the body and this proposed lead sentence. -- [[User:Colin|Colin]]°[[User talk:Colin|<sup>Talk</sup>]] 08:30, 13 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::I don't have any issue dropping "academic freedom" from the body and the draft given what you've said. [[User:Sideswipe9th|Sideswipe9th]] ([[User talk:Sideswipe9th|talk]]) 19:55, 14 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
===Draft proposal in context=== |
|||
Ok, so that it's clearer for everyone, here's where we're at with the proposed changes to the lead: |
|||
{| class="wikitable" |
{| class="wikitable" |
||
! style="width: 30em;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=J._K._Rowling&oldid=1165322330 Current] |
|||
! style="width: 30em;" | Proposed (adds 20 words) |
|||
|- |
|- |
||
! Historic (454 words) !! Proposed (401 words) |
|||
|| These views have been criticised as transphobic by LGBT rights organisations and some feminists, but have received support from other feminists and individuals. |
|||
|- |
|||
|| These views have been described as transphobic by critics and LGBT rights organisations. They have divided feminists, fuelled debates on freedom of speech, academic freedom, and cancel culture, and prompted declarations of support for transgender people from the literary, arts, and culture sectors. |
|||
|| |
|||
{{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> |
|||
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> |
|||
[[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 |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> 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> |
|||
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> |
|||
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 news |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'|work= [[Deadline Hollywood]] |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 |publisher= [[BBC News]] |access-date= 2 May 2024}}</ref> and that "no action [would] be taken" as they were not illegal.<ref>{{Cite news |last=Bonar |first=Megan |date=2 April 2024 |title=JK Rowling hate law posts not criminal, police say |url=https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-68712471 |access-date=2 April 2024 |publisher=[[BBC News]] |language=en-GB}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |last=Learmonth |first=Andrew |date=3 April 2024 |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=3 April 2024 |work=[[The Herald (Scotland)|The Herald]] |language=en-GB}}</ref> |
|||
|| |
|||
{{Main|Political views of J. K. Rowling#Transgender rights}} |
|||
<!-- Overview --> |
|||
Rowling is a gender-critical feminist.{{sfn|Whited|2024|p=7}}{{sfn|Steinfeld|2020|pp=34–35}}{{sfn|Schwirblat|Freberg|Freberg|2022|pp=367–368}} She has often used Twitter and her blog to share thoughts on trans people, mostly in the context of proposed legal changes in Scotland that would make it easier to transition. She has said that "the majority of trans-identified people not only pose zero threat to others, but are vulnerable ... Trans people need and deserve protection",<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> but she opposes gender self-recognition.{{sfn|Whited|2024|p=17}} She feels that some transwomen are a threat to women {{sfn|Duggan|2021|p=161}} and trans-positive messages can be a threat to children.{{sfn|Duggan|2021|p=161}} She has tweeted a list of transwomen, writing that they are "men, every last one of them". Many people, including some of the principal film stars connected with her work, have condemned her remarks,{{sfn|Pape|2022|p=238}} although sales of Harry Potter books grew by 28% after she made them.{{sfn|Pape|2022|p=238}} |
|||
<!-- History --> |
|||
Controversy over Rowling's gender-critical messaging has developed over time. Although it started in 2017,{{sfn|Duggan|2021|pp=160–161)}} it became more fraught in 2019 when she expressed support for [[Maya Forstater]],{{sfn|Whited|2024|pp=6-8}} whose employment contract with the London branch of the [[Center for Global Development]] was not renewed after she expressed gender-critical views.{{sfn|Pugh|2020|p=7}} Rowling wrote 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>}} ''Harry Potter'' scholar Lana Whited writes that 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 --> |
|||
Rowling's views have impacted her reputation. Fans turned away from her work, boycotted events, and publishers hesitated to accept her work.{{sfn|Whited|2024|p=8}} 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>{{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> [[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> [[LGBT]] charity the [[Wizarding World]] spoke out against her stance.<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> [[Daniel Radcliffe]], [[Emma Watson]], [[Rupert Grint]], and [[Eddie Redmayne]] and others expressed support for the transgender community.{{sfn|Borah|2024|p=375}} [[GLAAD]] called Rowling's comments "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> 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 --> |
|||
Rowling rejects these characterisations and denies being transphobic.<ref name=RowlingReasons/><ref name= Breznican2023/> In an essay she posted to her website on 10 June 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> she said her views on women's rights arose from her experience as a survivor 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> |
|||
|} |
|} |
||
{{cot|Sources}} |
|||
And transgender people section: |
|||
{{reflist-talk}} |
|||
{{notelist-talk}} |
|||
{{cob}} |
|||
====Discussion of fourth draft==== |
|||
I think we need to look carefully at what the sources are saying. For example, Steinfeld says J.K Rowling has been labeled a TERF ([https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0306422020917609 2nd para])(as opposed to saying she ''is''); Schwirblatt says that one side of the Twitter community labeled her a TERF in reaction to her #IStandWithMaya tweet ([https://books.google.com/books?id=KRN2EAAAQBAJ&lpg=PA359&ots=1YmwKn_ktE&lr&pg=PA368#v=onepage&q&f=false p. 368]); Whited says "Rowling’s manifesto led some people to label her as a trans-exclusionary radical feminist (TERF)", (p.7). This is the reason I kept changing the first sentence; sometimes in response to comments here, sometimes in response to sources. Bottom line is that we have to be careful what we put in Wiki voice. That's why hedging is good, though it does result in tortured prose. But that's often characteristic of writing here. [[User:Victoriaearle|Victoria]] ([[User talk:Victoriaearle|tk]]) 15:29, 1 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*Would we prefer "Rowling's views are gender-critical"? I'm looking for a simple declarative sentence without vagueness, evasion, or waffle of any kind.—[[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> 16:36, 1 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*:I would support that if we feel like we need to for sourcing purposes, though I would say that we can use sources that phrase it like that to source "is a gender-critical feminist" in most cases. Depends some on the particular source, though. [[User:LokiTheLiar|Loki]] ([[User talk:LokiTheLiar|talk]]) 17:57, 1 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*::It's a reasonable fallback. I can't imagine a good faith Wikipedian reading the sources and then denying that she's gender-critical. I'd prefer gender-critical feminist because our page on [[gender-critical feminism]] so clearly captures what Rowling says.—[[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> 19:37, 1 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*:::A couple of thoughts. First, we have to hew to the sources. If references exist for the sentence as written, then we should just swap out sources rather than use the ones that don't exactly support it. Another idea would be to use a three-pronged thesis, something along the lines of "Rowling's views about sex and gender have alienated fans, affected her reputation and [fill in the blank]". I suspect something like that would be easier to source.{{pb}}While I'm here a couple of other nitpicks: there's no source for the sentence "She has tweeted a list of transwomen, writing that they are "men, every last one of them". Right now it's cited to Pape but that article is about Ratcliffe if my memory is correct. Also, "principal film stars connected with her work, have condemned her remarks" is in the 2nd para & again in the 3rd. One mentioned should be deleted.{{pb}}The structure is looking much much better! [[User:Victoriaearle|Victoria]] ([[User talk:Victoriaearle|tk]]) 22:49, 1 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*::::Yes, the duplication of principal film stars is one of my nitpicks, and I have a suggestion for how to fix it. If we're on the right track overall, maybe rather than add a list, I could just put up the next draft fixing these nitpicks? [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 11:59, 2 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*::::Re: the inclusion of: 'She has tweeted a list of transwomen, writing that they are "men, every last one of them".': |
|||
*::::I think it's right that this incident is included because it's notable and there's not much point discussing her views on transgender people if we entirely omit what she's saying to and about transgender people. |
|||
*::::We should, however, be saying "trans women" rather than "transwomen".<ref>{{cite web |last1=Lopez |first1=German |title=Why you should always use "transgender" instead of "transgendered" |url=https://www.vox.com/2015/2/18/8055691/transgender-transgendered-tnr |website=Vox |access-date=2 May 2024 |language=en |date=18 February 2015 |quote=Writers shouldn't use "transman" or "transwoman." The word trans is an adjective that helps describe someone's gender identity, and it should be treated like other adjectives. Merging the adjective and the noun risks suggesting that a trans man or woman is more (or less) than just a man or just a woman, which goes against how many trans people identify themselves.}}</ref> A point of note is that "transwoman" is deliberately used as a dog whistle by people who deny trans people are of the gender with which they identify; per [[MOS:GIDINFO]], we should use people's gender identity affirmatively. Using "transwomen" as a separate noun differentiates them from other, cisgender women. By contrast, "trans woman" is labelling someone as a woman who happens to be trans.<ref>{{cite web |title=Trans Journalists Association Stylebook and Coverage Guide |url=https://styleguide.transjournalists.org/#def-trans-woman |website=Trans Journalists Association |access-date=2 May 2024 |language=en |date=15 August 2023 |quote=trans woman (n.) Last updated Aug 25, 2023 A woman who is trans. Trans woman is two words, with trans simply modifying the broader category of woman. The one-word compound transwoman is outdated but has recently been adopted by some anti-trans political groups; do not use it in news copy.}}</ref> |
|||
*::::As mentioned, we also need to provide references for this sentence. Here are some first options to consider: |
|||
*::::* {{cite web |title=Police say JK Rowling committed no crime with tweets slamming Scotland's new hate speech law |url=https://apnews.com/article/jk-rowling-hate-speech-law-police-7416928367e1b4a15775f1472297a721 |website=AP News |language=en |date=2 April 2024}} |
|||
*::::* {{cite web |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 |website=The Guardian |date=3 April 2024 |ref=none}} |
|||
*::::* {{cite web |title=J.K. Rowling will not face action under Scottish hate crime laws, police say |url=https://www.reuters.com/world/uk/uk-government-backs-jk-rowling-scottish-hate-crime-law-challenge-2024-04-02/ |website=Reuters|ref=none}} |
|||
*::::* {{cite web |title=JK Rowling in ‘arrest me’ challenge over Scottish hate crime law |url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c51j64lk2l8o |website=BBC News |date=1 April 2024|ref=none}} |
|||
*::::* {{cite web |last1=Beal |first1=David Leask, James |title=JK Rowling challenges police: Arrest me under Scottish hate crime law |url=https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/online-misgendering-scotland-hate-crime-law-act-7gsf5t3k3 |language=en |website=The Times |date=2 May 2024 |ref=none}} |
|||
*::::* {{cite web |last1=Sands |first1=Leo |title=Scotland’s hate speech law ignites culture war far outside its borders |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2024/04/10/hate-crime-speech-scotland-jk-rowling/ |website=Washington Post |date=10 April 2024|ref=none}} |
|||
{{cot|Sources}} |
|||
{{reflist-talk}} |
|||
{{cob}} |
|||
*::::I do think it's important to provide context as to why she did make this thread: the perceived possibility that misgendering trans people might become illegal in Scotland under the new act. Although the threshold for criminality is a lot higher than a lot of people seem/seemed to believe, as discussed in the Washington Post article above and by Humza Yousaf who himself said [https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-68725547 he wasn't surprised] her comments weren't criminal, she made this thread to be the one to take up the challenge over the chance such comments were now criminal. [[User:13tez|13tez]] ([[User talk:13tez|talk]]) 21:17, 2 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*:::::{{u|13tez}} agree on your comments, but I am not finding the specific quote about "men, every last one of them" in the sources above ... which one has it ? [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 21:36, 2 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*::::::Ah ha ... found in ''The Guardian'' (my first preference for sourcing is usually AP or Reuters, but The Guardian works). [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 21:38, 2 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*:I'd prefer that alernate (16:36, 1 May) as well. Victoria's three-pronged idea works, too; I still dislike the declartive sentence in WikiVoice. And we don't know how she "feels"; we know what she has stated. Overall, I think this draft is headed the right direction. I've got my usual list of nitpicks that I'll put up if others agree that this draft is the way to go overall. I also want to point out that this kind of structured process works!!! If we get it close enough on the next version to call it final, we can ping the world for approval before installing, and then move on to using the same process to re-do the lead. Holding off on my list of nitpicks until others indicate this is close. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 11:44, 2 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*::With a reminder that [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=J._K._Rowling&oldid=1202117364#Transgender_people this is where we started (some elements are still missing)]. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 11:51, 2 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
=== Fifth draft === |
|||
{| class="wikitable" |
{| class="wikitable" |
||
! style="width: 30em;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=J._K._Rowling&oldid= |
! style="width: 30em;" | Historical [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=J._K._Rowling&oldid=1202117364#Transgender_people 429 words] |
||
! style="width: 30em;" | |
! style="width: 30em;" | Draft 5; 468 words |
||
|- |
|- |
||
|| {{Main|Political views of J. K. Rowling#Transgender rights}} |
|||
|| 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: |
|||
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: |
|||
* [[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> |
|||
|| 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}} |
* [[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> |
||
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> |
|||
[[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> |
|||
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> |
|||
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> |
|||
|| {{Main|Political views of J. K. Rowling#Transgender rights}} |
|||
<!-- Overview --> |
|||
Rowling has espoused views referred to as [[Feminist views on transgender topics#Gender-critical feminism and trans-exclusionary radical feminism|gender-critical]].{{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 has often shared opinions on [[Transgender rights movement|transgender rights]], mostly in the context of proposed legal changes in Scotland that would make it easier to [[transgender|transition]].<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)}} }} She has suggested 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> Her remarks have provoked 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}} while sales of ''Harry Potter'' books following some of her comments grew by 28% 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> |
|||
<!-- History --> |
|||
Controversy over Rowling's gender-critical messaging started in 2017.{{sfn|Duggan|2021|pp=160–161)}} It became more fraught in 2019 when she defended [[Maya Forstater]],{{sfn|Whited|2024|pp=6-8}} whose employment contract with the London branch of the [[Center for Global Development]] was not renewed after she expressed 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>}} ''Harry Potter'' scholar Lana Whited writes that 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 --> |
|||
Rowling's views have impacted her reputation. As her views on the [[legal status of transgender people]] came under scrutiny,{{sfn|Suissa|Sullivan|2021|pp=66–69}} she received insults and threats{{sfn|Suissa|Sullivan|2021|p=69}}{{sfn|Whited|2024|p=9}} and discussion moved beyond the Twitter community.{{sfn|Schwirblat|Freberg|Freberg|2022|p=368}} Fans turned away from her work, boycotted events, and publishers hesitated to accept her work.{{sfn|Whited|2024|p=8}} Criticism came from the ''Harry Potter'' fansites [[MuggleNet]] and [[The Leaky Cauldron (website)|The Leaky Cauldron]],{{sfn|Henderson|2022|p=224}} and [[LGBT]] charities [[Mermaids (charity)|Mermaids]],<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> [[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 name= Milne2020/> [[GLAAD]] called Rowling's comments "cruel" and "inaccurate".<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> Leading actors of the [[Wizarding World]] spoke out against her stance;<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> [[Daniel Radcliffe]], [[Emma Watson]], [[Rupert Grint]], [[Eddie Redmayne]] and others declared support for the transgender community.{{sfn|Borah|2024|p=375}}{{efn| [[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>}} 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 --> |
|||
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 – that Tolando Henderson{{sfn|Henderson|2022|p=224}} and Whited state left trans people feeling betrayed{{sfn|Whited|2024|p=7}} – Rowling said her views on women's rights arose from her experience as a survivor 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}} |
|||
|} |
|} |
||
{{cot|Sources}} |
{{cot|Sources}} |
||
{{reflist-talk}} |
{{reflist-talk}} |
||
{{notelist-talk}} |
|||
{{cob}} |
{{cob}} |
||
====Discussion of proposal ==== |
|||
For the lead, these changes bring it more in line with the article's body text. It means we're going against the flawed 2021 RfC, but I think it's an improvement to the article and we are far enough away from that time that we can just make this change, if there's a consensus for it. For the transgender people section, this is the incorporation of {{u|Colin}}'s proposal to drop "academic freedom" from the "fuelled debates" sentence. Thoughts? [[User:Sideswipe9th|Sideswipe9th]] ([[User talk:Sideswipe9th|talk]]) 19:27, 15 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
==== Discussion of fifth draft ==== |
|||
:I like the first sentence in the first proposed change, I'm uncertain about "divided feminists" however, for the simple reason that as is, it seems incredibly vague and doesn't really tell the reader, anything. What feminists, divided how? [[User:Snokalok|Snokalok]] ([[User talk:Snokalok|talk]]) 19:56, 15 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
I think the fourth draft is a great improvement. In Draft 5, I tried to address the following (which I consider minor): |
|||
::Per the body content and the sources her statements have divided feminist opinion. If you want to see how that content in the body was developed and why that phrasing was selected, I'd recommend reviewing [[Talk:J._K._Rowling/Archive_13#"and_she_has_been_referred_to_as_a_TERF"|this discussion from June 2022]], as well as [[Wikipedia_talk:Featured_article_review/J._K._Rowling/archive1/Archive_5#Workshopping_the_transgender_section|this section of the FAR]] in March 2022. We can't really go into that much detail in the article lead, as that is what the body is for. [[User:Sideswipe9th|Sideswipe9th]] ([[User talk:Sideswipe9th|talk]]) 20:57, 15 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:It isn't enough to put it at the end of the lead. It needs to be within the first three sentences of the article. It is one of the most notable and significant aspects of who she is in public society. |
|||
:Furthermore, as per comments in the "It's time to include anti-transgender activist in the first sentence" discussion, there is sufficient scholarly, peer-reviewed evidence to state that she is "widely known for her anti-trans views." The term "anti-trans" should be explicit--not making this explicit is whitewashing / shielding her, which would be a form of sociopolitical bias. [[User:PenelopePlesiosaur|PenelopePlesiosaur]] ([[User talk:PenelopePlesiosaur|talk]]) 22:14, 15 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::I don't think the article body content supports bringing this up to being something said within the first three sentences of the lead. While it's certainly noteworthy enough for the lead overall, when looked at in the scope of the rest of the content about Rowling I just don't see that being feasible. |
|||
::As for {{tq|widely known for her anti-trans views}}, I don't think the body content nor the sourcing we currently cite supports it with that broad a qualifier (ie, widely known). That might change if we're able to do a broader rewrite of the second paragraph of the transgender people section, per [[#c-Sideswipe9th-20240315191000-13tez-20240315181600|my comment above]] suggesting that we look for sourcing that describes the changes in her expressed views over time. But for now, I don't think it's really possible. [[User:Sideswipe9th|Sideswipe9th]] ([[User talk:Sideswipe9th|talk]]) 22:45, 15 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::I'd argue at this point that a broader rewrite may be in order, focusing less on individual instances (which can be detailed in the separate views article), and more on the general pattern that's been established. There's certainly enough RSP sources to support that. [[User:Snokalok|Snokalok]] ([[User talk:Snokalok|talk]]) 00:29, 16 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::You won't find me objecting to re-writing that second paragraph. Let's start a new discussion section for that, with step 1 being finding and listing here all of the highest quality sources available that would support a substantial change. [[User:Sideswipe9th|Sideswipe9th]] ([[User talk:Sideswipe9th|talk]]) 19:03, 16 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:Just realised after reviewing the {{diff2|1214059799|bold implementation}} of this by {{u|LegalSmeagolian}} that while I'd removed "academic freedom" from the body in the proposal, I'd forgotten to remove it from the lead of the proposal. I've just {{diff2|1214063489|removed the words}} from both places now. [[User:Sideswipe9th|Sideswipe9th]] ([[User talk:Sideswipe9th|talk]]) 19:01, 16 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::Thanks I did not catch that. [[User:LegalSmeagolian|LegalSmeagolian]] ([[User talk:LegalSmeagolian|talk]]) 19:05, 16 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
# Address the uncited statement "every last one of them" sentence. |
|||
# Address the lead declarative sentence. |
|||
We have other people once known for their work in other fields, who are now known for anti-transgender activism. Such as [[Graham Linehan]], described in our article as {{tq|"an Irish comedy writer and anti-transgender activist"}}. For the past half decade, most coverage of Rowling in reliable sources has been about her anti-transgender views and activism. She is far better known as an anti-transgender activist than Graham Linehan ever was; in fact many RS have described her as the most famous TERF[https://www.themarysue.com/jk-rowlings-most-controversial-moments/]. It's really all she talks about in public, and it's what RS focus on when reporting on her. If you do a Google News search every result is about her anti-transgender views in some way (I looked through the first hundred results today). And this has now been the situation for years. Also, "philanthropist", really? She donates money to anti-transgender groups. She doesn't seem to be widely known for any philanthropic efforts, to the same degree that she is known for her former work as a children's author and that she is now known as an anti-transgender activist. Any philanthropic activities (that aren't just donations to anti-trans groups) could be mentioned below instead. |
|||
# Work back in some of the laws so readers (particularly those not from the UK) are given some idea what these laws are. |
|||
# Fix duplicate on supporting actors. |
|||
# Threats to her safety which was deleted is supported by Whited |
|||
# Transwomen to trans women |
|||
# Address the word ''feels'' |
|||
# The [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=J._K._Rowling&oldid=1222030423#Views broader introduction to this section in the article already addresses that she often/frequently uses twitter], so some redundancy there. |
|||
# Fix all the citation formatting to agree with the article style. |
|||
[[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 03:39, 3 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:PS, this statement needs a more concrete time frame: "although sales of Harry Potter books grew by 28% after she made them" ... I haven't had a chance to check Pape, but we should specify change from x year to y or something. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 03:44, 3 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
Hence, based on the model of [[Graham Linehan]] and comparable articles, the first sentence should be {{tq|"is a British author and anti-transgender activist"}}. --[[User:Amanda A. Brant|Amanda A. Brant]] ([[User talk:Amanda A. Brant|talk]]) 16:35, 15 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::Here's the source that Pape cites: |
|||
::* {{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=none}} |
|||
::[[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 14:52, 3 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::: [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AJ._K._Rowling&diff=1222044690&oldid=1222044077 Added], [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 15:01, 3 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*I'm afraid I'm going to bang on about starting each paragraph with a [[simple sentence|simple]] [[declarative sentence|declarative]] [[topic sentence]] again. I think encyclopaedia writers are educators, and I feel it's important to write in an educational way. Introduce each idea before we explain it. |
|||
# The new draft's first paragraph begins with a [[compound sentence]], which means a sentence with sub-clauses. Let's preface it with: "Rowling's views are gender-critical." |
|||
# The second paragraph begins with a compound sentence. We can fix that by changing "Controversy over Rowling's gender-critical messaging started in 2017, and became more fraught in 2019..." to "Controversy over Rowling's gender-critical messaging started in 2017. It became more fraught in 2019..." |
|||
#: [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:J._K._Rowling&diff=prev&oldid=1222038721 Done]. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 14:20, 3 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
# The third and fourth paragraphs start well. |
|||
:I know I've said this several times, and I'm sorry to keep badgering on about 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> 12:08, 3 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::I understand and respect some editors' desire for starting paragraphs with topic sentences, but I've seen it cause problems at other articles, where it led to accusations of OR. If my suggested first sentence is too complex, I'm confident better writers than I (which is almost everyone :) can fix that without using a declarative sentence that has other problems (for example, as in the fixes in your suggestion #2, [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:J._K._Rowling&diff=prev&oldid=1222038721 which works]). You're not badgering about it; I hear you, but disagree that the way one writes an essay is always the best way to write an encyclopedia. If those are your only two issues with Draft 5, we are making progress !!! [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 14:12, 3 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::Also, with [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:J._K._Rowling&diff=prev&oldid=1222045035 the change suggested by 13tez], the first sentence no longer seems overly complex. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 15:04, 3 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::Could you be more specific about what these "other problems" are? Rowling's views ''are'', very clearly and obviously, gender-critical. I'm concerned that it could come across as POV if we're evasive or obfuscatory about this.—[[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> 15:10, 3 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::Why label her in WikiVoice when the succeeding paragraphs make it possible for the reader decide ? Always write in a way that let's the reader decide ... [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 15:13, 3 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::::PS, in fact, that's quite why I like your rewrite in Draft 4 -- it sticks to saying what she said to let the reader decide. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 15:25, 3 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::Because we're an encyclopaedia, so we have to write concise summary of our topic. I thought we'd agreed on "Rowling's views are gender-critical".—[[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> 16:00, 3 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::: Yes, per discussed [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:J._K._Rowling&oldid=1222056037#Discussion_of_fourth_draft here], where I continue my concern about the missing context (changes to and proposed laws). Her comments have consistently opposed changes to laws. I [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:J._K._Rowling&diff=prev&oldid=1222056037 made this adjustment] to hew more closely to discussion above. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 16:36, 3 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::::I only tonight realized that the fourth draft had taken the prior sources about "labeling her as a TERF", and used them for the declarative that she is gender-critical; we can't do that (and this is a BLP). All sources say "some labeled her" as a TERF. The first sentence will need work. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 03:00, 5 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::::I don't think {{tq|Always write in a way that let's the reader decide }} is true, and in fact I think that's specifically bad advice a lot of the time. We don't "let the reader decide" whether [[Lee Harvey Oswald]] killed JFK or not, we just say that he did. |
|||
::::::Similarly, we should not do a lot of hedging about whether Rowling is a gender-critical feminist if the sources say she is (and they do). [[User:LokiTheLiar|Loki]] ([[User talk:LokiTheLiar|talk]]) 16:31, 3 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::See [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:J._K._Rowling&oldid=1222056037#Discussion_of_fourth_draft related comments here from Victoriaearle] about how we are misapplying labels. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 16:37, 3 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::::::Well, the choices seem to be, accept Sandy's watering-down or go to RFC. I don't mind which. If we accept Sandy's watered-down version then we should simplify "Rowling has used the internet to express gender-critical views" to "Rowling has expressed gender-critical views".—[[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> 16:41, 3 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::::As I said somewhere else on this page, it helps process-wise to focus on the good first, before moving on to the difficult. Are we yet at a place where, besides these few sticking points, we think we're headed in the right direction or where we want to be ? Spend some time finding where we agree before moving on to sorting disagreements. Overall, since Draft 4, I'm pleased with the direction, where we are doing more of letting her words speak for themselves, and less of he-said, she-said and lists of supporters and opposers, while also focusing better now on recent scholarly sources, with limited reliance on news sources or recentism. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 16:46, 3 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::::Also, [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:J._K._Rowling&diff=prev&oldid=1222059247 trimmed] (internet is stated in global introduction to the entire section anyway). [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 16:49, 3 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
====Minor tweaks==== |
|||
:Anti-trans activist is a pretty strong label to use for any BLP, and the sourcing requirements for it are high. For Linehan, we have an array of relatively high quality sources that explicitly describe him as an anti-trans activist, and that descriptor sees pretty frequent use in sources about him and his current activities. |
|||
We've got five (5) instances of "expressed". Can we simplify all of them please? Suggest: find/replace "expressed the view that" to "said", "expressed support for" to "supported", and then "expressed that" to "said".—[[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> 09:56, 4 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:For Rowling, I don't think we have any high quality sources that describe her as an anti-trans activist, or a close synonym, much less use that to the same sort of consistent degree that sources about Linehan describe his activities. Yes The Mary Sue have described her as {{tq|the world’s most famous TERF}}, but from reading the highest quality sources available I don't think that's something that's reflected elsewhere. What other sources do you have that could support this? [[User:Sideswipe9th|Sideswipe9th]] ([[User talk:Sideswipe9th|talk]]) 16:41, 15 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::I agree with this until more comprehensive sourcing can be found. — '''[[User:Czello|<i style="color:#8000FF">Czello</i>]]''' <sup>''([[User talk:Czello|<i style="color:#8000FF">music</i>]])''</sup> 18:03, 15 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::For now, I'm interested in starting a conversation regarding the first sentence and specifically the need to revisit it. I'm open to ideas regarding the exact way to phrase it, but I believe it should include something that summarizes her anti-trans or TERF activism in some way. It's simply too prominent to ignore, considering that a majority of RS over the past half decade focus on this topic. The Mary Sue article was just an example; the sources describing Rowling as (a prominent or some variation thereof) TERF, anti-trans, or in similar terms are numerous[https://www.forbes.com/sites/dawnstaceyennis/2019/12/19/jk-rowling-comes-out-as-a-terf/][https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2020/06/09/what-terf-definition-trans-activists-includes-j-k-rowling/5326071002/][https://theconversation.com/witch-trials-terf-wars-and-the-voice-of-conscience-in-a-new-podcast-about-j-k-rowling-200088][https://news.yahoo.com/j-k-rowlings-transphobia-controversy-102506549.html][https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/j-k-rowling-doubles-down-what-some-critics-call-transphobic-n1229351][https://www.advocate.com/people/2020/6/06/jk-rowling-goes-full-terf-new-series-transphobic-tweets][https://www.vox.com/culture/23622610/jk-rowling-transphobic-statements-timeline-history-controversy][https://www.vanityfair.com/style/2020/06/jk-rowling-transphobia-feminism][https://theweek.com/feature/1020838/jk-rowlings-transphobia-controversy-a-complete-timeline][https://www.out.com/transgender/2020/9/23/noted-terf-jk-rowling-promotes-anti-trans-store-followers][https://www.vox.com/culture/22254435/harry-potter-tv-series-hbo-jk-rowling-transphobic] ({{tq|Rowling’s name is now synonymous with “TERF”}}) [https://insidethemagic.net/2024/03/jk-rowling-denies-transgender-persecution-holocaust-jc1/] ({{tq|The controversial figurehead has dived full force into the trans-exclusionary radical feminist (TERF) movement in recent years}}) [https://www.usmagazine.com/celebrity-news/news/j-k-rowling-says-shed-happily-go-to-prison-for-anti-trans-views/][https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/jk-rowling-s-drawn-backlash-anti-trans-beliefs-hits-back-putin-citing-rcna21587] [https://www.gamespot.com/articles/jk-rowlings-anti-transgender-stance-and-hogwarts-legacy/1100-6501632/] ({{tq|the [Harry Potter] franchise has, sadly, remained in the ever-present shadow of a larger conversation: creator JK Rowling's public support of anti-transgender rhetoric, as well as her support for the people and groups that spread it, all expressed on social media, her website, and in her activism. This has not been an isolated incident, but a continued stance for Rowling dating all the way back to 2018}}) [https://edition.cnn.com/2023/02/21/entertainment/jk-rowling-podcast-release-what-to-know-cec/index.html][https://www.vulture.com/2020/06/jk-rowling-anti-transgender-comments-blog.html]. Regarding Linehan, his anti-trans activism is relatively obscure compared to Rowling, and mostly limited to ramblings on his Youtube channel, and he doesn't receive anywhere near the kind of coverage that Rowling gets for her anti-trans views. --[[User:Amanda A. Brant|Amanda A. Brant]] ([[User talk:Amanda A. Brant|talk]]) 18:11, 15 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::More than enough reliable sources for a phrase along the lines of "she is known for expressing views that are widely considered to be anti-transgender" in the first or second sentence of the article, for sure. [[User:PenelopePlesiosaur|PenelopePlesiosaur]] ([[User talk:PenelopePlesiosaur|talk]]) 18:23, 15 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::The issue isn't that Linehan's actions are more obscure or limited compared to Rowling's, it's that the anti-trans activist descriptor is more widely used in sources about him. |
|||
:::Taking the array of sources you've provided, several have to be eliminated immediately. The [https://news.yahoo.com/j-k-rowlings-transphobia-controversy-102506549.html Forbes piece] is by a contributor, so see [[WP:FORBESCON]]. The [https://news.yahoo.com/j-k-rowlings-transphobia-controversy-102506549.html Yahoo piece] is actually a republishing of the article by [https://theweek.com/feature/1020838/jk-rowlings-transphobia-controversy-a-complete-timeline The Week], and I've already told you on your talk page to watch out for this exact problem. The reliability of Inside The Magic is unclear, and may not be suitable for BLPs. |
|||
:::Of what's left, [https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2020/06/09/what-terf-definition-trans-activists-includes-j-k-rowling/5326071002/ USA Today] doesn't describe her as a TERF and only says that others have described her as such and she disputes the term. This is the same for [https://theconversation.com/witch-trials-terf-wars-and-the-voice-of-conscience-in-a-new-podcast-about-j-k-rowling-200088 The Conversation], the first [https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/j-k-rowling-doubles-down-what-some-critics-call-transphobic-n1229351 NBC News], [https://www.usmagazine.com/celebrity-news/news/j-k-rowling-says-shed-happily-go-to-prison-for-anti-trans-views/ Us Magazine], the second [https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/jk-rowling-s-drawn-backlash-anti-trans-beliefs-hits-back-putin-citing-rcna21587 NBC News], [https://www.gamespot.com/articles/jk-rowlings-anti-transgender-stance-and-hogwarts-legacy/1100-6501632/ Gamespot], [https://edition.cnn.com/2023/02/21/entertainment/jk-rowling-podcast-release-what-to-know-cec/index.html CNN], and [https://www.vulture.com/2020/06/jk-rowling-anti-transgender-comments-blog.html Vulture] all of which describe her as expressing anti-trans or transphobic views but not being an anti-trans activist. |
|||
:::[https://www.advocate.com/people/2020/6/06/jk-rowling-goes-full-terf-new-series-transphobic-tweets The Advocate] only describes her as "going full TERF" in the headline, however [[WP:RSHEADLINES|headlines aren't considered reliable]]. Otherwise it describes her as "invoking anti-trans language". The [https://www.vox.com/culture/23622610/jk-rowling-transphobic-statements-timeline-history-controversy first Vox piece] is a useful timeline but only says {{tq|Rowling has been turning toward an anti-trans stance over a long period}}. The [https://www.vanityfair.com/style/2020/06/jk-rowling-transphobia-feminism Vanity Fair article] says that {{tq|she's transphobic because everyone she reads and listens to is}}. The timeline from [https://theweek.com/feature/1020838/jk-rowlings-transphobia-controversy-a-complete-timeline The Week] is useful for documenting the progression of her views, but does not describe Rowling in any way outside the headline. The [https://www.out.com/transgender/2020/9/23/noted-terf-jk-rowling-promotes-anti-trans-store-followers article by Out] has the same headline issues as The Advocate and The Week. The [https://www.vox.com/culture/22254435/harry-potter-tv-series-hbo-jk-rowling-transphobic second Vox article] does say that {{tq|Rowling’s name is now synonymous with "TERF"}}. |
|||
:::Having reviewed all of these sources, I'm sorry but I don't think this supports any change in descriptor in the article, much less promoting that descriptor to the first sentence. [[User:Sideswipe9th|Sideswipe9th]] ([[User talk:Sideswipe9th|talk]]) 18:39, 15 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::"These views have been criticised as transphobic by LGBT rights organisations and some feminists, but have received support from other feminists and individuals." |
|||
::::I feel that these sources are enough to change from "criticized by LGBT rights orgs and some feminists" to simply "widely criticized as transphobic" [[User:Snokalok|Snokalok]] ([[User talk:Snokalok|talk]]) 19:24, 15 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::Please see [[#Draft_proposal_in_context|this discussion above]] where a draft to replace that sentence in the lead with one that more accurately reflects the body content is underway. [[User:Sideswipe9th|Sideswipe9th]] ([[User talk:Sideswipe9th|talk]]) 19:29, 15 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::Agreed, "both sides-ing" this in the article isn't rooted in reality. It's an overtly political, biased, and--yes--anti-trans move. |
|||
:::::Additionally, there are plenty of scholarly, peer-reviewed articles that characterize Rowling as anti-trans or as a TERF, as listed below. By Wikipedia's own standards, these are more reliable than the popular media sources listed above. |
|||
:::::https://www.revistageminis.ufscar.br/index.php/geminis/article/view/759/516 |
|||
:::::McNamarah, Chan Tov. “CIS-WOMAN-PROTECTIVE ARGUMENTS.” Columbia Law Review, vol. 123, no. 3, 2023, pp. 845–928. JSTOR, https://www.jstor.org/stable/27211377. Accessed 15 Mar. 2024. |
|||
:::::Duggan, Jennifer. “Transformative Readings: Harry Potter Fan Fiction, Trans/Queer Reader Response, and J. K. Rowling.” Children’s Literature in Education, vol. 53, no. 2, June 2022, pp. 147–68. EBSCOhost, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10583-021-09446-9. [[User:PenelopePlesiosaur|PenelopePlesiosaur]] ([[User talk:PenelopePlesiosaur|talk]]) 19:33, 15 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::::You'll have to forgive my not being able to directly assess Martins and Sigliano, as I don't speak Portuguese. However is there a particular quote within that article that you think supports this? If so, could you please quote it both in the original Portuguese and provide a translation of it? |
|||
::::::McNamarah only comments on Rowling once, where they say {{tq|The British media ... largely welcomed author J.K. Rowling’s view that transgender equality jeopardizes cis women’s progress.}} That doesn't describe Rowling as an anti-trans activist, or any other related term. It merely states that the British media were welcoming of her views, just as they were supportive of Forstater's tribunal. |
|||
::::::The closest that Duggan gets to describing Rowling as an anti-trans activist is {{tq|Rowling’s personal, conservative views on sex and gender have recently been made abundantly clear through her repeated and escalating anti-trans commentary, posted between 2017 and 2020}}, where it's only describing her commentary as being anti-trans. [[User:Sideswipe9th|Sideswipe9th]] ([[User talk:Sideswipe9th|talk]]) 19:42, 15 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::You're moving the goalpost. Please note that my suggestion for the rewrite did not describe her as an "anti-transgender activist," but as "known for having anti-trans views." The Duggan article is evidence for that. |
|||
:::::::As for McNamarah's, believing that transgender equality jeopardizes women's progress is, factually, an incorrect and anti-trans view. The article presents her view as notable and welcomed by the British media; therefore, why you may be correct that it doesn't describe her as an anti-trans *activist* per se, it does describe her as having anti-trans views that are notable (which they are). |
|||
:::::::As for the Martins and Sigliano article, this is from the Abstract: "This paper aims to analyze the dimensions of media competence present in the content published on Twitter |
|||
:::::::by Harry Potter fans and/or J.K. Rowling fans. The tweets are part of the #RIPJKRowling indexing context, which emerged from the author's transphobic positions." [[User:PenelopePlesiosaur|PenelopePlesiosaur]] ([[User talk:PenelopePlesiosaur|talk]]) 19:59, 15 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::::::Respectfully I'm not. You said that {{tq|there are plenty of scholarly, peer-reviewed articles that characterize Rowling as anti-trans or as a TERF}} and highlighted three articles. I was able to access two of them, and quoted their content on Rowling and how they describe her. One of the sources I was unable to access due to a language barrier, and I asked if you could provide a quotation and translation that supports what you've said. The two sources I could access do not support describing Rowling as an anti-trans activist or a TERF in the article lead, in line with Amanda's suggestion that we describe Rowling as an anti-transgender activist in the first sentence of the article lead. To do that, you need to have very strong and consistent sourcing, as it's not a label we use lightly in [[WP:VOICE|wikivoice]]. Presently, it does not appear as though we have the sourcing available to make this change. |
|||
::::::::There is a rather large difference between someone who is known to hold anti-trans views, and describing them as an anti-trans activist, as has been suggested in this discussion. We currently state later in the lead that Rowling's views {{tq|have been criticised as transphobic..}}, which is a rough synonym for holding anti-trans views, however there is also a [[#Draft_proposal_in_context|proposal above]] to re-phrase that and bring it more into line with the article's body. |
|||
::::::::As for Martins and Sigiliano, I'm more interested in what the paper says outside of the abstract. A research paper's abstract is a lot like a Wikipedia article's lead. It summarises and sets the stage for everything that follows in the article's body. That paper is 20 pages long, outside of its citations, and for our purposes it would be significantly more useful use its body content, rather than the single paragraph abstract. [[User:Sideswipe9th|Sideswipe9th]] ([[User talk:Sideswipe9th|talk]]) 21:11, 15 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::::Respectfully, you are. Note that I did not use the term "activist" in any of my posts in this discussion until you misattributed that term to my replies. I said that there is a wealth of scholarly evidence pertaining to JK Rowling's anti-trans views and how she has become known for them. This is true, and the listed examples prove this. Whether or not they use the term "activist" is irrelevant to my point; perhaps it is relevant to Amanda's point, but not mine nor my suggested wording, and to attribute it to mine is to commit a rather blatant straw man fallacy. That is not engaging in good faith. |
|||
:::::::::Perhaps there isn't enough evidence to use the term "activist" or even "TERF." But as it stands, JK Rowling's social relevance over the last several years has revolved around her anti-trans views, and there are plenty of reliable sources to back this up. This fact should be present in the introduction of the article. [[User:PenelopePlesiosaur|PenelopePlesiosaur]] ([[User talk:PenelopePlesiosaur|talk]]) 21:44, 15 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::::::::The original suggestion that started this discussion was to change the first sentence of the lead to read {{tq|"is a British author and anti-transgender activist"}}. Everything I've been replying to is on that point, and how the sources don't support that change. |
|||
::::::::::Now if you're suggesting that we should state that Rowling's views are anti-trans, or transphobic, or some other synonym, we are ''already'' doing that. At end of the lead, which is the introduction of the article, there is a pair of sentences that currently read {{tq|She has publicly expressed her opinions on transgender people and related civil rights since 2017. These views have been criticised as transphobic by LGBT rights organisations and some feminists, but have received support from other feminists and individuals.}}. The second sentence from that does not really reflect the article's body content, and there is a [[#Draft_proposal_in_context|discussion above]] on changing it to better reflect the body. That discussion is happening separately to this one, on adding the descriptor "anti-trans activist" or some other synonym to the first sentence of the lead. If you feel those changes are in some way lacking, feel free to contribute to that discussion on that point. [[User:Sideswipe9th|Sideswipe9th]] ([[User talk:Sideswipe9th|talk]]) 22:06, 15 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:Hard agree. Her identity is completely associated with her anti-transgender views in the public consciousness; they have eclipsed and overshadowed her fiction work, and it is socially and morally irresponsible to pretend that they haven't. [[User:PenelopePlesiosaur|PenelopePlesiosaur]] ([[User talk:PenelopePlesiosaur|talk]]) 17:52, 15 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::I agree. This is why we need to revisit the first sentence. The current way of dealing with this in the lead may have been appropriate five years ago, but not today. --[[User:Amanda A. Brant|Amanda A. Brant]] ([[User talk:Amanda A. Brant|talk]]) 18:12, 15 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::The article lead, along with pretty much the entire body was extensively re-written two years ago during the [[Wikipedia:Featured article review/J. K. Rowling/archive1|Featured Article Review]], to bring the article back up to the standard of a [[Wikipedia:FA|featured article]]. The way in which we're dealing with the lead is appropriate based upon the content that is currently in the article's body, because [[WP:LEADFOLLOWSBODY|an article's lead follows its body]]. Nowhere in the article's body do we describe Rowling as an anti-trans activist, or any other synonym, and no proposals have been brought forward to change the body to reflect that. That doesn't really matter however, as none of the sources provided so far actually describe Rowling as an anti-trans activist, so we couldn't support it in the article's body either. |
|||
:::I would strongly urge that all of the editors present who are unfamiliar with the featured article process, and what that means for adding content to an article to review [[Wikipedia:Featured article review/J. K. Rowling/archive1|the FAR discussion]] and its five sub-archives ([[Wikipedia talk:Featured article review/J. K. Rowling/archive1/Archive 1|archive 1]], [[Wikipedia talk:Featured article review/J. K. Rowling/archive1/Archive 2|archive 2]], [[Wikipedia talk:Featured article review/J. K. Rowling/archive1/Archive 3|archive 3]], [[Wikipedia talk:Featured article review/J. K. Rowling/archive1/Archive 4|archive 4]], [[Wikipedia talk:Featured article review/J. K. Rowling/archive1/Archive 5|archive 5]]), to get a handle on how this content was developed two years ago and what the process involved in changing it is. [[User:Sideswipe9th|Sideswipe9th]] ([[User talk:Sideswipe9th|talk]]) 22:15, 15 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:I think that while few harbor any illusions about Rowling's views and her use of her platform/wealth, and while I think that it does at this point absolutely warrant mention in the summary, there's a difference between that and being able to put the words "anti-transgender activist" in there in compliance with BLP guidelines. |
|||
:If you can dig up some RSP sources calling her or describing her activities directly as "anti-trans", "terf", "gender critical", or similar, then there might be a solid case. [[User:Snokalok|Snokalok]] ([[User talk:Snokalok|talk]]) 18:16, 15 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::Wait okay I saw the sources list you posted in the other comment, yeah I'm supportive then, though I think the wording is still something that should be carefully talked over [[User:Snokalok|Snokalok]] ([[User talk:Snokalok|talk]]) 18:18, 15 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::Yes, the exact wording should absolutely be carefully considered. The main point was that it should be reflected in some way in the sentence. --[[User:Amanda A. Brant|Amanda A. Brant]] ([[User talk:Amanda A. Brant|talk]]) 18:21, 15 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::Right, looking over your sources, we have four separate RSP sources (CNN, Vox, Forbes, and Vulture) directly calling her a terf, and four more (CNN, Vox, Vanity Fair, and NBC) describing her beliefs and statements as anti-trans. That's a solid evidence base for a wide variety of wordings. |
|||
::::Perhaps we start with something like, "JK Rowling has more recently been notable for her prominent role in the anti-transgender movement, to the point of being regarded by many as a TERF" [[User:Snokalok|Snokalok]] ([[User talk:Snokalok|talk]]) 18:43, 15 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::I'm sorry but no. Please see my comment above for my overview of the sourcing, and why they're not acceptable for any change in the lead on this point. [[User:Sideswipe9th|Sideswipe9th]] ([[User talk:Sideswipe9th|talk]]) 18:47, 15 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::I posted this above but repeating here: to change the wording we generally workshop the proposed text and achieve consensus from all page watchers. See for example [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:J._K._Rowling/Archive_15#Draft_proposal_to_reflect_discussion_and_new_sources_above this proposal]. That said, {{u|Sideswipe9th}} comment from above applies - the sources don't exist for the proposed change, [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:J._K._Rowling&diff=prev&oldid=1213887349 diff] [[User:Victoriaearle|Victoria]] ([[User talk:Victoriaearle|tk]]) 18:49, 15 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:There is definitely a disconnect between the subject's ongoing campaigning (generating increasingly concerning news reports) and the way it is described in the lede, but I'm not sure if copying that phrase from another article is the right way to fix that. This encyclopedia very clearly describes [[gender-critical feminism]] as categorically anti-trans, and the subject of this BLP recently explicitly described her own views as "gender critical": https://twitter.com/jk_rowling/status/1765518705859977328. I would suggest changing the current vague description to match how this encyclopedia currently describes the movement. [[User:Umdlye|Umdlye]] ([[User talk:Umdlye|talk]]) 19:55, 15 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:I agree with some of your points, but Rowling is very famous for donating enough money to lose her billionaire status, so the philanthropist bit is relevant to the body of data on the author. [[Special:Contributions/2603:7081:1603:A300:8448:8888:CC8F:BC90|2603:7081:1603:A300:8448:8888:CC8F:BC90]] ([[User talk:2603:7081:1603:A300:8448:8888:CC8F:BC90|talk]]) 15:42, 2 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:I agree with some of your points, but Rowling is very famous for donating enough money to lose her billionaire status, so the philanthropist bit is relevant to the body of data on the author. [[Special:Contributions/2603:7081:1603:A300:8448:8888:CC8F:BC90|2603:7081:1603:A300:8448:8888:CC8F:BC90]] ([[User talk:2603:7081:1603:A300:8448:8888:CC8F:BC90|talk]]) 15:45, 2 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:{{u|S Marshall}} I [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AJ._K._Rowling&diff=1222197896&oldid=1222195546 changed some others also]. Does changing the first ''expressed'' to ''espoused'' (adopt or support as a cause, belief, or way of life) help address your concern that the first sentence is "watered down"? [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 14:35, 4 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
"Her identity is completely associated with her anti-transgender views" - feels to me that is primarily true for people dealing with transgender issues, but much less so for the rest. So there might be a bit of perception bias.--[[User:Kmhkmh|Kmhkmh]] ([[User talk:Kmhkmh|talk]]) 04:46, 16 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:: I still aver that we should open with "Rowling is a gender-critical feminist". My position is that she's so undeniably gender-critical and so undeniably feminist that it's wrong to omit those words. If we absolutely ''must'' shy away from that, then okay, we should go to "Rowling has gender-critical views." With the full stop immediately after "views" and no tacked-on hedges or qualifications.—[[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> 17:31, 4 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:Reliable sources overwhelmingly focus on her anti-trans views and this has been the situation for years. When I looked through the first 100 Google News results recently all results were related to her anti-trans views in some way. She may have been a children's author two decades ago, but it is completely overshadowed by her anti-trans activism, judging by RS coverage. --[[User:Amanda A. Brant|Amanda A. Brant]] ([[User talk:Amanda A. Brant|talk]]) 05:43, 16 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::We still disagree on the first part (I hoped that ''espoused'' would help move us closer towards each other's position), but on the second part, where then would you work in the bit about which laws she opposed? [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 18:32, 4 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::For the overview paragraph that comes first, I would write: ''Rowling has gender-critical views. She has often shared thoughts on trans people, mostly in the context of proposed legal changes in Scotland that would make it easier to transition.'' I'd push back the detail about which laws, specifically, to the history 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> 22:58, 4 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::By the time I did all that, it was at 485 words (getting too long), so [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:J._K._Rowling&diff=prev&oldid=1222272711 did this]. Cuts the first sentence to a simple declarative, but had to make some cuts elsewhere (no meaning lost I hope). [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 23:51, 4 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
===== Further queries ===== |
|||
A quick comment: whether or not we describe her as an "anti-transgender activist", can we at least agree we can describe [[Maya Forstater]] as such? We have multiple high-quality sources describing her that way including both [https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2019/12/19/jk-rowling-tried-make-her-work-more-inclusive-then-she-tweeted-support-an-anti-trans-researcher/ the Washington Post] and [https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/19/world/europe/jk-rowling-maya-forstater-transgender.html the New York Times]. |
|||
{{u|S Marshall}} what are we citing from page 17 of Whited here ?? |
|||
* She opposes gender self-recognition,[55] ... |
|||
that page is the footnotes. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 15:03, 4 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:Take the Whited citation out, I suggest. Is it strictly necessary to cite that she opposes gender self-recognition?—[[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> 17:31, 4 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::{{u|S Marshall}} yes, I think so, because what she actually opposes is gender self-recognition as it applies to "legal" gender status without additional processes ... again, we have to get the context ... it's not individuals living how they want to live that she has opposed, rather the laws involved. That's why I was hoping to see exact wording from Whited ... [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 18:24, 4 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::She literally puts hashtag #notoselfID on her tweets.—[[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> 18:51, 4 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::We still need to source that statement. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 18:56, 4 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::Okay. According to [https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-63162533 this BBC article], the Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill would make anyone over the age of 16 who'd lived in their acquired gender for three months eligible to apply for a gender recognition certificate. This would remove the requirement for doctor's reports. At paragraphs 9 and 10, the BBC say: |
|||
:::::{{tq2|It remains a hotly contested issue, however, with critics saying "self identification" would undermine the safety of women-only spaces. JK Rowling has previously argued the new law would harm the most vulnerable women.{{pb}}Ms Rowling tweeted: "I stand in solidarity with @ForWomenScot and all women protesting and speaking outside the Scottish Parliament. #NoToSelfID."}} |
|||
I also think that we could call Rowling's tweets "anti-trans" in Wikivoice as we do have [https://edition.cnn.com/2023/02/21/entertainment/jk-rowling-podcast-release-what-to-know-cec/index.html several] [https://www.vox.com/culture/23622610/jk-rowling-transphobic-statements-timeline-history-controversy high] [https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/07/arts/Jk-Rowling-controversy.html quality] [https://variety.com/2020/film/news/jk-rowling-transphobic-tweets-controversy-1234627081/ sources] saying that as well, below. [[User:LokiTheLiar|Loki]] ([[User talk:LokiTheLiar|talk]]) 18:52, 2 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::It's my position that this reduces to "Rowling opposes gender self-recognition", although if you want to go to "self-identification" instead (as closer to the source), then I would accept that. |
|||
== Second paragraph of Transgender people section == |
|||
:::::As a cross-check that this is a fair characterization of what Rowling really does say, I refer you to her blog post [https://www.jkrowling.com/opinions/j-k-rowling-writes-about-her-reasons-for-speaking-out-on-sex-and-gender-issues/ here], which says at paragraph 26: |
|||
:::::{{tq2|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.}} |
|||
Ok, starting a workshop for this as there seems to be a rough consensus across several of the ongoing discussions for re-writing the second paragraph of the [[J. K. Rowling#Transgender people|transgender people]] to give a broader overview of how Rowling's views on transgender people and rights have changed over the last six or so years. Before we can consider any phrasing, the first step will be to find and assess all of the highest quality sources available that could support this re-write. I would suggest that we make separate lists for scholarly and book sources, news sources, and magazine sources, so I've added three subsections below where we can start adding links to those sources. Once you find a source, add a link to it with its title in the appropriate section. Once we've got a reasonable list of sources, we can start assessing them. [[User:Sideswipe9th|Sideswipe9th]] ([[User talk:Sideswipe9th|talk]]) 19:11, 16 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::I'd very much prefer it if this could be said without obfuscation or waffle, please.—[[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> 23:26, 4 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:(Note: I am very interested in this talk thread and wish to contribute, but am also on vacation right now, so my contributions for the next week may be sparse) [[User:Snokalok|Snokalok]] ([[User talk:Snokalok|talk]]) 10:50, 17 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::::I, as usual, second the desire to avoid waffling and obfuscation. The issues with this section as it stands are primarily an excess of [[WP:FALSEBALANCE]] and overly-complicated wordings that obscure simple facts. [[User:LokiTheLiar|Loki]] ([[User talk:LokiTheLiar|talk]]) 23:37, 4 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:Quick couple of notes. When you're adding sources to the sections below, just add them with the correct CS1 template (eg {{tl|cite news}}, {{tl|cite journal}}, etc) without the ref tags. And make sure when you're adding sources to the lists that they're [[WP:GENREL|generally reliable]]. You can do a quick check against the entries on [[WP:RSP]], but remember that list only has publications that have been discussed multiple times, so you may also need to check the [[WP:RSN]] archives. Oh, and keep it to their factual reports only. [[WP:RSOPINION|Opinion articles]] aren't helpful at this stage. [[User:Sideswipe9th|Sideswipe9th]] ([[User talk:Sideswipe9th|talk]]) 22:26, 17 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::On saying it simply, is that covered (now) with "proposed legal changes in Scotland that would make it easier to transition"? [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 00:06, 5 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::::::No, it still doesn't say she opposes gender self-recognition anywhere that I can see.—[[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> 01:02, 5 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::::Whited page 7 may work -- there are three moving pieces now, including the UK/Scottish law/legal stuff to fix, including the first declarative sentence, which was still pushing what the sources say -- see [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:J._K._Rowling&oldid=1222287886#Discussion_of_fourth_draft Victoriaearle at "Discussion of fourth draft"]). We should keep in mind that this is a BLP and hew closely to sources, and avoid stating something as fact in WikiVoice. I'll work further on the Scotland legal bit and self-identification part tomorrow. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 02:43, 5 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::::::::I very much agree that {{tq|not wanting to say something as fact in WikiVoice}} is the main remaining hurdle we have 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> 16:03, 5 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::::::{{u|S Marshall}}, now that Victoria has also weighed in, I'll move forward with Draft 6. Since all the earlier drafts were yours and Victoria's, I wanted to wait 'til I had heard from both of you before putting up the next, but we're at a point where we need a reboot on the talk page to see what's left! [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 16:29, 5 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::::::PS, it's gotten hard to find what's left to do on this talk page :) [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 16:29, 5 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
Is this too-closely paraphrased from Duggan 161 ? |
|||
===Scholarship and book sources=== |
|||
* and has implied that some transgender women are a threat to women and trans-positive messages can be a threat to children.[56] |
|||
* {{cite journal |last1=Ravell |first1=Hannah |title=#RIPJKRowling: A tale of a fandom, Twitter and a haunting author who refuses to die |journal=[[Sage Journals]] |date=5 June 2023 |volume=12 |issue=3 |url=https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/2046147X231180501#con |access-date=17 March 2024}} |
|||
[[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 15:20, 4 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
** Provocative-sounding title but this basically analyzes fan rejection of JKR through the concept of [[Death of the Author]] --[[User:WikiFouf|WikiFouf]] ([[User talk:WikiFouf|talk]]) 16:47, 17 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:The original reads: "[Rowling] not only suggests that trans individuals are a threat to women and that trans-positive discourses are dangerous to children". I weakened that to "some" transgender women and "can be" a threat to children, which is more consistent with what Rowling says. I'm certainly content for that to be rephrased in fewer words.—[[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> 17:31, 4 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
* {{cite journal |last1=Hobbs |first1=Mitchell John |last2=O'Keefe |first2=Sarah |title=Agonism in the arena: Analyzing cancel culture using a rhetorical model of deviance and reputational repair |journal=[[Public Relations Review]] |date=March 2024 |volume=50 |issue=1 |url=https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0363811123001352 |access-date=17 March 2024}} |
|||
:: Not my strength, so I hope someone will give it a go ... it's a bit too close for comfort. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 18:25, 4 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::"Some" here feels too weak, especially when combined with "implied": evident in her actual words is a strong and repeated emphasis on the threat of trans women with some hedging sometimes. If we want to keep the word count down I'd just drop "some" and "can be". Otherwise I'd go with {{tq|and has suggested that children and cis women are threatened by trans women and trans-positive messages}}. [[User:LokiTheLiar|Loki]] ([[User talk:LokiTheLiar|talk]]) 23:34, 4 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
* {{cite journal |last1=Gwenffrewi |first1=Gina |title=J. K. Rowling and the Echo Chamber of Secrets |journal=[[Transgender Studies Quarterly]] |date=1 August 2022 |volume=9 |issue=3 |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221106002848id_/https://watermark.silverchair.com/507gwenffrewi.pdf?token=AQECAHi208BE49Ooan9kkhW_Ercy7Dm3ZL_9Cf3qfKAc485ysgAAAsUwggLBBgkqhkiG9w0BBwagggKyMIICrgIBADCCAqcGCSqGSIb3DQEHATAeBglghkgBZQMEAS4wEQQMK3mkeQtQG7oE6yIoAgEQgIICeMfIXIz0mUVH-p9wjF8qOutgKZ71pFuqU9dWVFHpXkqctbceLs25ybRNcAtexjRVyqHJE-_aVYeQC2VdbE7i-JZhcapd4hi9e-PvykYgcW4pZ-k9QKNIntywYvDSioDTK7DIbos4hZOcSXJ8VORYq5XBkGGSmRdPikE0WT1OC2p56VrtcENIH_tqmI6UtCcKYT0J4Egi1dwvRy6KtiXYg_21yuQ_-WdH_Ym3eH_UAzN_s7-aqClTuKecOCJpYF_OIVmXcTpZqimwYeplxlLpT8BCd7VfXeC4LvC_wEXVOw1tXY48O8VEzvgh00Wpi06keDqPFRbFTTY2cty2Rgce6iyx2Gv5iCAP0-pLs4kTv3xIQVujuNO-6QUJYrFO9eEX-cyOWq-084oIaa-Rynuy51DoBI5SUOCoq5nYJ3NKv5OOSwCh9yABVljy5s8x_QQ6hPXHSbcfxkbE_UX4Mm0aM6g1LkxPSVzi-XXpJK98qY2D7ItVdXnO6Ul8UHqlCm4GWzESs5H-XOUnrxJ5TYLj7326AckNZJISyllSR-Ugibch6ovMgVR9aDdeF-yV80rYXi-pcvfES2PNRVCWShfiMaBu-dBAvjTb_4Asr_yOrZlIWoU4AbkireKaurUVXdVQjCmZavwZs-0BvkPIvrrUNSUuPyDBfiJJA5T5wP1GErfoEsVxfiQxcs1stQzK7HnPXdqHamtS7LOUsraVipK9jdFZXt8ZG_G6C8ri5WqeKQFiET429XnlsZftn4xmlCyEFI74FBG6xG1ZeZEt9cb_VlqO6nMLmyCimooiLgkU1NMOZyZx1JlcEi5rsuTDkP6nn2BQsdRtTqCC |access-date=17 March 2024}} |
|||
:::Did [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:J._K._Rowling&diff=prev&oldid=1222274292 that], [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 01:52, 5 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
** Analysis of anti-trans opinion pieces, including JKR's "TERF Wars", with an autoethnographic angle --[[User:WikiFouf|WikiFouf]] ([[User talk:WikiFouf|talk]]) 17:38, 17 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
* {{cite journal |last1=Duggan |first1=Jennifer |title=Transformative Readings: Harry Potter Fan Fiction, Trans/Queer Reader Response, and J. K. Rowling |journal=[[Children's Literature in Education]] |date=June 2022 |volume=53 |issue=2 |pages=147–168 |doi=10.1007/s10583-021-09446-9}} |
|||
* {{cite book |last1=Pugh |first1=Tison |title=Harry Potter and beyond: on J. K. Rowling's fantasies and other fictions |date=2020 |publisher=[[The University of South Carolina Press]] |location=Columbia, South Carolina |isbn=1643360876}} |
|||
=== |
==== Citations to fix ==== |
||
:I looked at the Vanity Fair article being used as a reference for "Rowling rejects these characterisations and denies being transphobic." It's from 2023 and quotes her from a podcast she did rather than the article used as the other reference for this statement. I think the two following articles which touch on her same comments (in the podcast) might be better references than the Vanity Fair article: |
|||
Add news sources here. Remove this comment when adding the first source. [[User:Sideswipe9th|Sideswipe9th]] ([[User talk:Sideswipe9th|talk]]) 19:11, 16 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:* https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/tv/news/jk-rowling-podcast-trans-harry-potter-comments-hogwarts-b2283266.html |
|||
:* https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-64729304 |
|||
:[[User:13tez|13tez]] ([[User talk:13tez|talk]]) 00:14, 4 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::Agree; [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:J._K._Rowling&diff=prev&oldid=1222138328 swapped in BBC] as it is not paywalled and links endure. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 03:41, 4 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:The reference currently used to support "Criticism has come from ... Human Rights Campaign." currently has nothing to do with the HRC criticising Rowling. It's talking about Dave Chappelle saying he's "team TERF" and then says "TERF views 'deny the validity of transgender people and transgender identities,' said Sarah McBride, national press secretary for the Human Rights Campaign." We can substantiate the HRC criticising Rowling with [https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/19/world/europe/jk-rowling-maya-forstater-transgender.html this article] instead. |
|||
:Similarly, ''Wizarding World'' isn't even mentioned in the reference used to substantiate "LGBT charity the Wizarding World spoke out against her stance." |
|||
:You'll probably prefer to use [https://apnews.com/article/entertainment-jk-rowling-us-news-media-7338b2b262090c00f04deafe2e6689c2 this article] to substantiate GLAAD's comments rather than the current reference from USA Today. [[User:13tez|13tez]] ([[User talk:13tez|talk]]) 00:31, 4 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::Thanks for checking those, 13tez; it had not occurred to me that our citations could have gotten corrupted in the journey. I will track back on these, if not today, then first thing tomorrow. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 02:26, 4 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::Human Rights Campaign: I used [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:J._K._Rowling&diff=prev&oldid=1222133751 Milne, Reuters] instead, as it is freely available and NYT is paywalled. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 02:44, 4 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:: On [[Wizarding World]], that got mangled in Draft 4 (it is ''not'' an LGBT charity); I've [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:J._K._Rowling&diff=prev&oldid=1222136859 restored to what is in the article now], which is correct. My apologies for not seeing the error when I copied text from Draft 4 to Draft 5. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 03:18, 4 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:: On GLAAD, USA Today is as reliable as AP -- why do the work to switch citations, since USA Today does verify the content? [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 03:22, 4 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::''USA Today is as reliable as AP -- why do the work to switch citations, since USA Today does verify the content?'' |
|||
:::I've seen a widespread aversion to using references from news sources that aren't from the most reputable outlets (NYT, Reuters, AP news, The Guardian, etc) in [[Talk:J. K. Rowling/Archive 16#Recent changes to transgender people section|past discussions]] and what you said above ("my first preference for sourcing is usually AP or Reuters"). I just thought you might prefer to use the AP article. [[User:13tez|13tez]] ([[User talk:13tez|talk]]) 12:50, 4 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::OK, then ... will switch it in when next on real computer. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 15:21, 4 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::Don't feel obliged! I just thought it'd be your preference and the preference of others generally. [[User:13tez|13tez]] ([[User talk:13tez|talk]]) 17:25, 4 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:J._K._Rowling&diff=prev&oldid=1222220552 Done], [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 17:26, 4 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
==== 13tez feedback ==== |
|||
:'''CNN dump'''. If you have a CNN source, post it here and give it a name. Avoid opinion pieces if possible: |
|||
:We should probably change "[[Hate Crime and Public Order (Scotland) Act 2021|Scotland's Hate Crime Law]] enacted in 2024" to "Scotland's [[Hate Crime and Public Order (Scotland) Act 2021|Hate Crime and Public Order Act]]". There are [https://www.gov.scot/publications/independent-review-hate-crime-legislation-scotland-final-report/pages/14/ multiple acts] that make up Scotland's hate crime legislation, so we should be specific. We could retain the fact that it came into force in 2024, but the article on the act already covers that, and we're trying to summarise here. |
|||
:{{Cite news |work=CNN |url=https://edition.cnn.com/2023/02/21/entertainment/jk-rowling-podcast-release-what-to-know-cec/index.html |title=What to know about the new J.K. Rowling podcast and her history of harmful anti-trans comments |date=February 21, 2023 }} |
|||
:Should the section's content be in roughly chronological order or have more context as to when she said/did what? For example, her "April fool's thread" was this year and is at the start of the section, but she said "Trans people need and deserve protection" in 2020, and it is at the end of the section. Presently, you could easily be left with the impression that she said the former first and the latter later, even though the opposite is true and her comments have escalated over time. Could it make it easier for the reader to chart the change in her views and speech over time by having the contents of the section ordered chronologically rather than thematically? |
|||
:{{Cite news |work=CNN |url=https://edition.cnn.com/2022/08/30/entertainment/jk-rowling-harry-potter-reunion/index.html |date=August 30, 2022 |title=J.K. Rowling says it was her choice not to appear in ‘Harry Potter’ reunion}} |
|||
:Should we rephrase 'She has tweeted a list of trans women, writing that they are "men, every last one of them".'? My thinking is that the specific quote isn't the biggest issue of her comments in this incident. Imho the bigger issue (when compared to her misgendering them) is that she listed famous trans women alongside sexual offenders who are also trans women in what has been called "an apparent attempt to draw a connection between trans people and sexual perversion".<ref>{{cite web |last1=Lavietes |first1=Matt |title=J.K. Rowling will not be arrested for comments about transgender women, police say |url=https://www.nbcnews.com/nbc-out/out-news/jk-rowling-will-not-arrested-comments-transgender-women-police-say-rcna146065 |website=[[NBC News]] |access-date=14 April 2024 |archive-url=https://archive.today/20240403041410/https://www.nbcnews.com/nbc-out/out-news/jk-rowling-will-not-arrested-comments-transgender-women-police-say-rcna146065 |archive-date=2024-04-03 |language=en |date=2 April 2024 |url-status=live}}</ref> Furthermore, it would enable the use of more of the possible references I listed earlier, which cover the incident without the specific quote, and which you've said before are your preferences for sourcing from news articles. Would it make sense to re-write it without the specific quote, but to summarise what she did to capture its spirit (listing famous trans women alongside trans women who are sexual offenders, mock them, and misgender them)? Should we also mention this was a response to the new act and speculation (albeit unfounded) that misgendering could become a criminal offence? |
|||
:{{Cite news |work=CNN |url=https://edition.cnn.com/2020/06/10/entertainment/jk-rowling/index.html |date=June 10, 2020 |title=J.K. Rowling explains her gender identity views in essay amid backlash}} |
|||
:Should we seek a higher-quality independent/secondary sources for the first sentence in the last paragraph ("Rowling rejects these characterisations...")? We're currently citing Vanity Fair and her own statement, which is obviously biased on if she's transphobic, and since we're not using it to reference direct quotes it would probably be better to use somebody else's analysis/summarisation of what she's said (in a reliable source) than to do so ourselves. Similarly, we could use [https://apnews.com/article/6d99e691c88a5631cc8c2aa2b39ff3c1 this article] to reference the fact that her essay was published on 10 June 2020 rather than the essay itself. [[User:13tez|13tez]] ([[User talk:13tez|talk]]) 14:56, 3 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:{{Cite news |work=CNN |url=https://edition.cnn.com/2020/09/15/entertainment/jk-rowling-troubled-blood-book-trans-gbr-scli-intl/index.html |date=September 15, 2020 |title=JK Rowling’s new book sparks fresh transgender rights row}} |
|||
{{reflist-talk}} |
|||
:{{Cite news |work=CNN |url=https://edition.cnn.com/2020/07/03/entertainment/harry-potter-sites-condemn-rowling-intl-scli-gbr/index.html |date=July 3, 2020 |title=‘Harry Potter’ fan sites distance themselves from J.K. Rowling over gender identity comments}} |
|||
::Did the [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:J._K._Rowling&diff=prev&oldid=1222045035 first]. On the second, I tried to get chrono order in Draft 5, but couldn't make it work. On the third, suggest that be better explored in the sub-article ?? We're covering it broadly to avoid going too much into recentism/news sources, although it's too new for mention in a scholarly source. Will work on the fourth; we can do it without using news sources, since Whited 2024 covers her "manifesto", but since this is her bio, her own words should also be cited/linked as primary, backed by the secondary. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 15:12, 3 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:{{Cite news |work=CNN |url=https://edition.cnn.com/2020/06/22/uk/jk-rowling-transgender-agency-gbr-intl/index.html |date=June 22, 2020 |title=Authors at J.K. Rowling’s literary agency quit over company’s refusal to speak out on transgender rights}} |
|||
::{{u|13tez}} if you could just add URLs on talk, that would help avoid the constant need to add reflist-talk to this page to avoid mucking up subsequent sections. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 15:16, 3 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:{{Cite news |work=CNN |url=https://edition.cnn.com/2019/12/20/uk/jk-rowling-transgender-tweets-scli-intl-gbr/index.html |date=December 20, 2019 |title=JK Rowling under fire over transgender comments}} |
|||
::[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AJ._K._Rowling&diff=1222050170&oldid=1222048036 Worked in secondary sources], added back some Henderson for more secondary analysis, but left the news sources for accessibility, since Whited is paywalled. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 15:44, 3 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:{{Cite news |work=CNN |url=https://edition.cnn.com/2020/06/11/uk/jk-rowling-trans-harry-potter-gbr-intl/index.html |date=June 11, 2020 |title=Trans activists call J.K. Rowling essay ‘devastating’}} |
|||
:Is "a background of proposed changes to UK gender recognition laws" definitely accurate? My own understanding had been that the issue was largely based on proposed changes to the law in Scotland. I remember reading that [https://archive.ph/yAOS2 Rowling donated to a legal case] seeking to overturn the inclusion of trans women in the broader category of women in a (pretty beige) Scottish law (Gender Representation on Public Boards (Scotland) Act 2018) after it was [https://archive.ph/pawRg granted judicial review]. I did have the impression that proposed legal changes were chiefly in Scotland since the [https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-9079/ UK government decided not to change the GRA] in September 2020 and there has [https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-67773606 been a back-and-forth] between the UK and Scottish governments over whether Scotland can pass acts of this kind (see [[Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill]]). Maybe this is an issue of timing if this was written before the September 2020 decision and while Rowling was voicing opposition to reforms? Certainly since the decision, however, Scotland is the only place gender recognition laws have had proposed or actualised changes. It might be worth mentioning Scotland has its own devolved Parliament which can pass bills on [[Devolved, reserved and excepted matters|devolved matters]], similar to states in the USA. |
|||
:[[User:Snokalok|Snokalok]] ([[User talk:Snokalok|talk]]) 21:51, 17 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:Regarding what's said in the references used, the Reuters reference says "Rowling is unhappy that Scotland plans to relax the law". The Guardian says "she felt compelled to write about after reading of the Scottish government’s latest progress towards changing gender recognition laws." Pedersen says "a new women's cooperative constellation has been established in Scotland around the issue of the Scottish Government's proposed reforms of the Gender Recognition Act." Suissa says "in 2017, Rowling shared an article critiquing a proposed change to the United Kingdom’s Gender Recognition Act (2004), which was interpreted by some commentators as a change that would allow trans women to access women’s spaces, such as bathrooms". Duggan says "These debates about sex and gender are not abstract. In the UK, they have been triggered partly by proposed legislative change, in the form of changes to the 2004 Gender Recognition Act which would allow individuals to change their legal sex on the basis of self-ID, without meeting any diagnostic or other criteria." |
|||
:From what I can tell, Rowling was, circa 2017-2020, voicing opposition to proposed changes to the (UK-wide) [[Gender Recognition Act 2004]] and that, since the UK government decided not to pursue such changes, she has been voicing opposition to proposed and actualised changes to the law (or even entirely new laws?) from the [[Scottish Parliament]] which are inclusive of trans women as women. Do you agree with this assessment, and do you think we should re-write the way this is described? I don't think it's accurate to say her opposition is to proposed changes to UK gender recognition laws since, as far as I can tell, it has mostly been to proposed and passed changes to gender recognition laws in Scotland. [[User:13tez|13tez]] ([[User talk:13tez|talk]]) 16:14, 3 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::No, I think it's accurate and reflected in the sources used; first it was UK Gender Recognition, then on to Scotland Hate Crime. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 16:31, 3 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::Rowling has certainly voiced opposition to the Hate Crime and Public Order Act, which [https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-68746512 some incorrectly thought] made misgendering trans people a criminal offence, but changes re gender law in Scotland also includes acts like the Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill, which sought to make it easier for trans people to change their legal gender, and the Gender Representation on Public Boards (Scotland) Act 2018, which includes some trans women (those with [https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/section/7 gender recognition certificates]) in [https://www.legislation.gov.uk/asp/2018/4/section/2/enacted its definition of "woman"]. We probably need to find some references as to which specific laws, bills, and proposed changes she's spoken out against. Maybe relating to how she called Sturgeon an eraser of women's rights, IIRC. [[User:13tez|13tez]] ([[User talk:13tez|talk]]) 16:50, 3 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::I think the sources we have now cover it. We are already at 470 words ... an addition of 40 words. Can this detail be explored at [[Political views of J. K. Rowling]]? [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 16:56, 3 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::[https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-63170808 Here's what I was thinking of] - Rowling called Sturgeon "destroyer of women's rights" over the [[Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill]] (which the Scottish Parliament passed but the UK gov later blocked). In that sense, she's voiced opposition to that bill, donated to a legal case trying to overturn trans inclusion in the Public Boards (Scotland) Act 2018, and tried to directly challenge the Hate Crime and Public Order (Scotland) Act. This is far more opposition than she's ever made to proposed or actualised UK-wide laws: she only opposed possible reforms to the GRA while the consultation was ongoing, and the UK government is pretty much in agreement with her now. |
|||
:::::Re too many words, I'm not suggesting we explore each of these instances here. I'm suggesting we change "a background of proposed changes to UK gender recognition laws" to "a background of proposed changes to Scottish and UK gender recognition laws" since there are many more instances of her being opposed to a proposed change to Scottish law (and I'm sure I could go and dig out even more) than UK law. [[User:13tez|13tez]] ([[User talk:13tez|talk]]) 17:04, 3 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::::Thank you for this: {{tq|I'm suggesting we change "a background of proposed changes to UK gender recognition laws" to "a background of proposed changes to Scottish and UK gender recognition laws"}} It helps to keep proposals brief and readable :) I will work that in as soon as I get a moment ... things suddenly got complicated around my household! But, since the [[United Kingdom]] includes Scotland, why would that not be redundant ? Would you rather we just add to the footnote to include a citation related specifically to Scotland? [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 17:08, 3 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::Scotland has [[Scottish Parliament|its own devolved Parliament]] (separate from the [[UK Parliament]]) which can pass bills on [[devolved matters]] in a manner similar to states in the USA. In this sense, saying [[Scottish law]] separately is like saying the law of a state in the USA separately from the USA's federal law (sort of). Most of her opposition has been to acts and bills in Scotland, since she basically agrees with the current UK government on trans issues. [[User:13tez|13tez]] ([[User talk:13tez|talk]]) 17:16, 3 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::::::I'm going to be out the rest of the afternoon. I think we have the UK issue broadly covered in the UK footnote, and regardless if they ended up agreeing, her tweets were intially related to those UK proposed laws. {{pb}} Could you give me one high quality source that I could use to work in Scotland on gender recognition when I'm home later today? [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 17:37, 3 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::::I'm not suggesting we cover her opposition to Scottish laws (separately or in detail), only to say that her opposition has been to "Scottish and UK gender recognition laws" rather than to "UK gender recognition laws" because most of her opposition has been to proposed changes to Scottish gender recognition laws rather than UK gender recognition laws. |
|||
:::::::::To make it more concrete, the three acts/bills which I mentioned Rowling opposing earlier are [[acts of the Scottish Parliament]]. This means they only apply in Scotland, and not the rest of the [[United Kingdom]] (England, Wales, and Northern Ireland). This is the sense in which they are Scottish gender recognition laws rather than UK gender recognition laws. Most of her opposition has been to changes in gender recognition laws proposed or passed by the Scottish Parliament. Therefore, most of her opposition has been to proposed (or implemented) changes in Scottish gender recognition laws. Her only opposition to changes in UK gender recognition laws (I can find) is when she only opposed the UK-wide proposal (dropped in 2020) of reforming the [[Gender Recognition Act 2004]]. She also opposed changes to Scottish gender recognition laws at that time. Since then, she has only opposed proposed changes to Scottish gender recognition laws because, as far as I can find, there haven't been any more proposed changes to UK gender recognition laws. |
|||
:::::::::"her tweets were intially related to those UK proposed laws" |
|||
:::::::::Her initial statements were not only related to proposed changes to UK gender recognition laws. In [https://www.jkrowling.com/opinions/j-k-rowling-writes-about-her-reasons-for-speaking-out-on-sex-and-gender-issues/ her June 2020 essay], she says "On Saturday morning, I read that the Scottish government is proceeding with its controversial gender recognition plans, which will in effect mean that all a man needs to ‘become a woman’ is to say he’s one." She is referring to the [[Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill]]. It's also mentioned in the references currently in use. The Reuters reference says "Rowling is unhappy that Scotland plans to relax the law so that trans people can change their birth certificates without having to provide a medical diagnosis." The Guardian says "she felt compelled to write about after reading of the Scottish government’s latest progress towards changing gender recognition laws." Pedersen says "a new women's cooperative constellation has been established in Scotland around the issue of the Scottish Government's proposed reforms of the Gender Recognition Act." |
|||
:::::::::"Could you give me one high quality source that I could use to work in Scotland on gender recognition when I'm home later today?" |
|||
:::::::::Please could you tell me what qualifies as a high-quality source? I've seen the term used in talk pages a lot, but I've never seen anything in [[WP:P&G]] that actually defines source quality. |
|||
:::::::::You might find these sources helpful: |
|||
:::::::::* https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.o3057 |
|||
:::::::::* https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.o2608 |
|||
:::::::::* https://doi.org/10.1080/10894160.2023.2229216 |
|||
:::::::::[[User:13tez|13tez]] ([[User talk:13tez|talk]]) 18:42, 3 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::::::::{{u|13tez}} I'm truly at a loss for what you want added and why so much discussion about it. The footnote already mentions the Scottish Gender Recognition Reform Bill that you want added (which as you note is discussed in the Reuters source already given), and since Scotland is part of the UK, I don't know how I can add the words "and Scotland" to that text without it being obviously redundant. Perhaps someone else is better able to understand what you're asking for, as I'm not seeing it. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 22:48, 3 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::::::''I'm truly at a loss for what you want added'' |
|||
:::::::::::Thanks for trying to work through it regardless. I'm suggesting we say that her opposition has been to "Scottish and UK gender recognition laws" rather than to "UK gender recognition laws" because most of her opposition has been to proposed changes to Scottish gender recognition laws rather than UK gender recognition laws. |
|||
:::::::::::''Scotland is part of the UK, I don't know how I can add the words "and Scotland" to that text without it being obviously redundant.'' |
|||
:::::::::::As discussed, the majority of her opposition to proposed or implemented changes to gender recognition laws has been within [[Scottish law]] passed by the [[Scottish Parliament]], not [[Law of the United Kingdom|UK-wide law]] passed by the [[UK Parliament]]. Even though Scotland is part of the UK, its devolution allows it to pass its own laws that don't apply to other parts of the UK. It's like how bills passed by the [[California State Legislature]] don't apply in any other state, so they're "Californian law" and not "American law", even though California is part of the USA. In the same way, Scots law only applies to Scotland, so it is not UK law. For example, The Alcohol etc. (Scotland) Act 2010 makes it illegal to buy alcohol in supermarkets in Scotland after 10PM, but being part of Scots law, this doesn't apply in any other part of the UK. It wouldn't make sense to call this "UK law" when it only applies in Scotland. I discussed it more above ("To make it more concrete..."). I appreciate this might be hard to understand because Scotland is part of the UK if you're not from the UK yourself, but it's a matter of correctness. |
|||
:::::::::::Thanks! [[User:13tez|13tez]] ([[User talk:13tez|talk]]) 23:09, 3 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::::::::::It's hard for me to understand too, and I'm as British as roast beef. I don't see any equivalency with US state law vs US federal law. In the US state law is subordinate to federal law. The UK operates parallel legal systems: the Law of England and Wales, Scots law, and Northern Ireland which is its own thing again. None are subordinate. When you cross the Scottish border you enter a different legal world.—[[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> 19:00, 4 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::::::::I really don't want to get bogged down in a political science discussion (perhaps we should move to a talk page?), but: |
|||
:::::::::::::''None are subordinate.'' |
|||
:::::::::::::This is not true. There are [[Devolved, reserved and excepted matters#Reserved|reserved matters]]: areas in which only the UK Parliament can legislate and the devolved legislatures cannot. |
|||
:::::::::::::''When you cross the Scottish border you enter a different legal world.'' |
|||
:::::::::::::Again, this isn't really true. Although Acts of the Scottish Parliament now apply to you, UK-wide legislation created by the UK Parliament still does as well. This is why Scotland has seats in the House of Commons. [[User:13tez|13tez]] ([[User talk:13tez|talk]]) 19:46, 4 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:''On the second, I tried to get chrono order in Draft 5, but couldn't make it work.'' |
|||
:'''NBC Dump''' |
|||
:Yeah that's reasonable. Do you think it might be helpful to say when she said/did all this stuff, since it will be ordered thematically? |
|||
:NBC1[https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/j-k-rowling-doubles-down-what-some-critics-call-transphobic-n1229351] NBC2[https://www.nbcnews.com/pop-culture/pop-culture-news/jk-rowlings-new-book-youtube-cartoonist-gets-doxxed-online-trolls-rcna45504] NBC3[https://www.nbcnews.com/pop-culture/pop-culture-news/harry-potter-tv-series-targeted-2026-premiere-jk-rowling-recently-met-rcna140321] NBC4[https://www.nbcnews.com/nbc-out/out-pop-culture/broadcaster-reported-jk-rowling-police-alleged-transphobic-social-medi-rcna142302] NBC5[https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/j-k-rowling-accused-transphobia-after-mocking-people-who-menstruate-n1227071] NBC6[https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/new-j-k-rowling-book-raises-more-allegations-transphobia-n1240057] NBC7[https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/jk-rowling-s-drawn-backlash-anti-trans-beliefs-hits-back-putin-citing-rcna21587] NBC8[https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/warner-bros-discovery-condemns-threats-jk-rowling-tweeting-support-sal-rcna43022] NBC9[https://www.nbcnews.com/nbc-out/out-news/jk-rowling-slams-transgender-activists-posting-home-address-twitter-rcna6375] NBC10[https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/j-k-rowling-faces-backlash-after-tweeting-support-transphobic-researcher-n1104971] NBC11[https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/j-k-rowling-returns-kennedy-family-award-after-transphobic-tweets-n1238674] NBC12[https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/j-k-rowling-warns-against-new-kind-conversion-therapy-n1232958] NBC13[https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/gop-senator-quotes-j-k-rowling-while-blocking-vote-lgbtq-n1231569] NBC14[https://www.nbcnews.com/nbc-out/out-pop-culture/quidditch-change-name-citing-jk-rowlings-anti-trans-positions-rcna9149] [[User:Snokalok|Snokalok]] ([[User talk:Snokalok|talk]]) 22:05, 17 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:''On the third, suggest that be better explored in the sub-article ?? We're covering it broadly to avoid going too much into recentism/news sources, although it's too new for mention in a scholarly source.'' |
|||
:These should help give some context to how her comments have changed over time. |
|||
:I'm not suggesting we should give a summary of the type I proposed as well as the quote currently included. I'm suggesting we replace the current text with a summary of the sort I proposed, so long as it's roughly the same length as the current sentence. I think this would give readers a better picture of what she said than what's currently included for the reasons I mentioned before. |
|||
:''Will work on the fourth; we can do it without using news sources, since Whited 2024 covers her "manifesto", but since this is her bio, her own words should also be cited/linked as primary, backed by the secondary.'' |
|||
:I don't see why we shouldn't use news sources, but if you reference it from academia, that's fine. I think it's arbitrary. However, I think we should rely mostly on secondary sources because of [[WP:BLPPRIMARY]] and the following from [[WP:BLPSTYLE]]: "BLPs should be written responsibly, cautiously, and in a dispassionate tone, avoiding both understatement and overstatement. Articles should document in a non-partisan manner what reliable secondary sources have published about the subjects, and in some circumstances what the subjects have published about themselves." [[User:13tez|13tez]] ([[User talk:13tez|talk]]) 19:14, 3 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::Re {{tq|it might be helpful to say when she said/did all this stuff}}, yes, absolutely; I know a few people are reluctant to add any extra words, but I think we can afford to include "in 2017", "in 2023", etc so people understand the chronology. [[User:-sche|-sche]] ([[User talk:-sche|talk]]) 21:56, 3 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::{{u|-sche}}, I've just looked over the draft with an eye to adding dates, and I can't find a place where the dates aren't already included or implied. The first paragraph is an overview, and every other para seems to have dates where they are needed. Could you provide a concrete example where they are missing? It's good to avoid writing that reeks of [[WP:PROSELINE]], which I hope we've done. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 22:39, 3 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::I understand the reasoning to not include dates in an overview section. I was personally thinking of: ''She has tweeted a list of trans women, writing that they are "men, every last one of them."'' Even though we will want brevity in an overview, it's worth weighing that up against the benefit of making it more obvious how her rhetoric has changed over time by including the dates of her comments. [[User:13tez|13tez]] ([[User talk:13tez|talk]]) 00:04, 4 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::Added [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:J._K._Rowling&diff=prev&oldid=1222138830 date on that one] (could you all start a new sub-section when you start a new issue-- following this discussion is getting very hard-- I think I got everything, but it's hard to tell). [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 03:46, 4 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*Scots Law is certainly included in the phrase "UK law". This article definitely shouldn't try to explain the distinction between Scots Law and the Law of England and Wales, and it shouldn't try to summarize the competence of the respective parliaments. To avoid getting bogged down in that I do prefer "UK law", particularly when no law anywhere in the UK has the effect of doing any of the things at issue!—[[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> 23:30, 3 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*:I'm still at a loss; I added "Scottish and" to the draft, but I'm fairly certain that is open to criticism for redundancy. Should I now remove it again? This has seemed to be a full page of bogging down on something seems redundant, but maybe that's only me. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 23:46, 3 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*::I think we should move on and discuss something more productive until a consensus arises because I've explained my reasoning and it's not a point of utmost importance. [[User:13tez|13tez]] ([[User talk:13tez|talk]]) 23:54, 3 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*:Hey, thanks for your thoughts. |
|||
*:''This article definitely shouldn't try to explain the distinction between Scots Law and the Law of England and Wales, and it shouldn't try to summarize the competence of the respective parliaments.'' |
|||
*:I'm not trying to, but almost all of her opposition to proposed gender-related legislation has been within Scots law. I just think that should be reflected by saying "Scottish and UK law". |
|||
*:''no law anywhere in the UK has the effect of doing any of the things at issue'' |
|||
*:The Gender Representation on Public Boards (Scotland) Act 2018 includes trans women in its definition of women. Rowling has donated to a legal case brought by [[For Women Scotland]] seeking to overturn this. As discussed, it's one of several bills in Scots law she's publicly opposed. |
|||
*:''Scots Law is certainly included in the phrase "UK law".'' |
|||
*:Scots law is one of the legal systems within the UK, but Scots law is different from the laws passed from the UK Parliament. It's honestly probably a semantical point and not worth discussing further: there are probably more productive things we could be talking about. At this point, I've explained my reasoning, so it's probably just best to let consensus decide and move on to something else. |
|||
*:Thanks! [[User:13tez|13tez]] ([[User talk:13tez|talk]]) 23:50, 3 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*::Ok, if you want to move on, but I want to register that I'm not able to follow your position on this and in fact think I'm misunderstanding you quite badly. You're surely aware that the Westminster parliament writes Scottish law, and that more Scottish law originates in Westminster than in Holyrood?—[[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> 00:55, 4 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*:::Yes, I'm aware that many (not all) acts of the Parliament of the United Kingdom apply to the whole of the UK, including Scotland. I'd be interested to read an article discussing what proportion of Scots law is created in Westminster vs Holyrood, excluding common law. |
|||
*:::Political science aside, my reasoning to add Scottish law explicitly was that most of her opposition was to bills/acts of the Scottish Parliament which are exclusively part of Scots law, and a lot of her campaigning (for lack of a better word) has taken place within Scotland and to assist groups like For Women Scotland who are trying to change Scots law. This isn't relevant to the rest of the UK. This is ultimately because the [https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/jk-rowling-humza-yousaf-scotland-rishi-sunak-first-minister-b2521781.html Conservative UK government wouldn't] propose or enact any gender identity law she would oppose, but the SNP Scottish government did several times. See exhibits [https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-63170808 A], [https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/02/18/jk-rowlings-70k-to-challenge-ruling-men-can-become-women/ B], and [https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c51j64lk2l8o C]. |
|||
*:::To me, the test is what you'd say if it was California (or another US state) and the USA instead of Scotland and the UK. Imagine she'd publicly opposed proposed and enacted Californian state law several times and opposed proposed changes to US federal law once. Would you say "Rowling has expressed gender-critical views against a background of proposed changes to Californian and US gender recognition laws" or just "US gender recognition laws"? If you're of the former opinion, we should say "Scottish and UK laws" and, in the latter case, just "UK laws". [[User:13tez|13tez]] ([[User talk:13tez|talk]]) 01:33, 4 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*:::I agree with S Marshall re not following this at all, and it's taking a huge portion of this talk page. Please try to remember that Wikipedia's audience is global (not only beyond UK in the English-speaking world, but beyond the English-spearking world as well). For the huge majority of our readers (who may not understand what is going on in the UK with this whole matter anyway), complicating it with a further parliamentary issue isn't adding anything helpful. The UK includes Scotland, and the relevant laws are in the footnote for those readers who want to know what proposals were made and what laws were involved. We're risking now the talk page being so long that the earlier drafts -- which may contain bits we may want to revisit -- will soon have to be archived. I hope I have incorporated everything now (we're still stalled on the opening sentence), but it's become hard to follow the talk page as there aren't separate sub-heads for separate topics. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 03:52, 4 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*::::I agree with 13tez here, actually. It's not accurate to say that she objects to UK law if what she actually objects to is laws passed by the Scottish Parliament. [[User:LokiTheLiar|Loki]] ([[User talk:LokiTheLiar|talk]]) 11:27, 4 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*:::::The current (Draft 5) mentions both (Scottish and UK). [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 15:23, 4 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*::::::Should we add the ''Gender Representation on Public Boards (Scotland) Act 2018'' to the list of laws she's opposed? I say this because [https://archive.ph/yAOS2 she's donated] to a legal case trying to challenge its inclusion of trans women in its definition of "woman". If we are providing a list, it should probably be complete, unless we say "laws such as" or something similar to indicate it's an incomplete list. [[User:13tez|13tez]] ([[User talk:13tez|talk]]) 17:33, 4 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*:::::::It doesn't strike me that specifically was part of the whole brouhaha; see footnote d, where everything there is cited to a scholarly source. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 19:50, 4 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*::::::::@[[User:SandyGeorgia|SandyGeorgia]], I'm (very) sorry that this is taking so much time, but we are now phrasing it differently: "legal changes in the UK/Scotland" now vs "Scottish/UK laws" previously. I think the former indicates geography and Scotland is in the UK, so its laws are in the UK (albeit only one part of it), so I think we can say "...mostly in the context of proposed legal changes in the UK that..." Even though all but one of these instances (as far as I can tell) was within exclusively Scottish law, she did also [https://edition.cnn.com/2019/12/20/uk/jk-rowling-transgender-explainer-intl-gbr/index.html oppose proposed UK-wide legal changes too], so it wasn't just legal changes in Scotland. I think (hope), then, that we can probably all agree on: "mostly in the context of proposed legal changes in the UK that would"? |
|||
*::::::::I was proposing adding the ''Gender Representation on Public Boards (Scotland) Act 2018'' to footnote d. You can read about her opposition to it in [[Political views of J. K. Rowling#Transgender issues|Political_views_of_J._K._Rowling#Transgender_issues]] ("In February 2024, Rowling donated £70,000 to a crowd-funding appeal..."). Is the footnote one of the places in the article where we're only using references from academia? [[User:13tez|13tez]] ([[User talk:13tez|talk]]) 00:41, 5 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*:::::::::Sorry to be repeating myself, but saying it once again. The scholarly/academic sources are provided to demonstrate issues that are covered in recent scholarly sources (due weight). We also sometimes, but rarely, use non-scholarly sources to provide accessible text when others are paywalled, more background, or out of necessity when a recent issue warrants it. I don't mind adding this content to the footnote; I would mind expanding the article body to include it, when it's not something mentioned in scholarly sources or that has received the amount of coverage other issues have (due weight). I'll add it in the footnote of Draft 6. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 16:26, 5 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*Can't we just link to [[Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill]], which is mentioned in at least one source. [[User:Victoriaearle|Victoria]] ([[User talk:Victoriaearle|tk]]) 19:18, 4 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:'''Other''' |
|||
*:We do; it's in footnote d, and has been since the FAR version. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 19:47, 4 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:{{cite web |title=A timeline of JK Rowling’s comments about women and transgender rights |url=https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/news/jk-rowling-trans-twitter-timeline-b2326256.html |website=[[The Independent]] |access-date=17 March 2024 |language=en |date=25 April 2023}} |
|||
:{{cite web |title=The metamorphosis of J.K. Rowling |url=https://www.politico.com/news/2022/07/03/the-metamorphosis-of-j-k-rowling-00043835 |website=[[Politico]] |date=3 July 2022}} |
|||
:{{cite web |last1=Romano |first1=Aja |title=Is J.K. Rowling transphobic? Let’s let her speak for herself. |url=https://www.vox.com/culture/23622610/jk-rowling-transphobic-statements-timeline-history-controversy |website=[[Vox (website)|Vox]] |access-date=17 March 2024 |language=en |date=3 March 2023}} |
|||
:{{cite web |last1=McKee |first1=Jake |title=The long and ugly history of JK Rowling and her views on trans people |url=https://www.thepinknews.com/2023/02/10/what-has-jk-rowling-said-about-transgender-people/ |website=[[PinkNews]] |access-date=17 March 2024 |date=10 February 2023}} |
|||
:[[User:13tez|13tez]] ([[User talk:13tez|talk]]) 22:12, 17 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
* {{cite news |last1=Jacobs |first1=Julia |title=Harry Potter Fans Reimagine Their World Without Its Creator |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/12/style/jk-rowling-transgender-fans.html |work=[[The New York Times]] |date=12 June 2020}} --[[User:WikiFouf|WikiFouf]] ([[User talk:WikiFouf|talk]]) 02:05, 18 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
* {{cite news |last1=Rao |first1=Sonia |last2=Ohlheiser |first2=Abby |title=J.K. Rowling tried to make her work more inclusive. Then she tweeted support for an anti-trans researcher. |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2019/12/19/jk-rowling-tried-make-her-work-more-inclusive-then-she-tweeted-support-an-anti-trans-researcher/ |work=[[Washington Post]] |date=20 December 2019}} --[[User:WikiFouf|WikiFouf]] ([[User talk:WikiFouf|talk]]) 02:23, 18 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
====Feedback (Victoria)==== |
|||
* Sources on misgendering India Willoughby in March 2024 |
|||
A few remarks: |
|||
** {{cite web |last1=Murray |first1=Tom |title=JK Rowling deliberately misgenders trans activist India Willoughby |url=https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/news/jk-rowling-twitter-india-willoughby-trans-b2506793.html |website=[[The Independent]] |language=en |date=4 March 2024}} |
|||
*First sentence - will revisit after re-reading sources (hopefully sooner than later) |
|||
** {{cite web |last1=Bradley |first1=Sian |title=JK Rowling reported to police for ‘misgendering’ trans TV newsreader |url=https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/jk-rowling-reported-to-police-for-misgendering-trans-tv-newsreader-6bzj0llwb |website=[[The Times]] |language=en |date=16 March 2024}} |
|||
*Maybe a bit of prose tightening for this phrase "She has often shared opinions on transgender rights" >> possibly try something like "She is vocal about transgender rights ...." |
|||
** {{cite web |last1=Tait |first1=Albert |last2=Sanderson |first2=Daniel |title=JK Rowling reported to police by trans activist India Willoughby for misgendering |url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/03/07/jk-rowling-reported-police-trans-india-willoughby/ |website=[[The Daily Telegraph]] |language=en |date=7 March 2024}} |
|||
*"She has suggested that children and cisgender women" >> if she still believes this (which seems to be the case) then maybe consider writing in the present tense >> "She suggests that children and cisgender women ..." This would probably involve tense changes throughout & might need discussion |
|||
** {{cite web |title=JK Rowling: Trans newsreader India Willoughby calls comments by Harry Potter author 'grotesque transphobia' |url=https://news.sky.com/story/jk-rowling-trans-newsreader-india-willoughby-calls-comments-by-harry-potter-author-grotesque-transphobia-13087709 |website=[[Sky News]] |language=en |date=5 March 2024}} |
|||
*Sales of ''Harry Potter'' books during Covid >> not sure it's needed & could be cut to save words |
|||
** {{cite web |last1=Baska |first1=Maggie |title=JK Rowling misgenders trans journalist India Willoughby in 'grotesque' post |url=https://www.thepinknews.com/2024/03/05/jk-rowling-misgenders-india-willoughby-anti-trans-comments-online/ |website=[[PinkNews]] |language=en |date=5 March 2024}} |
|||
*2nd para looks good |
|||
** {{cite web |last1=Bradley |first1=Sian |title=JK Rowling’s misgendering of India Willoughby was no crime, say police |url=https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/jk-rowlings-misgendering-of-india-willoughby-was-no-crime-say-police-tfmj5g00v |website=[[The Times]] |language=en |date=19 March 2024}} |
|||
*3rd para looks good |
|||
** {{cite web |last1=Perry |first1=Kevin E G |title=India Willoughby’s JK Rowling complaint did not meet criminal threshold, police say |url=https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/news/jk-rowling-india-willoughby-police-trans-b2509754.html |website=[[The Independent]] |language=en |date=8 March 2024}} |
|||
*Tolando >> Tolonda (I had to double check!) |
|||
** {{cite web |last1=Sanderson |first1=Daniel |title=Police will not investigate JK Rowling over ‘misgendering’ trans activist |url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/03/08/police-will-not-investigate-jk-rowling-over-misgendering/ |website=[[The Daily Telegraph]] |date=8 March 2024}} |
|||
That's all for now. [[User:Victoriaearle|Victoria]] ([[User talk:Victoriaearle|tk]]) 15:22, 5 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
** {{cite web |title=Transgender broadcaster reports J.K. Rowling to police over social media comments |url=https://www.reuters.com/world/uk/transgender-broadcaster-reports-jk-rowling-police-over-social-media-comments-2024-03-07/ |website=[[Reuters]] |date=7 March 2024}} |
|||
** {{cite web |last1=Roberts |first1=Hannah |title=JK Rowling responds after being reported to police over misgendering broadcaster |url=https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/jk-rowling-india-willoughby-misgender-b2508819.html |website=[[The Independent]] |date=7 March 2024}} |
|||
:Thanks, Victoria; I was waiting for you before resuming, as the talk page has gone outta control. I will work your comments, and the stragglers left over from above, in to a new Draft 6, in a new level two heading, because we are now at a talk page length that will necessitate archiving of the five previous drafts. I feel more comfortable starting a new level 2 given that you seem broadly satisfied with the direction so far -- need a few hours to work in everything. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 15:27, 5 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
* Sources on Rowling's comments on trans people in Nazi Germany in March 2024 |
|||
::Sounds good. [[User:Victoriaearle|Victoria]] ([[User talk:Victoriaearle|tk]]) 15:46, 5 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
** {{cite web |last1=Fox |first1=Mira |title=It wasn't just the goblins — is J.K. Rowling doing Holocaust denial now? |url=https://forward.com/culture/592580/j-k-rowling-holocaust-denial-trans/ |website=[[The Forward]] |date=13 March 2024}} |
|||
:::Continued at [[#Reboot: Draft 6 (near final)]]. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 01:09, 6 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
** {{cite web |last1=Hayes |first1=Britt |title=J.K. Rowling's Transphobia Hits a New Low With Holocaust Denial |url=https://www.themarysue.com/j-k-rowling-holocaust-denial-nazi-transphobic/ |website=[[The Mary Sue]] |date=13 March 2024}} |
|||
** {{cite web |last1=Romano |first1=Aja |title=Is J.K. Rowling transphobic? Let’s let her speak for herself. |url=https://www.vox.com/culture/23622610/jk-rowling-transphobic-statements-timeline-history-controversy |website=[[Vox (website)|Vox]] |date=3 March 2023}} |
|||
** {{cite web |title=JK Rowling under fire for ‘transphobic’ remarks, claims Nazis never burnt books on trans health |url=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 |website=[[Hindustan Times]] |date=14 March 2024}} |
|||
** {{cite web |last1=Lazine |first1=Mira |title=JK Rowling accused of “Holocaust denial” over posts about transgender persecution in Nazi Germany |url=https://www.lgbtqnation.com/2024/03/jk-rowling-denies-transgender-persecution-during-the-holocaust/ |website=[[LGBTQ Nation]] |date=14 March 2024}} |
|||
** {{cite web |last1=Ring |first1=Trudy |title=Yes, J.K. Rowling, the Nazis persecuted transgender people |url=https://www.advocate.com/transgender/jk-rowling-nazis-persecuted-transgender |website=[[The Advocate (magazine)|Advocate]] |date=15 March 2024}} |
|||
*Sources on April Fools Twitter thread: |
|||
** {{cite news |last1=Cook |first1=James |last2=Hastie |first2=Paul |title=JK Rowling in ‘arrest me’ challenge over Scottish hate crime law |url=https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c51j64lk2l8o |access-date=2 April 2024 |work=[[BBC]] |date=1 April 2024}} |
|||
** {{cite news |last1=Bonar |first1=Megan |last2=Scott |first2=Katy |title=JK Rowling hate law posts not criminal, police say |url=https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-68712471 |date=2 April 2024 |work=[[BBC]]}} |
|||
** {{cite news |last1=Evans |first1=Greg |title=J.K. Rowling Mocks Trans Women To Defy Scotland’s New Hate Crime Law: “I Look Forward To Being Arrested” |url=https://deadline.com/2024/04/jk-rowling-scotland-hate-crime-law-1235872981/ |access-date=2 April 2024 |work=[[Deadline Hollywood|Deadline]] |date=1 April 2024}} |
|||
** {{cite news |last1=Harrison |first1=Ellie |title=JK Rowling could be probed by police for misgendering trans people, minister says |url=https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/news/jk-rowling-misgender-trans-snp-b2521530.html |access-date=2 April 2024 |work=[[The Independent]] |date=1 April 2024 |language=en}} |
|||
*** Also mentions previous Willoughby incident |
|||
== "She has publicly expressed her opinions on transgender people and related civil rights since 2017." == |
|||
* Existing sources currently in 2nd paragraph |
|||
** {{cite web |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 |website=[[The Independent]] |date=17 September 2020}} |
|||
** {{cite web |title=Daniel Radcliffe Criticizes J.K. Rowling’s Anti-Transgender Tweets |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/07/arts/Jk-Rowling-controversy.html |website=[[New York Times]] |date=7 June 2020}} |
|||
** {{cite web |last1=Moreau |first1=Jordan |title=J.K. Rowling Gets Backlash Over Anti-Trans Tweets |url=https://variety.com/2020/film/news/jk-rowling-transphobic-tweets-controversy-1234627081/ |website=[[Variety (magazine)|Variety]] |date=6 June 2020}} |
|||
** {{cite web |title=Maya Forstater: Woman discriminated against over trans tweets, tribunal rules |url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-62061929 |website=[[BBC News]] |date=6 July 2022}} |
|||
** {{cite web |title=J.K. Rowling Criticized After Tweeting Support for Anti-Transgender Researcher |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/19/world/europe/jk-rowling-maya-forstater-transgender.html |website=[[New York Times]] |date=2019-12-20}} |
|||
This sentence in the lead is very weasel word-y, isn't it? "expressed her opinions" is such a vague way of describing active attacks - it doesn't even make it clear if she's for or against trans people - and it goes on to carefully isolate criticism. <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> 13:43, 23 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
===Magazine sources=== |
|||
* {{cite news |last1=Morrow |first1=Brendan |title=J.K. Rowling's transphobia controversy: A complete timeline |url=https://theweek.com/feature/1020838/jk-rowlings-transphobia-controversy-a-complete-timeline |access-date=17 March 2024 |work=[[The Week]] |date=13 February 2023 |language=en}} |
|||
** Best one of those "timeline" articles, not high quality but a good starting point --[[User:WikiFouf|WikiFouf]] ([[User talk:WikiFouf|talk]]) 16:13, 17 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
* More magazine timelines for what they're worth |
|||
:{{cite web |title=The New J.K. Rowling Podcast and Her History of Transphobia |url=https://www.advocate.com/arts-entertainment/jk-rowling-podcast-transphobia |website=[[Advocate]] |access-date=17 March 2024 |language=en |date=22 Feb 2023}} |
|||
:{{cite web |last1=Murray |first1=Conor |title=J.K. Rowling Defends Herself In Podcast: Her Controversial Comments On Transgender Issues Explained |url=https://www.forbes.com/sites/conormurray/2023/02/15/jk-rowling-defends-herself-in-podcast-heres-her-controversial-comments-on-transgender-issues-explained/ |website=[[Forbes]] |access-date=17 March 2024 |language=en |date=15 Feb 2023}} |
|||
:{{cite web |title=A Complete Breakdown of the J.K. Rowling Transgender-Comments Controversy |url=https://www.glamour.com/story/a-complete-breakdown-of-the-jk-rowling-transgender-comments-controversy |website=[[Glamour]] |access-date=17 March 2024 |date=19 October 2023}} |
|||
:{{cite web |title=A breakdown of the J.K. Rowling transgender comments |url=https://www.glamourmagazine.co.uk/article/jk-rowling-transphobia-explained |website=[[Glamour UK]] |access-date=17 March 2024 |date=27 Feb 2024}} |
|||
:{{cite web |title=A timeline of JK Rowling’s views on trans rights as she reveals ‘death threats’ from activists {{!}} indy100 |url=https://www.indy100.com/celebrities/jk-rowling-trans-twitter-timeline-transphobic-b1887157 |website=[[Indy 100]] |language=en |date=20 Jul 2021}} |
|||
:{{cite web |last1=Doyle |first1=Jack |title=J.K. Rowling Launches Yet Another Attack on Trans Women |url=https://www.themarysue.com/jk-rowling-controversy-explained/ |website=[[The Mary Sue]] |access-date=17 March 2024 |language=en |date=13 March 2024}} |
|||
:If you could please read the work progressing on the talk page, it would help towards not bloating an already lengthy talk page with dated commentary. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 14:10, 23 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== Is the transgender section imbalanced? == |
|||
::I don't see how noting a particular point about the lead - and noting a tag being added - is redundant to other sections not talking about the specific wording. <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> 18:52, 29 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::@[[User:Adam Cuerden|Adam Cuerden]] I do not understand which of "She has publicly expressed her opinions on transgender people and related civil rights since 2017." are [[WP:WEASEL|weasel words]]; especially as the following sentences contain [partial] information on how other people have interpreted these publicly-expressed opinions, and events which have followed. [[User:Bazza_7|Bazza <span style="color:grey">7</span>]] ([[User_talk:Bazza_7|talk]]) 13:32, 3 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::Nor do I, but since that phrase is nowhere in any of the proposed drafts, the section is just distracting from work being done. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 14:13, 3 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::It's vague to the point of meaningless on what her views are. It's functionally identical to "She said something", not making it at all clear what her views are. Weasel words are using vague language that substitutes for actually saying anything on a point. |
|||
:::::As the lead stands, the transphobia section consists of two sentences, where the entire content is: |
|||
:::::* "She publicly said some undefined opinions about transpeople since 2017" |
|||
:::::* Some people don't like what she said. |
|||
:::::I mean, there's some attempts to list what groups dislike her views (some worked into the weasel word "critics"), but it doesn't really say anything about what Rowling actually said, thinks, or did. <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> 21:14, 4 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== "Transgender people" section should be re-titled as "Transphobia" == |
|||
Hey everyone! You might have seen me explaining my concern with the [[WP:BALANCE]] of this section at different spots on this page. I've kept reflecting on it and now, since there's an initiative to partly rework the section (thanks @[[User:Sideswipe9th|Sideswipe9th]]!), I thought this would be the best time to propose this discussion on it. This may or may not be stuff to keep in mind while reworking the section. Tell me if you agree or disagree: |
|||
Why are we white-washing her transphobic views? Representing overt transphobia as simply her "views on transphobic people" is reductive. It makes her views sound way more benign than they really are, violating NPOV in the process. [[Special:Contributions/98.116.173.242|98.116.173.242]] ([[User talk:98.116.173.242|talk]]) 02:42, 26 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
So, a considerable part of this section is dedicated to Rowling's public statements. Of course, this makes sense; those statements are the primary source of information we have to understand her views, and they must be included. The balance issue I see comes from how this section ''only'' relies on her statements, and which ones of those statements are prioritized : |
|||
: No, it shouldn't. Because it labels her, and leaves no room in a section like that for any supportive or neutral views of transgender people, and this is a [[WP:BLP]] which must maintain a [[WP:NPOV|neutral point of view]]. There is no ban on representing her transphobia in a section entitled Views on Transgender people, and well-sourced content on her transphobic views are welcome in that section. The heading is fine as it stands. [[User:Mathglot|Mathglot]] ([[User talk:Mathglot|talk]]) 02:59, 26 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::Reinforcing this - [[WP:BLP]] has a very specific and strident set of guidelines about how we can refer to a person and, in order for us to just say "Rowling is a transphobe," we would need the vast preponderance of reliable sources, including, in her case, academic sources to say "Rowling is a transphobe." Otherwise we simply cannot. That's why you'll see the fiddly and fussy discussions over minutia above. There's a pretty widespread sentiment right now that the article, as it stands, is not neutral or accurate regarding how Rowling has expressed her political views surrounding the rights of trans people. And a lot of effort is going into trying to correct that within the bounds of what we can do on Wikipedia. For more, though, we must use other venues than Wikipedia. [[User:Simonm223|Simonm223]] ([[User talk:Simonm223|talk]]) 13:23, 26 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:No it shouldn't, for reasons already explained. {{pb}} But since Rowling's comments have been made in the context of changes to laws, a more apt section heading would be something like Transgender rights. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 14:17, 3 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:98.116.173.242: This is an idea riddled with bias and cannot be accepted. I agree with @[[User:Simonm223|Simonm223]], this page is very left-leaning and biased. I think it needs radical changes, personally. [[User:Scientelensia|Scientelensia]] ([[User talk:Scientelensia|talk]]) 14:21, 6 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::I think you should probably go back and re-read what I said. Because my concern is that it is not neutral in that it under-plays the extent to which Rowling is transphobic but that we should make sure that changes happen within the appropriate boundaries of [[WP:BLP]]. [[User:Simonm223|Simonm223]] ([[User talk:Simonm223|talk]]) 14:57, 6 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== Reboot: Draft 6 (near final) == |
|||
# First of all, there's a nuance between '''statements''' and '''views'''. While statements are the default mode of expression of one's views, they're not the only way to express those views. The case of JKR is maybe special in that sense because the controversy around her views, as she acknowledges herself in her essay [https://www.jkrowling.com/opinions/j-k-rowling-writes-about-her-reasons-for-speaking-out-on-sex-and-gender-issues/ "TERF Wars"], didn't start with her statements but with the scrutiny of her Twitter activity. I wondered for a while if this was just a chronically-online thing that only a couple of people remembered, but I actually found it to be mentioned as the beginning of the controversy in tons of quality secondary sources: [https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/12/style/jk-rowling-transgender-fans.html][https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/2046147X231180501#con][https://web.archive.org/web/20221106002848id_/https://watermark.silverchair.com/507gwenffrewi.pdf?token=AQECAHi208BE49Ooan9kkhW_Ercy7Dm3ZL_9Cf3qfKAc485ysgAAAsUwggLBBgkqhkiG9w0BBwagggKyMIICrgIBADCCAqcGCSqGSIb3DQEHATAeBglghkgBZQMEAS4wEQQMK3mkeQtQG7oE6yIoAgEQgIICeMfIXIz0mUVH-p9wjF8qOutgKZ71pFuqU9dWVFHpXkqctbceLs25ybRNcAtexjRVyqHJE-_aVYeQC2VdbE7i-JZhcapd4hi9e-PvykYgcW4pZ-k9QKNIntywYvDSioDTK7DIbos4hZOcSXJ8VORYq5XBkGGSmRdPikE0WT1OC2p56VrtcENIH_tqmI6UtCcKYT0J4Egi1dwvRy6KtiXYg_21yuQ_-WdH_Ym3eH_UAzN_s7-aqClTuKecOCJpYF_OIVmXcTpZqimwYeplxlLpT8BCd7VfXeC4LvC_wEXVOw1tXY48O8VEzvgh00Wpi06keDqPFRbFTTY2cty2Rgce6iyx2Gv5iCAP0-pLs4kTv3xIQVujuNO-6QUJYrFO9eEX-cyOWq-084oIaa-Rynuy51DoBI5SUOCoq5nYJ3NKv5OOSwCh9yABVljy5s8x_QQ6hPXHSbcfxkbE_UX4Mm0aM6g1LkxPSVzi-XXpJK98qY2D7ItVdXnO6Ul8UHqlCm4GWzESs5H-XOUnrxJ5TYLj7326AckNZJISyllSR-Ugibch6ovMgVR9aDdeF-yV80rYXi-pcvfES2PNRVCWShfiMaBu-dBAvjTb_4Asr_yOrZlIWoU4AbkireKaurUVXdVQjCmZavwZs-0BvkPIvrrUNSUuPyDBfiJJA5T5wP1GErfoEsVxfiQxcs1stQzK7HnPXdqHamtS7LOUsraVipK9jdFZXt8ZG_G6C8ri5WqeKQFiET429XnlsZftn4xmlCyEFI74FBG6xG1ZeZEt9cb_VlqO6nMLmyCimooiLgkU1NMOZyZx1JlcEi5rsuTDkP6nn2BQsdRtTqCC][https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/j-k-rowling-accused-transphobia-after-mocking-people-who-menstruate-n1227071][https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2019/12/19/jk-rowling-tried-make-her-work-more-inclusive-then-she-tweeted-support-an-anti-trans-researcher/][https://www.cnn.com/2023/02/21/entertainment/jk-rowling-podcast-release-what-to-know-cec/index.html][https://www.theguardian.com/books/2019/dec/19/jk-rowling-trans-row-court-ruling-twitter-maya-forstater]. Some of these sources mention [https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-out/j-k-rowling-accused-transphobia-after-mocking-people-who-menstruate-n1227071 a first "like" in 2017], but most of them focus on the [https://www.thepinknews.com/2018/03/22/jk-rowling-reps-blame-middle-aged-moment-for-liking-tweet-calling-trans-women-men-in-dresses/ 2018 "men in dresses" like]. In our section, the first incident mentioned is Rowling's [https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/19/world/europe/jk-rowling-maya-forstater-transgender.html tweet in support of Maya Forstater], in 2019, a year and a half later. |
|||
::: First five drafts can be reviewed at [[#Proposed text for "Transgender people" section]]; previous discussions and source dumps in [[Talk:J. K. Rowling/Archive 16]]. |
|||
# My concern with this omission is not just that a key piece of information is missing. We have to remember that this section contains the description of a '''debate''', therefore we need to uphold [[Wikipedia:Neutral point of view|WP:NPOV]]. Most of the statements by Rowling that are cited currently are defensive in nature, so the full context behind them is essential to the neutrality of the section. As I highlighted in my first point, newspapers, academics and Rowling herself all recognize that she has been criticized for more than her statements, and cite the role played by her Twitter activity. Therefore, the fact that only her statements — defensive statements, for the most part — are mentioned in this section goes against [[WP:BALANCE]]. |
|||
# Not only are just her statements cited, ''which'' statements are cited is also what I think makes the section imbalanced. In particular, the fact that her [https://www.reuters.com/world/uk/transgender-broadcaster-reports-jk-rowling-police-over-social-media-comments-2024-03-07/ misgendering of India Willoughby] is currently left out poses a problem. I understand waiting for the best quality sources, but most of her other statements currently cited in the section — for example, her first defensive tweet from 2019, or the near full paragraph on the content of "TERF Wars"; all supported only by breaking news — are backed by the exact same level of sourcing. And regardless of the original intention, we have to recognize that it may look biased to cite Rowling saying that trans people deserve "peace and security", while omitting that she also called a trans woman "a man revelling in his misogynistic performance of what he thinks 'woman' means". To be clear, my suggestion is that the Willoughby incident be added back, not that other stuff be removed, although any effort to uphold consistent standards across the section will be an improvement. |
|||
=== Draft 6 === |
|||
# These inconsistent standards apply beyond her statements. If the reason for omitting Willoughby is that it's an individual incident — something I would tend to disagree with, as it's also the clear expression of an opinion — then other individual incidents, which are arguably less notable and are also backed by lesser-quality sourcing, would also need to be questioned. Examples: Ripple of Hope Award, open letter condemning "hate speech". |
|||
'''NOTE!!!!''' {{highlight|I have reversed the order (draft vs. historical) compared to earlier versions because it's easier to edit with the draft first.}} [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 16:53, 5 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
# This final point is maybe more trivial and unrelated, but I think the order and structure of the section should be changed, especially with the first and fourth paragraphs. Both contain information that would belong in a "general overview" paragraph, so I don't understand why they're separated. In particular, I don't see why the first paragraph mentions first and foremost that her statements have "divided feminists, fuelled debates on freedom of speech and cancel culture, and prompted declarations of support for transgender people", but the fact that those same statements "have been called transphobic" is separated from the other stuff and relegated to the 4th paragraph. In any case, this would inevitably be addressed if, as some suggested, we rework the section to show the progression of her views in more of a linear way. |
|||
{| class="wikitable" |
|||
! style="width: 30em;" | Draft 6: 459 words |
|||
! 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}} |
|||
<!-- Overview --> |
|||
Rowling espouses [[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)"}} Since 2017,{{sfn|Duggan|2021|pp=160–161}} she has written frequently about [[Transgender rights movement|transgender rights]], mostly in the context of proposed changes to UK gender recognition laws that would make it easier to [[transgender|transition]] without a medical diagnosis.<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 --> |
|||
Controversy over Rowling's gender-critical messaging accelerated in 2019 when she defended [[Maya Forstater]].{{sfn|Whited|2024|pp=6-8}} When Forstater's employment contract with the London branch of the [[Center for Global Development]] was not renewed after she expressed 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 --> |
|||
Rowling's views have impacted her reputation. As her views on the [[legal status of transgender people]] came under scrutiny,{{sfn|Suissa|Sullivan|2021|pp=66–69}} she received insults and threats{{sfn|Suissa|Sullivan|2021|p=69}}{{sfn|Whited|2024|p=9}} and discussion moved beyond the Twitter community.{{sfn|Schwirblat|Freberg|Freberg|2022|p=368}} While her remarks provoked 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}} 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> Fans turned away from her work and boycotted events, and publishers hesitated to accept her work.{{sfn|Whited|2024|p=8}} Criticism came from the ''Harry Potter'' fansites [[MuggleNet]] and [[The Leaky Cauldron (website)|The Leaky Cauldron]],{{sfn|Henderson|2022|p=224}} and [[LGBT]] charities [[Mermaids (charity)|Mermaids]],<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> [[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 name= Milne2020/> [[GLAAD]] called Rowling's comments "cruel" and "inaccurate".<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> Leading actors of the [[Wizarding World]] spoke out against her stance;<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> [[Daniel Radcliffe]], [[Emma Watson]], [[Rupert Grint]], [[Eddie Redmayne]] and others declared support for the transgender community.{{sfn|Borah|2024|p=375}}{{efn| [[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>}} 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 --> |
|||
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 – that left trans people feeling betrayed{{sfn|Whited|2024|p=7}}{{sfn|Henderson|2022|p=224}} – Rowling said her views on women's rights arose from her experience as a survivor 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}} |
|||
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: |
|||
* [[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> |
|||
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> |
|||
If you've read this, thank you! If you share some of my concerns, please tell me if you'd be interested in working on improving this section. We're already starting to collect newer sources for an update, so we might as well use this opportunity now. And if you disagree, please let me know why, I'll be happy to discuss. |
|||
[[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> |
|||
[[User:WikiFouf|WikiFouf]] ([[User talk:WikiFouf|talk]]) 04:04, 19 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:I am starting to seriously wonder whether she has devoted most of her recent life to picking fights, rather than working. Every time I come across a news report on her, it is about a fight or an outrageous statement. When was the last time she released a newsworthy book? At this point, we could easily have several spin-off articles about her "controversies". Plenty of sources, if an editor can stomach them. [[User:Dimadick|Dimadick]] ([[User talk:Dimadick|talk]]) 12:16, 19 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::@[[User:Dimadick|Dimadick]]: The article shows [[The Running Grave|26 Sep 2023]] as the answer to your first question. There are ''Main article'' links to more in-depth coverage of her works, as well as [[Religious debates over the Harry Potter series]], [[Political views of J. K. Rowling]], including {{Section link|Political views of J. K. Rowling|Transgender rights}} and the [[Politics of Harry Potter]]. <span class="nowrap">[[User:Bazza_7|Bazza <span class="tmp-color" style="color:grey">7</span>]] ([[User_talk:Bazza_7|talk]])</span> 12:28, 19 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::@[[User:Dimadick|Dimadick]] The answer to your question would be 2023, with a book that is shortlisted for Crime and Fiction Book of the Year by the British Book Awards.[https://publishingperspectives.com/2024/03/the-uks-nibbies-books-of-the-year-shortlists/]. Beware of confirmation bias. [[Special:Contributions/2A00:23C8:2C85:5F01:6117:98DF:6359:9333|2A00:23C8:2C85:5F01:6117:98DF:6359:9333]] ([[User talk:2A00:23C8:2C85:5F01:6117:98DF:6359:9333|talk]]) 17:46, 19 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::She has, in fact, released new, massive books in the Cormoran Strike series at a fairly rapid pace, despite devoting some of her time for online spats. [[User:Dtobias|*Dan T.*]] ([[User talk:Dtobias|talk]]) 02:55, 21 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::I will say the last paragraph of the section seems determined to "clear her name" using sources mainly from 4-5 years ago and ignoring everything since then (the whole section is somewhat outdated, for that matter, but here the outdatedness is definitely pushing a POV). Just as a more recent example, she's gotten a lot of press recently for denying transgender people were targeted in the Holocaust; it's unlikely she has the same support she did early on, but quote a lot of statements from four years ago or so - or, rather, ''don't'' include any nuance like that and just say a bunch of people support her and don't talk about the people who vehemently do not, and you get a very dismissive statement that appears to be encyclopedic. <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> 13:25, 30 March 2024 (UTC) |
|||
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> |
|||
== 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= |
|||
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: |
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: |
||
Line 538: | Line 779: | ||
* [[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}} |
* [[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> |
* [[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 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. |
|||
{{cot|Sources}} |
|||
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) |
|||
{{reflist-talk}} |
|||
{{notelist-talk}} |
|||
{{cob}} |
|||
=== Discussion of draft 6 === |
|||
:@[[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) |
|||
My intent was to work in everything mentioned under Draft 5, recognizing that the first sentence may still be a sticking point. My apologies if I missed anything (it's been quite a chore to keep up with this talk page :). {{pb}} Going forward, could people please remember that we are now at a state which is approaching final and would like others to weigh in, so please try to keep your feedback chronological, brief, and within a separate fourth-level heading when starting a new issue. All that said, I think great progress has been made, in a collegial and collaborative environment!! [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 16:53, 5 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*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) |
|||
:Sandy, for consistency with the previous drafts, I think these need to be flipped with the new one on the right and the historical on the left. Unless I'm missing something? [[User:Victoriaearle|Victoria]] ([[User talk:Victoriaearle|tk]]) 20:28, 5 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
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 |
|||
::I left a note about that at the top of [[#Draft 6]]; when editing to make changes, it's easier if the version being edited is first. I often had to start over, as I entered changes in the old version when trying to change the draft, so having the draft first is easier. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 21:08, 5 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
term ‘TERF’, effectively used as a replacement for epithets such as ‘witch’, ‘bitch’ or ‘cunt’" |
|||
:::Sorry, I shouldn't have peeked while multi-tasking. Sorry for clogging up the page. Will get back to it later when I can focus. [[User:Victoriaearle|Victoria]] ([[User talk:Victoriaearle|tk]]) 22:48, 5 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
==== First sentence: feedback needed ==== |
|||
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) |
|||
*This is a substantial improvement. I'd delete "espoused" without replacement, and I'd simplify "Beginning in" to "Since", and then I'm happyish with 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> 00:26, 6 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*:Implemented [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:J._K._Rowling&diff=prev&oldid=1222449061 beginning in --> since.]. {{pb}} On the opening sentence, now that the rest of the para gives more context (the laws and the self-identification without diagnosis), I would probably be OK with that as well, but I'll wait to hear from others before implementing that change in the draft. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 00:48, 6 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*::It reads okay without "espoused". If we keep it, suggest converting to present tense - "espouses". Lets see what others say. [[User:Victoriaearle|Victoria]] ([[User talk:Victoriaearle|tk]]) 13:29, 6 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*:::I prefer the version without "espoused", and I agree if we do keep it, it should at least be present tense. [[User:LokiTheLiar|Loki]] ([[User talk:LokiTheLiar|talk]]) 14:12, 6 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*:::Changed to present tense. On the rest, my concern is that we cite three scholarly sources who quite carefully do ''not'' label her as such, rather state that ''some'' do. Wikipedia does not lead; it follows sources. I'd feel much better about flat out labeling her if we had three scholarly sources which did that. (I've included the exact quotes from the sources; the reasons we can't label her flat out are already covered in the section just above this one, [[#"Transgender people" section should be re-titled as "Transphobia"]]. And the section name should be "Transgender rights".) [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 14:27, 6 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*:::: Followup from [[WP:BLP]]: {{tq|"Material about living persons added to {{em|any}} Wikipedia page '''must be written with the greatest care and attention''' to [[Wikipedia:Verifiability|verifiability]], [[Wikipedia:Neutral point of view|neutrality]], and [[Wikipedia:No original research|avoidance of original research]]."}} {{pb}} In the interest of moving forward, I have attempted to find a compromise ("espouses views") for this area of disagreement. I have always been willing to install content developed by consensus on talk to the article even when I disagree with that content; I can't do that in this case, as without sources, I believe the proposed changes to the first sentence breach BLP. We can't label Rowling "gender-critical" in the absence of high-quality sources that do so. The sources we have so far do not do that. {{pb}} Our options at this point are: 1) find scholarly sources labeling her outright, 2) wait for more feedback, 3) someone besides me installs the draft should consensus form to add what I believe to be a BLP breach, or 4) run an RFC (do we install before the RFC, or wait a full month to get something installed, or find an interim compromise?). [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 17:56, 6 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*:::::It's really important to be fully immersed in the sources to understand the nuances, and I'm not convinced an RFC would be helpful at this point. I'm fine with "espouses" because that's really the best that can be done with the sources. I'm wondering whether the sources support that she's outspoken? If so, can we simply say something along the lines that "Rowling has been vocal about her gender-critical beliefs". Sorry, I'm not feeling well today, so this is just brainstorming and an imperfectly framed idea and I don't have sources open to check, so feel free to ignore. P.s - thanks Sandy for the work on the talkpage - I got caught in a number of edit conflicts earlier. [[User:Victoriaearle|Victoria]] ([[User talk:Victoriaearle|tk]]) 18:22, 6 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*:::::After walking away for a bit of perspective & then re-reading this evening, "espouses" seems fine to me. [[User:Victoriaearle|Victoria]] ([[User talk:Victoriaearle|tk]]) 23:17, 7 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*Scholarly sources are written for scholars, so there are things they don't say. |
|||
:The sun is quite large and rather hot. But you won't find a paper in an astronomical journal that says so. The paper might give specifics of the sun's temperature at various depths, its diameter, its mass, its density or its circumference. But if you need to explain in a Wikipedia article that the sun is big and hot, scholarly sources are no good at all. Because the astronomy professors are writing for an audience that knows about stars, there are things they don't have to say and they don't waste words on. |
|||
:Therefore you need a source that says the sun is big and hot, you have to go to a non-academic source. |
|||
:But, Sandy, I want to ask you to stop and think here. If, as it seems, you can genuinely read the sources on Rowling and not think she has gender-critical views, then really, how objective are you about this?—[[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> 00:13, 7 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::I agree with you that we shouldn't require scholarly sources specifically if we have good quality [[WP:NEWSORG]] ones. But I do sympathize somewhat with Sandy here: this is a featured article on a BLP and we do need to make sure we can clearly source everything we say about her. [[User:LokiTheLiar|Loki]] ([[User talk:LokiTheLiar|talk]]) 02:17, 7 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::Re S Marshall, the "sun is hot" analogy doesn't apply to this situation for two reasons. |
|||
::# We have three high-quality sources (that multiple editors seem to agree are good scholarly sources) that quite specifically are ''not silent'' on the topic, as an astronomy professor may be on whether the sun is hot. The academics we have so far ''do'' address the matter by specifically ''not'' saying that JKR is a TERF, rather they clearly state that some say she is, while others disagree. Silence on the "sun is hot" is not the situation here. |
|||
::# Since the sun is not a [[WP:BLP|living person]], Wikipedia doesn't have a Wikipedia policy to make sure we don't defame it. |
|||
::We can't use lower quality sources to refute good academic sources that we have on this matter, and Wikipedia can't be the first to say something that high quality sources, when specifically addressing the matter, have not said as far as we know. {{pb}} Re your final question, perhaps you would stop and think about whether you want to be the first editor in several years to personalize a discussion on this, or the FAR, talk page? What any of us ''thinks'' is irrelevant; our content is guided by policy and sources. If there really are no scholarly sources or academics willing to label JKR a TERF, then we should be moving forward on an alternate way to frame the first sentence; compromise should not be hard, considering there are many ways to frame the sentence. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 02:51, 7 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*::All right then. |
|||
:::We need one phrase that encapsulates J. K. Rowling's views on sex and gender. In draft 6, we've already decided and agreed that she: |
|||
:::# Opposes gender self-recognition; |
|||
:::# Accuses trans women of being men; |
|||
:::# Believes sex is real, or at least, warns of dire consequences of thinking sex isn't real; and |
|||
:::# Denies being transphobic. |
|||
:::These are of course the precise views we cover in [[Gender-critical feminism]], with a long string of academic references for the definition. But also at issue here is the law, and there's also a legal definition of what gender-critical views are, from the judgment in [https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/60c1cce1d3bf7f4bd9814e39/Maya_Forstater_v_CGD_Europe_and_others_UKEAT0105_20_JOJ.pdf Maya Forstater -v- CGD Europe & ors]. They include: ''The belief that sex is immutable and not to be conflated with gender identity...'' [which are] ''...absolutist in nature and whereby...'' [Forstater would] ''...refer to a person by the sex she considers appropriate even if it violates their dignity and/or creates an intimidating, hostile, degrading or offensive environment.'' According to the Tribunal, this is the element of gender-critical views that amounts to a protected philosophical belief. It's even more simply encapsulated (at page 3) as: ''the Claimant’s belief as to the immutability of sex''. (This is the Law of England and Wales. Unfortunately for 13tez, Maya Forstater's case isn't about Scots Law.) |
|||
:::Therefore, J. K. Rowling's views on sex and gender meet both the academic and legal tests for what a gender-critical belief is. QED. |
|||
:::The objection is that a sufficiently academic source doesn't say so. Wikipedia does have a problem with this. We use hedges like: "[Donald] Trump's political positions are viewed by some as right-wing populist" (from [[Political positions of Donald Trump]]), because to say Donald Trump is a right wing populist in wikivoice would be sooo controversial.—[[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> 08:07, 7 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::: I feel it should be pointed out that this section "[Forstater would] ''...refer to a person by the sex she considers appropriate even if it violates their dignity and/or creates an intimidating, hostile, degrading or offensive environment.''" is the Appeal Tribunal quoting the first instance judgement, and was an interpretation disputed in that appeal. The Appeal judgement found that "''On a proper reading of the Judgment, the Tribunal was stating that the Claimant would not use preferred pronouns whenever she considered it appropriate not to do so. That must mean that she would not use them where she considered it to be relevant. If that is correct, then the description “absolutist” would appear to be something of a misnomer as her position was more nuanced and context dependent''." Absolutism and an automatic rejection of preferred pronouns are not therefore part of the legal definition of the protected gender-critical belief in the UK. [[User:Daff22|Daff22]] ([[User talk:Daff22|talk]]) 11:56, 7 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
==== Unnecessary attribution ? ==== |
|||
: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) |
|||
Re {{tq2|In an essay posted on her website in June 2020 – that Tolonda Henderson[35] and Whited state left trans people feeling betrayed[12] – Rowling said her views ... }} Could we drop the attribution, and make this just: {{tq2|In an essay posted on her website in June 2020 – that left trans people feeling betrayed[12][35] – Rowling said her views .... }} My impression is that this is a widely supported statement, so that the attribution is creating a false impression, not needed, and only clunking up the sentence. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 17:56, 6 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*Imv: Yes, drop 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> 18:02, 6 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:I agree we can drop the attribution there. [[User:LokiTheLiar|Loki]] ([[User talk:LokiTheLiar|talk]]) 18:03, 6 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
: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) |
|||
::[https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:J._K._Rowling&diff=prev&oldid=1222643520 Done], [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 02:55, 7 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::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) |
|||
==== Thoughts from Scientelensia==== |
|||
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) |
|||
Regarding this part: “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".” |
|||
* Could it be changed to this (or a shorter version of it)? “After the [[Hate Crime and Public Order (Scotland) Act 2021]] had come into force in April 2024, Rowling, who resides in Edinburgh, took to [[X (social network)|X]] to criticise the bill, stating that "freedom of speech and belief" was at an end if accurate description of biological sex was outlawed. She further posted 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> Rowling also said: "Scottish lawmakers seem to have placed higher value on the feelings of men performing their idea of femaleness, however misogynistically or opportunistically, than on the rights and freedoms of actual women and girls."<ref>{{cite web |title= JK Rowling in ‘arrest me’ challenge over hate crime law |url= https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c51j64lk2l8o |website=BBC News |access-date=8 April 2024 |date=1 April 2024}}</ref>” |
|||
My main criticsm of this draft (though it is much better than before) is that: |
|||
* The actors who didn’t support Rowling are in the main text, the others are merely a note. I understand the difference between main and supporting actors, but it does seem that those who oppose Rowling are being given more prominence. Intentions could be misconstrued. As for scholarly sources (which Sandy Georgia wanted; these are surely adequate I hope):<ref name=FiennesSupport>{{cite web|title= Ralph Fiennes: Verbal abuse directed at JK Rowling is disgusting and appalling |url= https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2022/10/24/ralph-fiennes-verbal-abuse-directed-jk-rowling-disgusting-appalling/ |publisher=[[The Daily Telegraph|The Telegraph]] |date=24 October 2022 |access-date=13 December 2022 |url-status=live}}</ref><ref name=BonhamCarterSupport>{{cite web|title= 'It's horrendous': Helena Bonham Carter defends JK Rowling and Johnny Depp |url= https://www.theguardian.com/film/2022/nov/28/helena-bonham-carter-defends-jk-rowling-and-johnny-depp |work=The Guardian |date=28 October 2022 |access-date=30 November 2022 |url-status=live}}</ref><ref name=SupportMargolyes>{{cite web|title= JK Rowling: Miriam Margolyes says anger at Harry Potter author over trans views has been 'misplaced' |url= https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/films/news/miriam-margolyes-jk-rowling-trans-b2060541.html |work=The Independent |date=19 April 2022 |access-date=16 December 2022 |url-status=live}}</ref><ref name=SupportColtrane>{{cite web|title= Robbie Coltrane says JK Rowling transphobia critics ‘hang around waiting to be offended’ |url= https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/films/news/robbie-coltrane-jk-rowling-transphobic-tweet-hagrid-troubled-blood-b445069.html |work=The Independent |access-date=7 May 2024 |url-status=live}}</ref> (for example). From Scientelensia (17:47, May 7, 2024) |
|||
* Another main criticism is that this paragraph… |
|||
: Fans turned away from her work, boycotted events, and publishers hesitated to accept her work. Criticism came from the Harry Potter fansites MuggleNet and The Leaky Cauldron, and LGBT charities Mermaids, Stonewall, and Human Rights Campaign. GLAAD called Rowling's comments "cruel" and "inaccurate". Leading actors of the Wizarding World spoke out against her stance; Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Watson, Rupert Grint, Eddie Redmayne and others declared support for the transgender community. 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. |
|||
: …almost wholly only lists critics from organisations. No support for her has been mentioned at all, which arguably displays bias as there was a lot of support for her also. From Scientelensia (20:04, May 7, 2024) |
|||
* The last paragraph also fails to mention any praise for JK Rowling’s essay; only criticism. Only the views of trans people are considered. See for example: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-55350905. From Scientelensia (20:08, May 7, 2024) |
|||
{{reflist-talk}} |
|||
==== Thoughts from Victoria ==== |
|||
:: 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) |
|||
A couple of thoughts to keep things moving. |
|||
:::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) |
|||
*First, there's been a sustained effort to improve what's currently in the article & in my view that's a Good Thing. Pats on the back all around! |
|||
: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) |
|||
*Second, re first sentence. What we have is honestly fine. There are other options too. I'm not convinced that [[Wikipedia:CONTROVERSY]] applies - it's an essay about articles rather than about one section in an BLP. Following that line of thought, then we can write something like Rowling's remarks/comments (pick the word) have been/are controversial. This [https://www.glamour.com/story/a-complete-breakdown-of-the-jk-rowling-transgender-comments-controversy Glamour article] (very long) has been continually updated for a number of years & is cited by a number of the literary critics. The verbiage they use is that J.K. Rowling has come "under fire" for controversial tweets (not verbatim, but very very close). We should either stick with the first sentence as written in Draft 6 or consider rewriting along the lines of the controversial tweets verbiage. |
|||
::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) |
|||
*Third, re scholarly sources: Rowling is a productive writer - something like 20 works in 25 years - and the reason this article exists is because of her writing career. Because she's a writer, literary critics do what literary critics do - hence scholarly sources. For this topic in Rowling's bio, those sources simply distill news sources and are now the desired secondary sources. |
|||
::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) |
|||
*Fourth, I think Scientelensia raises points that are maybe worth considering. Back when we were discussing Draft 3 it became clear that draft had veered into discussing what others were saying about Rowling, rather than what Rowling says/believes. To veer back, we might consider trimming or even cutting the text in the third para beginning from "Criticism came from the Harry Potter fansites ... " possibly to the end of the paragraph. If so, the text can focus on Rowling & there'd be fewer words. |
|||
::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) |
|||
Personally, I think we're almost there. In fact, I think we could take the "it's good enough" route and say that Draft 6 is good to go. What do others think? [[User:Victoriaearle|Victoria]] ([[User talk:Victoriaearle|tk]]) 23:22, 8 May 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) |
|||
:My general thoughts are that while there are things I'd change if I could write it entirely myself, I think that Draft 6 is basically fine and I'm not that interested in getting in a big fight about what are essentially small quibbles. [[User:LokiTheLiar|Loki]] ([[User talk:LokiTheLiar|talk]]) 23:41, 8 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
====References for above quote==== |
|||
:I'm concerned that the proposal has veered into non-neutral territory by overfocusing on one academic writer (Whited) rather than a [[WP:WIAFA|thorough and representative survey of the relevant literature]]. A survey of the entire literature would not have seen us drop the one sentence in the article that is [[WP:RECENTISM|most likely to endure beyond what any Hollywood star said or thinks]]. "Her statements have divided feminists; fuelled debates on freedom of speech, academic freedom and cancel culture ... " and more). But this is not a hill worth dying on; I wouldn't mind if we install and move on, but if I had my druthers we'd move the list of all actors and organizations to footnotes (who is surprised at the list of charities?), and restore and expand instead the content that will endure beyond Hollywood -- that is, the overall and lasting cultural effects of the whole brouhaha as reflected in a variety of scholarly sources. A thorough and representative survey of the relevant literature produces scholarly analyses of linguistics, hate speech, fandom, feminism, women's rights, trans rights, etc -- much more than passing opinions of Radcliffe, Watson and anyone else who spends the GDP of a small country to attend the Met Gala. I don't think the draft is POV enough to tag it as such, the POV is subtle, and I won't protest if it goes in, but somewhere along the way, neutrality was dropped in the content that was excised. My solution is different than Scientelensia's; rather than add in those who support her, delete all of that recentism, and focus on a survey of the literature and the broader issues raised. But if someone wants to install now, I won't object. I still believe the section heading should be "Transgender rights". I don't think Draft 6 is FA material, but the rest of the article is, so neither do I think a FAR is in order; it's good enough, but won't endure. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 01:25, 9 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
<references /> |
|||
::Your solution would work also, but there would also have to be rigorous testing to ensure that the selection of literary works constitutes an unbiased interpretation. [[User:Scientelensia|Scientelensia]] ([[User talk:Scientelensia|talk]]) 16:19, 9 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::1. Looking back at Victoria's fourth point, I agree; that's where in my view most precious real estate (word count) is misspent on excess detail, and trimming that would give us room to work back in some neutrality and replace some RECENTISM with enduring content. {{tq2|Criticism came from the Harry Potter fansites MuggleNet and The Leaky Cauldron, and LGBT charities Mermaids, Stonewall, and Human Rights Campaign. GLAAD called Rowling's comments "cruel" and "inaccurate". Leading actors of the Wizarding World spoke out against her stance; Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Watson, Rupert Grint, Eddie Redmayne and others declared support for the transgender community. }} could become {{tq2|Criticism came from Harry Potter fansites, LGBT charities, and leading actors of the Wizarding World.}} by moving the detail to a footnote. That word count could be better used on more enduring issues. |
|||
:::2. Whited may have said this, but here's where neutrality is particularly lost: {{tq|"Fans turned away from her work, boycotted events, and publishers hesitated to accept her work."}} In fact, book sales increased, Universal Studios is expanding Harry Potter World, a TV series is in the works, Maya Forstater was exonerated, etc ... so while the statement is true to some extent and for many people, it's factually inaccurate in terms of leaving out the big picture, and redundant to territory already covered in the first point above. Dropping the sentence is an alternative to discuss. |
|||
:::3. Looking back at [[Talk:J._K._Rowling#Fourth_draft|Draft 4]] reveals the problem with trying to write an encyclopedic entry with topic sentences: doing so can result in a POV construction that leads the reader (I forget which article is on a record number of [[WP:FAC|FACs]] for this very problem, which has proven insurmountable). Grouping like content logically by paragraphs avoids wasting wordcount in ways that risk leading the reader or telling the reader what a paragraph is about; just the facts, and let the reader make their own decision. |
|||
:::4. I agree with Scientelensia that the sentence {{tq|she tweeted a list of trans women, writing that they are "men, every last one of them"}} needs a few more clauses for context and relevance, although I wouldn't take as many words as Scientelensia suggests. |
|||
:::5. And after doing that wordcount reduction, use the gained space to rework and update the enduring content based on [[WP:WIAFA|a survey of the literature]], which was: {{tq|Her statements have divided feminists; fuelled debates on freedom of speech and cancel culture; and prompted declarations of support for transgender people from the literary, arts and culture sectors}} ... we seem to have lost academic freedom, and there's plenty of scholarly literature on how fandom has evolved, and the power of Twitter. |
|||
:::We could put in Draft 6 now, but it is POV and we'll be back here in less than two years to repair the damage we inflicted. {{u|Victoriaearle}} I had my turn; are you interested in working up Draft 7 ?[[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 16:55, 9 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::PS, my separate and growing concern is that none of the three main FA authors have shown up to update the rest of the article to reflect Whited 2024, so if that doesn't happen, we're likely to end up at [[WP:FAR|FAR]] anyway. I think we made a mistake in over-relying on Whited for transgender content, but she certainly should be used for updating literary content. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 16:58, 9 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::@[[User:SandyGeorgia|SandyGeorgia]] You suggest {{!xt|Criticism came from Harry Potter fansites, LGBT charities, and leading actors of the Wizarding World.}}, but that implies (to me) all "leading" actors, which isn't true. Either define "leading actors", or quantify with "most", "some", etc. [[User:Bazza_7|Bazza <span style="color:grey">7</span>]] ([[User_talk:Bazza_7|talk]]) 21:13, 9 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::Yep, I wasn't trying to wordsmith the thing yet ... just give the broad points I'd do if we started over. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 21:23, 9 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::{{u|SandyGeorgia|Sandy}} please excuse my brevity, but I'm not at all able at this time. Will get back here when able. Sorry. [[User:Victoriaearle|Victoria]] ([[User talk:Victoriaearle|tk]]) 23:27, 9 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
===Draft 6.3=== |
|||
== Featured article review == |
|||
Since I agree that all of Sandy's proposed elisions improve the text, I've made them. I've made no effort to add the suggested new content, and I view cutting words as more important.—[[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> 16:31, 10 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
{| class="wikitable" |
|||
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) |
|||
! style="width: 30em;" | Draft 6.3: 403 words |
|||
! 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}} |
|||
:Yeah... [[User:LegalSmeagolian|LegalSmeagolian]] ([[User talk:LegalSmeagolian|talk]]) 19:14, 2 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::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) |
|||
<small>Moved from FAR. [[User:Nikkimaria|Nikkimaria]] ([[User talk:Nikkimaria|talk]]) 23:40, 2 April 2024 (UTC)</small> |
|||
<!-- Overview --> |
|||
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. |
|||
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. She 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 --> |
|||
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. |
|||
Friction over Rowling's gender-critical writings surged in 2019 when she defended [[Maya Forstater]].{{sfn|Whited|2024|pp=6-8}} When Forstater's employment contract with the [[Center for Global Development]] 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 --> |
|||
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: |
|||
Rowling's views have impacted her reputation. As her thoughts on the [[legal status of transgender people]] came under scrutiny,{{sfn|Suissa|Sullivan|2021|pp=66–69}} she received insults and threats{{sfn|Suissa|Sullivan|2021|p=69}}{{sfn|Whited|2024|p=9}} and discussion moved beyond the Twitter community.{{sfn|Schwirblat|Freberg|Freberg|2022|p=368}} While her remarks provoked 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}} 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> |
|||
<!-- Denial --> |
|||
{{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.}} |
|||
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}} |
|||
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. |
|||
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: |
|||
* [[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> |
|||
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> |
|||
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) |
|||
[[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> |
|||
:'''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) |
|||
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> |
|||
<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) |
|||
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: |
|||
*'''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) |
|||
* [[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}} |
|||
*:It takes a minute to notify everyone. I've notified them now. I also don't think it's the paragraph, I think it's every point raised on that talk page right now - the coverage of her transphobia in the lead, the positioning of the transgender views section, the entire transgender views section being out of date. This isn't one paragraph, it's how the article is both out of date, and minimising. <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> 17:30, 2 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}} |
|||
*::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) |
|||
* [[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}} |
|||
*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) |
|||
* [[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}} |
|||
*: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) |
|||
* [[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}} |
|||
*::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) |
|||
* [[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}} |
|||
*:::Concur. This is the best solution here. [[User:Simonm223|Simonm223]] ([[User talk:Simonm223|talk]]) 18:08, 2 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> |
|||
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) |
|||
|} |
|||
<small>End moved content. [[User:Nikkimaria|Nikkimaria]] ([[User talk:Nikkimaria|talk]]) 23:40, 2 April 2024 (UTC)</small> |
|||
==== Sources ==== |
|||
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) |
|||
{{cot|Sources}} |
|||
{{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 6.1 ==== |
|||
: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) |
|||
Thanks for getting the ball rolling on this, {{u|S Marshall}}, and I hope Victoria feels better soon. I am traveling today and won't be able to peek in 'til tomorrow. Bst, [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 16:49, 10 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:Agreed, thanks. As a newcomer to this discussion, I have to ask why are we just relying on one critic, Whited, whose opinion seems at ace level very pro-trans. What gives Whited the right to be here? Would it be useful to insert another critic to level the bias, or remove reference to Whited together? |
|||
== REACHING CONSENSUS == |
|||
:Also, in terms on labelling JKR, if a label is needed, gender-critical is indeed appropriate and applicable. [[User:Scientelensia|Scientelensia]] ([[User talk:Scientelensia|talk]]) 18:46, 10 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::If you can find a proper Rowling scholar who ''doesn't'' think Rowling's a trans-exclusionary feminist, go ahead and cite them.—[[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> 20:23, 10 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
It's getting pretty good, actually; focused mostly on what she actually said rather than endless tedious recounting of what other people think of it. As to the discussions about whether to say "gender-critical", that seems to be a reasonable label to use, one that is frequently used as a self-label by people expressing views of a similar nature to JKR's, not a pejorative name like "TERF" or "transphobe". The point of disagreement is in the apparent lack of her actually self-labeling this way; it seems JKR hasn't applied any sort of ideological or political label to herself, preferring her views to speak for themselves. This makes it harder to put a label on her, but if one is to be applied, this one seems fairly reasonable. [[User:Dtobias|*Dan T.*]] ([[User talk:Dtobias|talk]]) 18:33, 10 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
====Weird characterisation==== |
|||
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]] |
|||
"Since 2017,[4] she has written frequently about transgender rights, mostly in the context of proposed changes to UK gender recognition laws that would make it easier to transition without a medical diagnosis." |
|||
I don't get why we're using such a weirdly unspecific wording as "about". Like "she has written frequently against transgender rights" says something. If we can't get the sentence to say something with actual meaning, then the sentence is filler and should be scrapped: as it is, the only part that seems to be meaningful is "since 2017". |
|||
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) |
|||
Well, there's also the part about the gender recognition laws being the main focus... I have to ask if that's supported by sources as a general rule, or if the sources only say that she reacted at three times to such laws. It's kind of hard to make such a general statement with sources locked to very narrow periods of time. If the statement is something like "initially in response to..." then that's much easier to support. |
|||
: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) |
|||
Like, the draft's a massive improvement, but that one sentence... <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> 22:45, 10 May 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) |
|||
*And, she's not writing about or against transgender rights. She's writing about the law and the definition of a woman, with a focus on access to female-only spaces. I'll get my 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> 10:22, 12 May 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) |
|||
*:Actually why not just say that? |
|||
::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) |
|||
::{{tq2|Since 2017 she has written about the law and the definition of a woman. She is concerned about proposed changes to UK law that would make it easier to transition without a medical diagnosis, and about freedom of speech. She is particularly interested in how increased transgender rights would affect access to female-only spaces and legal protections for women.}} |
|||
: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) |
|||
::The downside is, it's long.—[[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> 10:31, 12 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::Enjoy your holiday! [[User:LegalSmeagolian|LegalSmeagolian]] ([[User talk:LegalSmeagolian|talk]]) 21:16, 2 April 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::I think, as long as that doesn't replace the sentences after the one under discussion, that it's okay, but I do worry we're skirting the line of falling into the gender critical movement's framing of itself. As the rest of the paragraph explains, her views are very anti-transwomen. <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> 13:22, 12 May 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) |
|||
::::I wouldn't just say anti-trans woman. She has expressed some pretty serious contempt for trans men too, just in the "poor deluded girls" framing that often gets people to mistake condescension for concern. |
|||
::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) |
|||
::::I agree that "about" is bad and "against" is better. But maybe something like {{tq|She has frequently opposed proposed laws that would expand transgender rights, such as...}} would be even better? [[User:LokiTheLiar|Loki]] ([[User talk:LokiTheLiar|talk]]) 14:43, 12 May 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) |
|||
:::::True, though her views on transmen aren't as widely reported (and more-or-less don't appear in the rest of the proposed paragraph) so it's a little harder to source with the restrictions on sources <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> 16:10, 12 May 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) |
|||
::::::I wouldn't write "opposed proposed". You might say I'm disposed to oppose opposed proposed.—[[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> 16:22, 12 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::😅 |
|||
:::::::Alright then, {{tq|She has frequently spoken against proposed laws that would expand transgender rights, such as...}}. [[User:LokiTheLiar|Loki]] ([[User talk:LokiTheLiar|talk]]) 18:56, 12 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*How about: |
|||
:{{tq2|Since 2017 she has written about transgender people. She resists proposed changes to UK law that would make it simpler to transition without a medical diagnosis. She is concerned about how easier transitions could affect access to female-only spaces and legal protections for women.}} |
|||
:Better?—[[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> 19:06, 12 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::This works! [[User:Scientelensia|Scientelensia]] ([[User talk:Scientelensia|talk]]) 19:08, 12 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::Now up as draft 6.2.—[[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> 19:14, 12 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::I still don't like it because IMO {{tq|Since 2017 she has written about transgender people}} is meaningless without saying which way she has written about them. We could cut that sentence and just have: |
|||
::::{{tq2|Since 2017 she has resisted proposed changes to UK law that would make it simpler to transition without a medical diagnosis. She is concerned about how easier transitions could affect access to female-only spaces and legal protections for women.}} [[User:LokiTheLiar|Loki]] ([[User talk:LokiTheLiar|talk]]) 23:28, 12 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::::She hasn't, though. She started writing about trans issues in 2017 but the resistance to legal changes dates to 2019 at the earliest, so that's counterfactual.—[[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> 23:43, 12 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::Was there any commentary of particular prominence or noteworthiness in 2017 or 2018? If not, one could say something like "While she had made some comments beginning in 2017, her views first came to widespread prominence in 2019..." and then jump into the Maya Forstater stuff and the proposed changes to UK law. If her extremely early views are going to hurt an otherwise clear and consise description of what she did, cut out the information or isolate it to its own sentence. <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> 01:56, 13 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::::::: That's a lot of extra words 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> 06:48, 13 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
*In draft 6.3, I've cut the disputed sentence.—[[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> 06:54, 13 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
== Suissa and Sullivan == |
|||
{{cot|Continue this at [[Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#Suissa and Sullivan]], please.—[[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, 15 May 2024 (UTC)}} |
|||
We've discussed anove what an odd source this is, and how it has sections that are clearly pro-gender critical movement. The introduction explicitly states that transwomen are not women, and that transgender people need no mord rights than already offered under UK law at the time. In the revised draft, it's used once. Does it ''have'' to be used at all? <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> 16:13, 12 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:Is it your position that no source that takes such positions should be used? How about sources that take opposing positions (stating that trans women are women, that transgender people need more rights under law, and being anti-gender-critical movement)? Do all sources have to be strictly neutral, or is it just that sources taking one side (but not the other) need to be avoided? [[User:Dtobias|*Dan T.*]] ([[User talk:Dtobias|talk]]) 14:51, 13 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::The issue here is that it appears to be a non-mainstream position in academic philosophy. (I'd link that to [[WP:FRINGE]] but in the context of philosophy that feels inflammatory. Nevertheless, I still would avoid citing it for its argument for similar reasons.) And it's also only being used as a redundant citation for a single footnote right now. [[User:LokiTheLiar|Loki]] ([[User talk:LokiTheLiar|talk]]) 02:17, 14 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::In which case there's no reason to cut 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> 07:04, 14 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::It's giving a questionable source exposure. I'm not sure how it adds anything but makes the article vulnerable to a source check. Does it even support the content? <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> 07:19, 14 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::Well, you say it's questionable, but you've raised questions about its ideology rather than its accuracy.—[[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> 07:40, 14 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::::They're saying it's [[WP:PROFRINGE]] - which it is - and as such it should not be used as a source in circumstances like this one. [[User:Simonm223|Simonm223]] ([[User talk:Simonm223|talk]]) 17:22, 14 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::No, that sentence isn't promoting a fringe theory.—[[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> 18:23, 14 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::::::The paper is, for example, {{tq|We will argue that current conflicts around sex and gender are not about trans rights per se, which we fully support, and which are already protected under current UK legislation,1 but about the imposition of ontological claims underlying a particular ideological position. Often associated with the intellectual traditions of postmodernism and queer theory, this position entails denying the material reality and political salience of sex as a category, and rejecting the rights of women as a sex class (Jones and Mackenzie, 2020). Disallowing discussion on these points is a feature of and, as we will argue, fundamental to a prominent strand of activism associated with this position, which we will refer to here as the gender identity ideology and movement.}} Is dipping into fringe territory with the claims that: |
|||
::::::::# There is a postmodernism and queer theory-derived ontological position that denies the material reality of sex as a category. |
|||
::::::::# That said ontological position "rejects the rights of women" |
|||
::::::::# That discussion of these points is disallowed |
|||
::::::::These are fringe positions. They're frankly farcical if you have even a passing familiarity with queer theory or the major ontological works of "postmodernism". [[User:Simonm223|Simonm223]] ([[User talk:Simonm223|talk]]) 18:51, 14 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::::Carrying on, we have this chestnut: {{tq|For gender identity campaigners, simply asserting that sex exists as a meaningful category, distinct from people’s self-declared ‘gender identity’, is deemed transphobic. Lobby groups such as Stonewall demand affirmation of the mantra ‘Trans Women Are Women’, with explicit and repeated calls for ‘No debate’. The statement ‘Trans Women Are Women’ could be assumed to be a polite fiction.}} Which is both deeply inaccurate, deliberately disingenuous with its interpretation of what "trans women are women" means and also pretty bloody bigoted to boot such as the language it uses to position [[Stonewall (charity)]]. [[User:Simonm223|Simonm223]] ([[User talk:Simonm223|talk]]) 18:59, 14 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::::::::I would give this line {{tq|In practice, the kinds of statements that routinely lead to people (overwhelmingly women) being denounced as transphobes include:}} a big old {{citation needed}} tag if it were in a Wikipedia article. Since, you know, it makes a factual claim with absolutely no citation nor evidence. [[User:Simonm223|Simonm223]] ([[User talk:Simonm223|talk]]) 19:02, 14 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::::::Over and over Suissa and Sullivan make the claim, unsupported by evidence, that the ideology of Stonewall and another trans rights charity erases, eliminates or obviates sex as a protected category. This is a factually inaccurate statement and is, frankly, a [[WP:FRINGE]] view within politics, social sciences and philosophy regarding the relationship between sex and gender and how trans rights legislation goes about protecting the rights of trans people. This is what I mean when I say it's fringe. The whole paper, front to back, is fringe. And, in fact, had such slap-dash research quality that the press had to issue a factual correction. [[User:Simonm223|Simonm223]] ([[User talk:Simonm223|talk]]) 19:09, 14 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
{{unindent}}My draft uses that source as a reference for: "[Rowling] received insults and threats". Not a single part of [[WP:FRINGE]] or [[WP:PROFRINGE]] is relevant.—[[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> 19:31, 14 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:The question is whether the source, as a fringe source, should be used when another, non-fringe, source would suffice for that particular piece of copy. I don't think anyone is objecting to the claim that Rowling was insulted and may have even faced threats. [[User:Simonm223|Simonm223]] ([[User talk:Simonm223|talk]]) 19:50, 14 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:I mean, if it's not a reliable source, we shouldn't use it to source anything. [[User:LokiTheLiar|Loki]] ([[User talk:LokiTheLiar|talk]]) 21:37, 14 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::I'd also question whether it's even a great source for citing the information it's meant to. Quote the text in Suissa and Sullivan that supports that point. <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> 22:25, 14 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::Okay! I've said "Rowling received insults and threats". Suissa and Sullivan p. 69 supports the insult part of that, which if you read it, is specifically that Rowling got told to "choke on a basket of dicks". Among many other things. Because that's the level of discourse you get on Twitter.{{pb}}Anyway, at issue here is whether Suissa and Sullivan is a reliable source for the claim being made. You have identified that it's not an impartial source. As you rightly say, it has a POV. Predictably, Wikipedia has a rule about that. The rule says that Wikipedia articles have to be neutral, but sources don't. Good sources are by experts and experts ''always'' have a POV. Our task, as Wikipedians, is to construct a NPOV article from POV sources. (This is all written up in WP:RS, and specifically the paragraph at [[WP:BIASEDSOURCES]].){{pb}}It's also true that some sources are just unreliable for ''any claim at all''. We call those sources "deprecated" and they include for example the Daily Mail. The Daily Mail isn't unreliable for being a horrible Tory rag full of ghastly right-wing opinions (even though it definitely is). We don't deprecate other horrible Tory rags full of ghastly right-wing opinions. We deprecate the Daily Mail because it has a history of straight up lying, publishing stuff its so-called journalists made up in their lunch breaks.{{pb}}Where a source is an academic or professional journalist, to deprecate it needs an ''extraordinary'' level of proof. The Daily Mail's complete sitewide deprecation needed three RfCs, [[Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 220#Daily Mail RfC|here]], [[Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 255#2nd RfC: The Daily Mail|here]], and [[Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 299#RFC: Remove "reliable historically" sentence from WP:RSPDM summary|here]], the third of which I personally closed in June 2020. If you want to say Suissa and Sullivan are unreliable for ''any claim at all'', then that's the kind of level of proof that Wikipedians demand.{{pb}}But if you want to say it's unreliable for the specific claim I'm making, then that's a normal use of a talk page and I'm all ears.—[[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> 22:36, 14 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::That's not how any of this works. What you're describing is not [[WP:DEPS|deprecated]], it's [[WP:GUNREL|generally unreliable]]. "Deprecated" means that a source is both generally unreliable and we warn people whenever they try to add it. Even generally unreliable sources {{tq|should never be used for information about a living person}}, as this source is being used here. [[User:LokiTheLiar|Loki]] ([[User talk:LokiTheLiar|talk]]) 22:44, 14 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::: It's not unreliable for the claim I'm making.—[[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> 22:58, 14 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::::I see no policy-based reason for excluding the source or the content it's citing. [[User:SandyGeorgia|'''Sandy'''<span style="color: green;">Georgia</span>]] ([[User talk:SandyGeorgia|Talk]]) 23:01, 14 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::You yourself say that it ''only'' sources the insult part - and it literally only quotes one incident of it. So it doesn't even source half the content that's its ''only'' reason for being in the article in the first place. <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> 23:31, 14 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::::::I get that you don't like it, Adam, but this is a teachable moment. I can use a source without conceding to a single one of its biases.—[[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> 00:17, 15 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::::I don't think you ''should''. It's improving the prominence of a POV, Fringe source without any compelling reason, not even to properly source the phrase in question (as it only sources half). Insisting on including it is no different than someone putting in a spam link to vaguely cite some fact in an 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> 00:50, 15 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:::::::::::I refer you to my answer of 14th May at 22:36, paragraph 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> 11:13, 15 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::::::::::There's a bit of [[WP:IDHT]] going on here - our concern is not with whether Rowling was insulted - I am confident you can find plenty of reliable sources for that - the concern is that this source is [[WP:PROFRINGE]] and as such should not be used for a general comment about a [[WP:BLP]] regardless of whether the source should be deprecated. [[User:Simonm223|Simonm223]] ([[User talk:Simonm223|talk]]) 12:37, 15 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
::::::::::::: There's certainly plenty of IDHT going on here. Since you persist in claiming that the source is generally unreliable, I'll open a thread on WP:RSN about it later today, so we can collapse all this verbiage until it's archived.—[[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> 12:54, 15 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
{{cob}} |
Revision as of 15:19, 15 May 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. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
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".
Also this page is overly long, but I'm not able to manually archive today. Thanks, Victoria (tk) 19:22, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
- Continued at #Discussion of first draft. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:19, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
- I hope we'll defer the discussion of changing the structure/flow of the article until we are closer to having a nearly-final draft of the Transgender section (the structure reflects a chronology from the Smith and Kirk sources of how her success led to fame and wealth led to philanthropy led to her being more willing to speak out on issues ... but placement of content can be discussed later). SandyGeorgia (Talk) 12:04, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
First draft
Current 454 words | Proposed (adds 19 words) |
---|---|
Rowling's responses to proposed changes to UK gender recognition laws,[1][2][a] and her views on sex and gender, have provoked controversy.[5] Her statements have divided feminists;[6][7][8] fuelled debates on freedom of speech[9][10] and cancel culture;[11] and prompted declarations of support for transgender people from the literary,[12] arts[13] and culture sectors.[14] 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,[15][16] 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".[16][b] In another controversial tweet in June 2020,[20] Rowling mocked an article for using the phrase "people who menstruate",[21] and tweeted that women's rights and "lived reality" would be "erased" if "sex isn't real".[22][23] LGBT charities and leading actors of the Wizarding World franchise condemned Rowling's comments;[24][25][c] GLAAD called them "cruel" and "inaccurate".[31] Rowling responded with an essay on her website[32] 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.[33] 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.[33][34][35] Writing of her own experiences with sexism and misogyny,[36] 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".[37] Rowling's statements – beginning in 2017[5][38][39] – have been called transphobic,[40][41] and she has been referred to as a TERF, a "trans-exclusionary radical feminist".[41][42][43] She has rejected these characterisations and the notion that she holds animosity towards transgender people, saying that her viewpoint has been misunderstood.[32][40][39] Criticism of Rowling's views has come from the Harry Potter fansites MuggleNet and The Leaky Cauldron;[44] and the charities Mermaids,[20] Stonewall,[45] and Human Rights Campaign.[46] 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.[47] 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 X a list of transgender women, and wrote that they were "men, every last one of them".[48] Police Scotland stated it had not received any complaints over the posts[49] and that "no action [would] be taken" as they were not illegal.[50][51] |
Rowling's views on sex and gender, have provoked controversy.[5] 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,[15][16] Rowling responded in December 2019 with a 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".[16][d] 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."[53] In another tweet in June 2020,[53] Rowling mocked the phrase "people who menstruate",[21] and tweeted that women's rights and "lived reality" would be "erased" if "sex isn't real".[22][15] Potter scholar Tolanda Henderson, self-described as "gender-queer...non-binary transgender",[54] writes the June 2020 tweet revealed Rowling's "stance that invalidates nonbinary people like me".[55] Her statements have shocked Rowling fans;[53] divided feminists;[6][7][56] fuelled debates on freedom of speech[9][57] and cancel culture;[11] and prompted declarations of support for transgender people from the literary,[58] arts[59] and culture sectors.[60] Rowling's statements[5][38][39] – have been called transphobic,[40][41] and she has been referred to as a TERF, a "trans-exclusionary radical feminist".[41][42][43] Criticism of Rowling's views has come from the Harry Potter fansites MuggleNet and The Leaky Cauldron;[55] and the charities Mermaids,[20] Stonewall,[61] and Human Rights Campaign.[62] 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.[47] LGBT charities and leading actors of the Wizarding World franchise condemned Rowling's comments;[24][25][e] GLAAD called them "cruel" and "inaccurate".[31] She rejected these characterisations and the notion that she is transphobic,[32][40] in an essay she posted to her website on June 10, 2020,[32] where she stated that her views on women's rights were informed by her experience as a survivor of domestic abuse and sexual assault.[33] 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",[33][66][67] she believes that public spaces, such as restrooms, should only be "same-gender space".[68] Of her own experiences with sexism and misogyny,[69] she asks if the "allure of escaping womanhood" would have led her to transition had she been born later, and said that trans activism was "seeking to erode 'woman' as a political and biological class".[37] Whited refers it to as a "public manifesto", which was the "final straw" for fans.[68] 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;[70] Henderson believes the situation does not apply because Rowling "will not shut up" and that "trans-exclusionary themes [are] baked right into the text".[55] |
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, 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. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:16, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
- 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. Victoria (tk) 20:44, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
- We can fix the trivialities later ... thanks for doing the REAL work !!! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:48, 19 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 here.—S Marshall T/C 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 S Marshall for redoing it. We can probably paste that in as the next suggested draft. Victoria (tk) 18:53, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
- I have no objections.—S Marshall T/C 19:08, 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 S Marshall for redoing it. We can probably paste that in as the next suggested draft. Victoria (tk) 18:53, 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. WikiFouf (talk) 19:14, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
- Hi 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. 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. 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? "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. Victoria (tk) 19:58, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
- For clarity, I wasn't saying that your intentions appear dishonest but that the text does, something which I stand by. If you missed it, she tweeted a list of transgender women weeks ago, including India Willoughby (again), Munroe Bergdorf as well as a handful of convicted sex offenders (for good measure), and wrote that they were "men, every single last one of them". Again, this is a section titled "Views [of J. K. Rowling] on transgender people". Misgendering is not just an insult towards an individual but a flat out rejection of transgender identity; that I even need to argue for its inclusion here is beyond me. WikiFouf (talk) 20:38, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
- Although I'm not delighted with WikiFouf's level of rhetoric, I do agree that Rowling's tendency to misgender trans people bears mentioning as a separate point. I'll add something to that effect to the draft.—S Marshall T/C 21:11, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
- The point I made was that omitting J. K. Rowling misgendering transgender people, in a section titled "Views [of J. K. Rowling] on transgender people", would appear dishonest. This is my honest concern. I did not call Victoria dishonest, I don't think that they are, I don't think being frank is low rhetoric. WikiFouf (talk) 21:53, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
- Don't worry, nobody here has any trouble at all understanding your point. For future reference: you can also say things less dramatically.—S Marshall T/C 22:37, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
- Wikipedia articles strive to reflect the highest quality sources and avoid recentism and news-style blow-by-blow reporting. That's what Victoria-- an experienced FA writer-- is striving for, so let's aim for constructive criticism and concrete draft proposals rather than wording that can be easily misunderstood on the internet. I see no consensus on this page for bringing in blow-by-blow news-style unencyclopedic recent newsy issues; text that will endure is the goal. Thank you Victoria; your first draft work is appreciated! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:24, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
- @SandyGeorgia 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. LGBT charities and leading actors of the Wizarding World franchise condemned Rowling's comments; GLAAD called them "cruel" and "inaccurate".
- This whole bit is backed only by breaking news sources, I don't see anyone here asking for its removal.
- As for recentism, "writing without an aim toward a long-term, historical view", it isn't a blanket ban on anything recent. As far as I know, we have to actually talk about it, case by case. On my end, I have repeatedly explained why I believe her misgendering of trans women is important. If you believe it to be unimportant, please explain why. WikiFouf (talk) 03:23, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
- WikiFouf, I'm fairly certain I already explained that on this page, but I understand if it was lost in the volume, so please pardon my repetition. During the FAR, several editors read all the scholarly sources. We strove to cover that which was covered by scholarly or the highest quality sources, and give that material its due weight, although there were some places where the FAR was constrained by the result of a poorly conceived but well attended RFC, and we were stuck with some bits. And we all acknowledged then that those bits would need to be rewritten as better sources become available. Because some of the scholarly sources aren't freely accessible, at times we also substituted in a high quality news source when the material we were citing was also due weight according to scholarly or high quality sources. I hope that, along with Victoria's response, answers the question. Perhaps you will read all five archives of the FAR to understand how the collaborative editing process worked towards consensus in a collegial environment that developed once people understood it was an iterative process. Have you accessed and read all the scholarly sources ? I believe your other concerns are being addressed in the second draft below, which is headed now in the right direction, but we need to make sure our content conforms closely to the sources. You can see below concrete suggestions for text changes and improvements. Robert F. Kennedy was Rowling's hero and role model; do you think her giving back the award is misplaced in the article? Do you want GLAAD removed? Then say so in the next draft with concrete suggestions and see if you can find consensus. The Willoughly issue has been on the page for days and has not found consensus; there is a better way to write encyclopedic content than RECENTISM, and much content can still be expanded at the sub-article, Political views of J. K. Rowling, keeping this article conforming with summary style for a broad overview article of a very large topic. Have you been able to do some expansion over there? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:59, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
- Although I'm not delighted with WikiFouf's level of rhetoric, I do agree that Rowling's tendency to misgender trans people bears mentioning as a separate point. I'll add something to that effect to the draft.—S Marshall T/C 21:11, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
- For clarity, I wasn't saying that your intentions appear dishonest but that the text does, something which I stand by. If you missed it, she tweeted a list of transgender women weeks ago, including India Willoughby (again), Munroe Bergdorf as well as a handful of convicted sex offenders (for good measure), and wrote that they were "men, every single last one of them". Again, this is a section titled "Views [of J. K. Rowling] on transgender people". Misgendering is not just an insult towards an individual but a flat out rejection of transgender identity; that I even need to argue for its inclusion here is beyond me. WikiFouf (talk) 20:38, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
- Hi 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. 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. 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? "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. Victoria (tk) 19:58, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
- Not SandyGeorgia, but as the author of the draft & the person who read the sources the section you quote 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. LGBT charities and leading actors of the Wizarding World franchise condemned Rowling's comments; GLAAD called them "cruel" and "inaccurate", is all covered in the three or four 2024 sources I read. The Kennedy Award is covered; Daniel Radcliffe's comments are covered (leading actor); GLAAD is mentioned. I don't have the sources all open at the moment, but we can swap out the sources just as the sources for the other section you mentioned can be swapped. Personally I'd prefer to swap them as long as people okay with using far fewer sources. It's fine to put these things up for discussion in a collaberative and collegial manner. As for misgendering, I believe that's been added in the subsequent draft, so we can move on to that discussion and point out deficiencies there. Victoria (tk) 03:41, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
- I sorta/kinda prefer leaving in freely accessible sources at times, for the benefit of readers, but that's not at all a sticking point for me. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 04:03, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
- Maybe a bit of both would work? There are some sources I'd marked for removal, so let's add it to the list of things to do for the next draft & see where we end up. Victoria (tk) 17:37, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
- I took the actors out of the notes, and actioned some other of WikiFouf's comments - will elaborate later. Am going blind again. Victoria (tk) 21:25, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
- I sorta/kinda prefer leaving in freely accessible sources at times, for the benefit of readers, but that's not at all a sticking point for me. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 04:03, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
- Not SandyGeorgia, but as the author of the draft & the person who read the sources the section you quote 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. LGBT charities and leading actors of the Wizarding World franchise condemned Rowling's comments; GLAAD called them "cruel" and "inaccurate", is all covered in the three or four 2024 sources I read. The Kennedy Award is covered; Daniel Radcliffe's comments are covered (leading actor); GLAAD is mentioned. I don't have the sources all open at the moment, but we can swap out the sources just as the sources for the other section you mentioned can be swapped. Personally I'd prefer to swap them as long as people okay with using far fewer sources. It's fine to put these things up for discussion in a collaberative and collegial manner. As for misgendering, I believe that's been added in the subsequent draft, so we can move on to that discussion and point out deficiencies there. Victoria (tk) 03:41, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
Second draft
Rowling has controversial views on sex and gender.[1] Rowling's statements[1][2][3] have been called transphobic,[4][5] and she has been called a TERF ("trans-exclusionary radical feminist").[5][6][7] Her statements have shocked her fans,[8] divided feminists,[9][10][11] fuelled debates on freedom of speech[12][13] and cancel culture,[14] and prompted declarations of support for transgender people from the literary,[15] arts[16] and culture sectors.[17] Rowling has said she would rather go to jail than use a trans woman's preferred pronouns.[18]
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,[19][20] Rowling responded in December 2019 with a 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".[20][a] 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."[8] In another tweet in June 2020,[8] 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][19] Potter scholar Tolanda Henderson, self-described as "gender-queer...non-binary transgender",[26] writes the June 2020 tweet revealed Rowling's "stance that invalidates nonbinary people like me".[27]
Criticism of Rowling's views has come from the Harry Potter fansites MuggleNet and The Leaky Cauldron;[27] and the charities Mermaids,[28] Stonewall,[29] and Human Rights Campaign.[30] 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.[31] LGBT charities and leading actors of the Wizarding World franchise condemned Rowling's comments;[32][33][b] GLAAD called them "cruel" and "inaccurate".[39]
She rejected these characterisations and denies being transphobic,[40][4] in an essay she posted to her website on June 10, 2020,[40] where she stated that her views on women's rights were informed by her experience as a survivor of domestic abuse and sexual assault.[41] 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",[41][42][43] she believes that public spaces, such as restrooms, should only be "same-gender space".[44] Of her own experiences with sexism and misogyny,[45] she asks if the "allure of escaping womanhood" would have led her to transition had she been born later, and said that trans activism was "seeking to erode 'woman' as a political and biological class".[46] Whited calls this a "public manifesto", which was the "final straw" for fans.[44] 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;[47] Henderson believes this does not apply because Rowling "will not shut up" and that "trans-exclusionary themes [are] baked right into the text".[27]
Discussion of second draft
S Marshall the template that we used during the FAR for viewing drafts side-by-side is at User:SandyGeorgia/sandbox5#Draft_proposals; it makes it much easier to compare where we are versus what is being proposed. (Also, word count matters :) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:21, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
- I get 466 words, compared to the 429 that were in the article before the edit warring, newsy edits started last month. I suspect 466 words can be justified as due weight relative to the new scholarly sources, and WP:SIZE would still be reasonable, but it would be good to hear from others on the size relative to her overall bio and work. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:40, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
Suggestions (it would be much easier to see the original and the proposed side-by-side):
- The original Duggan wording (her views on sex and gender have provoked controversy) was changed to "Rowling has controversial views on sex and gender." That's a significant difference: What does the source say? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:48, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
- Words can be trimmed and the issue above can be addressed by switching:
- Rowling has controversial views on sex and gender.[1] Rowling's statements[1][2][3] have been called transphobic,[4][5] and she has been called a TERF ("trans-exclusionary radical feminist").[5][6][7] Her statements have shocked her fans,[8] divided feminists,[9][10][11] fuelled debates on freedom of speech[12][13] and cancel culture,[14] and ...
- to ... (controversy is implied by rest of context)
- Rowling's stance on sex and gender[1][2][3] has been called transphobic[4][5] and she has been called a TERF ("trans-exclusionary radical feminist").[5][6][7] Her statements have shocked her fans,[8] divided feminists,[9][10][11] fuelled debates on freedom of speech[12][13] and cancel culture,[14] and ... SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:52, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
- Rowling has controversial views on sex and gender.[1] Rowling's statements[1][2][3] have been called transphobic,[4][5] and she has been called a TERF ("trans-exclusionary radical feminist").[5][6][7] Her statements have shocked her fans,[8] divided feminists,[9][10][11] fuelled debates on freedom of speech[12][13] and cancel culture,[14] and ...
- Is it possible to reduce overquoting here, without losing the thought? "Rowling herself fanned the flames as she became increasingly vocal and, in a few cases, flippant about gender identity." We should strive as much as possible to keep Featured articles in our own words (not always possible, and I'm terrible at it, but others might have ideas). SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:56, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
- Rejig this to avoid tweet ... tweeted redundancy in the same sentence: "In another tweet in June 2020,[8] 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][19]" SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:58, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
- Potter scholar Tolanda Henderson,
self-described as "gender-queer...non-binary transgender",... not necessary. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:59, 21 April 2024 (UTC) - New paragraph, so ... She rejected these characterisations --> Rowling rejected these characterisations ... SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:02, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
- (redundant) writes the
June 2020tweet revealed Rowling's SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:04, 22 April 2024 (UTC) - Serial commas were decided against in the FAR ... and denies being transphobic,[40][4] in an essay she posted to her website on June 10, 2020,[40] where she stated that her views ... can be adjusted in next draft. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:03, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
- Vague "literary scholars" ... one source is cited, so is it Whited suggesting this, or is Whited citing others ? "Literary scholars suggest that French literary ... " SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:06, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
- The source says: Rowling commented: “I’ll happily do two years if the alternative is compelled speech and forced denial of the reality and importance of sex.” Our text says: "Rowling has said she would rather go to jail than use a trans woman's preferred pronouns.") This needs work to better conform source-to-text integrity; if not possible, this might be an area where we might resort to a direct quote. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:59, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
- Sandy these changes are fine, with a couple of caveats:
- The "fanned the flames" quote can maybe be trimmed and should be attributed. I understand re overquoting but in this case a Rowling scholar is making the statement, which in my view holds some weight. If you or others disagree, maybe we can just delete that sentence
- Tolanda Henderson's voice, in my view, is important, not only because they are a talented young scholar but because they are transgender, yet immersed in Rowling's work. That should somehow be signaled.
- "literary scholars" >> Barthes is mentioned in Whited's "Introduction" and also in her volume by the author of "Accio, Jo" (the one who did the survey of fan fiction); in Henderson's "A Coda", published in Cecilia Konchar Farr's Open at the Close: Literary Essays on Harry Potter", and in Konchar Farr's "Introduction" to that volume. Of the four essays I read it was mentioned four times. We can cite all four if needed. Or none. Or something.
- I didn't add the quote from the Independent, so leaving that for now.
- I'm scheduled for a brain scan tomorrow, so don't know when I can get back to all of this. If I'm not back tomorrow, they're easy fixes that anyone else can do. Victoria (tk) 02:06, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
- I hope your brain comes out pretty :). My sutures come out Tuesday; maybe there will be a third draft up, consolidating all commentary, by Wednesday (too much typing for me until the hand works). On The Independent bit, I think the intent is heading the right direction (generalize), but she said something different. Hope you have good news in a few days! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:11, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
- I haven't had a headache for two years or more but something about Rowling seems to spark them. It happened during the FAR too. I'm sure all is well, but the dr doesn't want to hear about the Wikipedia/Rowling/dense mark-up in the edit window excuses :) I will be back when possible. Good luck with the sutures. Victoria (tk) 02:38, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
- I hope your brain comes out pretty :). My sutures come out Tuesday; maybe there will be a third draft up, consolidating all commentary, by Wednesday (too much typing for me until the hand works). On The Independent bit, I think the intent is heading the right direction (generalize), but she said something different. Hope you have good news in a few days! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:11, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
- Ah, yes, that's reminded me why I don't touch featured articles. FA is its own subculture where everything I'd do elsewhere is always against some convention or guideline. Personally I prefer considering the new draft as a piece of writing in its own right rather than in comparison to a previous text, but going forward I will use the format.On the substance, I fully agree with both of you except:On point 1, I would defend my revision of the first sentence. Its purpose is to say what the issue is in simple terms and introduce the rest of the paragraph. It ought to be a simple declarative sentence in the active voice. The source is writing for scholars; but we're writing for curious, uninformed teenagers whose first language might not be English.On point 8, definitely don't string that many semicolons together. We're not writing eighteenth century literary fiction. If some authority has mandated "no serial commas there" then I'd tend to contest its reasoning.On point 10, I'm not summarizing Rowling's tweet. I'm summarizing the article about Rowling's tweet. We need a sentence about misgendering transwomen (nb: Rowling doesn't detectably do it to transmen).I'm happy to redraft if nobody else gets to it first!—S Marshall T/C 08:00, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
- On point 1, we can avoid asserting something as fact in WikiVoice (which might not be supported by the source) by just rephrasing the whole construct as in point 2.On point 8, I'm not fussed about serial commas, but as we move towards a final draft, just something to keep in mind. Rephrasing usually resolves too many clauses. On point 10, we have a neutraility issue, since we're not reflecting what she actually said, or apparently thinks, if we take the context of her earlier statements together with that one quoted. What she seems to have said, in context, has been lost by some of the earlier deletions of content, which is why it's helpful to see side-by-side the last FA version (before the non-consensual changes started). The context of the quote in point 10 is about being "compelled" (by changes in law) to deny the reality of sex (wording she used earlier). This context of the change in laws was deleted by the non-consensual changes in the article, and by the time we reach point 10, we've now lost all context ... continued in response to Andrew below ... SandyGeorgia (Talk) 11:45, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
- The second draft does not seem neutral because it is one-sided – it presents criticism of the subject's views but fails to balance this with prominent support such as U.K. Prime Minister Backs J.K. Rowling.... The last word is not given to a VIP like Sunak but instead to some quotes by Henderson. But who is Henderson? The reader has look back to find that this is Tolonda Henderson who is not sufficiently notable to have a Wikipedia article. Their quoted views seem to be given undue weight because they are just cited to their own work rather than third parties. Andrew🐉(talk) 10:14, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
- Well, I do think Victoriaearle's draft is right to give the last word to an academic study by an accredited Rowling scholar, rather than to a transparently politically motivated off the cuff remark by our unelected and totally-unqualified-in-sociology Prime Minister. In fact I see Victoriaearle's draft as excellent, needing only reordering and a few tweaks.—S Marshall T/C 10:48, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
- @S Marshall: No prime ministers in the United Kingdom have been elected as such; being at all qualified in sociology is not a required qualification for the post. Bazza 7 (talk) 11:50, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for grasping my point.—S Marshall T/C 13:17, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
- Accredited Rowling scholar? The draft gets the name wrong but they seem to be this person. They are still working on their PhD but have several masters degrees in a variety of fields such as religious studies. None of their theses seems to be about or related to Rowling and they declare that they are "no longer a Harry Potter scholar". Andrew🐉(talk) 15:50, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
- I believe the text says Harry Potter scholar. The metric in literature is whether someone gets publishing and Henderson is being published very very early in their career. Whited cites them in the "Introduction" to her volume, so we can use her quote of Henderson's quote or just quote from Henderson. Fwiw, very view literary scholars have Wikipedia pages - not vastly published scholars such as Michael Reynolds who I use for Hemingway pages, so that's not a great metric. In my view Henderson's voice is valuable, so if consensus is needed to do so that process should begin before the next draft goes up. Victoria (tk) 17:47, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
- @S Marshall: No prime ministers in the United Kingdom have been elected as such; being at all qualified in sociology is not a required qualification for the post. Bazza 7 (talk) 11:50, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
- Andrew gives another example of why we should see the last consensus version side-by-side. The context of the criticism (changes in the law) and support has been lost in the rapid-fire, non-consensual editing that begin in March. The last good version I can find before all these changes is here; the context of changes in law, and the fact that Rowling's views also have support in some sectors got dropped and those were not cuts that gained consensus, rather that stuck because others didn't edit war them back in. I suggest in Draft 3 putting that version side-by-side with the new proposal for discussion purposes. I don't pay much attention to "who gets the last word"; prose flow is more relevant. But I do agree that we've lost some neutrality that was reflected in earlier versions, and points 1/2 and 10 need particular work to more closely reflect sources and context. It might help to keep in mind that this page has many watchers who remain silent while we are drafting and until we get closer to a consensual draft; when we do, if the text is non-neutral, watchers do speak up, and it won't gain support for insertion, so working collaboratively towards compromise is key. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 12:07, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
- Well, I do think Victoriaearle's draft is right to give the last word to an academic study by an accredited Rowling scholar, rather than to a transparently politically motivated off the cuff remark by our unelected and totally-unqualified-in-sociology Prime Minister. In fact I see Victoriaearle's draft as excellent, needing only reordering and a few tweaks.—S Marshall T/C 10:48, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
I have some issues with the way this new version seems to present Rowling's perspective nand Whited's quote on the subject. This seems to set up an idea that the disagreement with Rowling is the views that she is at times flippant, rather than presenting the description set out by Whited (or something like that) as a relatively NPOV descriptor, while also noting what the actual criticism of Rowling that has been presented is. At present, this draft somewhat increases the existing issue that this section seems to be rather from Rowling's POV, more than neutral -- missing out that she's posting personal attacks on trans people seems somewhat crucial. (On a more minor point: I feel like the sentence talking about Forsttaer would do better by being phrased as "In December 2019, Rowling commented [on Maya who had...]" would frame things more accurately than starting a sentence with "When Maya's employment contract was not renewed, Rowling Responded", because the currently suggested phrasing implied Rowling's comments were a response to Forstater's contract not being renewed (Feb 2019) as opposed to responding to the outcome of the employment tribunal (December 2019). WorthPoke2 (talk) 17:20, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, I agree re Forstater, we need to explain that Forstater was let go for misgendering. That's in one of the sources I used. The "flippant phrase" will be cut for the next iteration. Thanks for posting these remarks - very helpful. Victoria (tk) 17:40, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
First sentence
Historic (20 words) | Proposed (8 words) |
---|---|
Rowling's responses to proposed changes to UK gender recognition laws,[1][2][c] and her views on sex and gender, have provoked controversy.[5] | Rowling has controversial views on sex and gender.[5] |
Sources
|
---|
|
My position is that the version to the right is the better opening sentence. It's a topic sentence. It's a simple declarative sentence. It simply and accurately summarizes the paragraph that follows. And I don't see how anyone who's read the sources could possibly dispute it? A reasonable alternative could be "Rowling's views on sex and gender are controversial".—S Marshall T/C 13:42, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
- Quick comment and fwiw, my sandbox shows the first sentence as "Rowling's views on sex and gender, have provoked controversy", which is nice & declarative. It does look as though the gender recognition laws got cut b/c of word count, but it should probably go back in. It it mentioned on the sources. But I agree w/ S Marshall that it should start with a good declarative general topic sentence. Victoria (tk) 13:47, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
- It's declarative but personally I might tend to prefer the active voice for a topic sentence? On the gender recognition laws—yes, you're right. How about two sentences? "Rowling has controversial views on sex and gender. She uses X and her blog to share her thoughts about them, where she has been particularly outspoken about changes to gender recognition laws."—S Marshall T/C 14:03, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
- The Duggan source is attached to this sentence, but it's not very clear to me how "controversial" is all we're getting from that source for this opening sentence (MOS:CONTROVERSIAL), especially when this 2021 peer-reviewed article unequivocally states "Rowling’s personal, conservative views on sex and gender have recently been made abundantly clear through her repeated and escalating anti-trans commentary".
- If NPOV is the concern for not using "anti-trans" or "anti-transgender" as a descriptor for the years of continuous activism that the paragraphs that follow describe (despite the Duggan source using the term), we should at least consider gender-critical (which has been used by high quality news sources and herself to describe her views). Umdlye (talk) 16:28, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks, that's useful. I made a mental note to reread Duggan and to make notes. Whited does use gender-critical, so that can easily be slipped in. Victoria (tk) 17:35, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
- Reiterating my thanks to Umdlye for checking the source for this. The words "controversy/contreversial" are not used in Duggan & the commentary (as frankly it is also to some extent in other critics) is framed in regards to the Rowling/Harry Potter fandom. The most relevant sentence is the one Umdlye mentions above
Rowling’s personal, conservative views on sex and gender have recently been made abundantly clear through her repeated and escalating anti-trans commentary
which only goes to 2020. So, yes, I think we should rethink how to start. Victoria (tk) 19:59, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
- Second try
Historic (20 words) | Proposed (5 words) |
---|---|
Rowling's responses to proposed changes to UK gender recognition laws,[1][2][d] and her views on sex and gender, have provoked controversy.[5] | Rowling is a gender-critical feminist.[5] |
Sources
|
---|
|
Easy enough. :)—S Marshall T/C 22:02, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
- I think we should have more sources but I also think that this is the best starting sentence proposed so far, and it's not close. Loki (talk) 22:38, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
- Not working for me, as I explained in the third draft section. Removes context, and we already work in gender critical later in the text. Restore context first-- Rowling's statements refer to changes in laws. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 09:13, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
- I'm sorry, Sandy, I'm stuck on this. Could you be more specific, please? Is your position:
- That Rowling isn't a feminist?
- That she isn't gender-critical?
- That she's gender-critical and feminist, but not a gender-critical feminist?
- That she's a gender-critical feminist but we shouldn't just come out and say it?
- That she's a gender-critical feminist and it's okay to say so if we add more context?
- Thanks.—S Marshall T/C 13:05, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
Misgendering
- Context: A newspaper writes a speculative article about how a future Labour government could make misgendering into an aggravated offence, carrying a maximum sentence of two years at His Majesty's pleasure.
- Rowling tweet:
I'll happily do two years if the alternative is compelled speech and forced denial of the reality and importance of sex.
- A different newspaper covers the tweet, using the headline:
JK Rowling claims she would ‘happily’ spend two years in prison for misgendering a trans person.
- Proposed sentence about this:
Rowling has said she would rather go to jail than use a trans woman's preferred pronouns.
What's the NPOV issue here?—S Marshall T/C 14:29, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
- It's not what she said, although it's what a (clickbait?) newspaper headline claimed. And context is missing. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:56, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
- It looks fine to me. It's accurate. Simonm223 (talk) 17:59, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
- If the sentence is prefaced with "Rowling has said" (as it is), it is false as written: she did not say that.[1] She said “I’ll happily do two years if the alternative is compelled speech and forced denial of the reality and importance of sex.” It would be true if attributed, for example,
(It's still not what she said, and may not even be what she meant or believes, but we can't know, so attribute this as The Independent interpretation of her actual words, which were much more qualified than implied in the news report -- and that's why we have to take care with news reports.) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:07, 22 April 2024 (UTC)The Independent wrote that "Rowling has suggested that she would 'happily' spend two years in prison for misgendering a transgender person".
- If the sentence is prefaced with "Rowling has said" (as it is), it is false as written: she did not say that.[1] She said “I’ll happily do two years if the alternative is compelled speech and forced denial of the reality and importance of sex.” It would be true if attributed, for example,
- It's not a matter of NPOV; it's a matter of accuracy. WP:QUOTEUSE recommends that "Editors of controversial subjects should quote the actual spoken or written words to refer to the most controversial ideas." So, it's best to quote such tweets verbatim rather than paraphrasing them. Andrew🐉(talk) 20:06, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
- I'm a big fan of writing everything in WP:OUROWNWORDS. I think that we have to mean what the sources mean, but we don't have to say what the sources say.The sources are writing for their audiences—often scholars, with the best sources—but we're writing for our audience which is the general public. A decent Wikipedia article manages down its Flesch-Kincaid score. We ought to write clearly, using topic sentences, and preferring short words and simple indicative or declarative constructions. Let's not feel constrained to crib sources' wording. Our job is to summarize the source, not repeat it.—S Marshall T/C 22:20, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
- I agree, there's a nuance. The phrasing makes it sound as if she would rather be jailed than use any trans woman's pronouns. Her tweet doesn't say anything about "any". Not to be the broken record but we have a much clearer, more widely covered and more meaningful quote to include: she tweeted a list of trans women and wrote that they were "men, every single last one of them". You can't get more concise than that —WikiFouf (talk) 02:56, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
- I wouldn't be opposed to developing that idea instead ... at least it reflects exactly what she said. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 08:28, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
- Rephrase #1
Rowling sees transwomen as men, and she often uses her twitter account and blog to say so. She has shared a list of transwomen with her followers, writing that they were "men, every single last one of them".[1] She declines to use feminine pronouns for transwomen.[2]
- ^ Harrison, Ellie (1 April 2024). "JK Rowling could be investigated by police for misgendering trans people, SNP minister says". The Independent. Retrieved 23 April 2024.
- ^ Chilton, Louis (19 October 2023). "JK Rowling claims she would 'happily' spend two years in prison for misgendering a trans person". The Independent. Retrieved 21 April 2024.
I know, it's bloating again.—S Marshall T/C 07:27, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
- This doesn't provide context, and is still not what she said. The context, repeatedly, has been about changes in laws. That context was in the previous versions and should be restored, and we have to take great care to not put words in her mouth she hasn't said. It's possible to use preferred personal pronouns in one's daily personal interaction and not be opposed to doing so, yet still be opposed to laws that criminalize language. In the olden days, it was referred to as "freedom of speech". SandyGeorgia (Talk) 08:27, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
- We have to explain why the trans community and allies are annoyed with Rowling. We can't do that fairly and accurately unless we discuss her refusal to stop misgendering people. We shouldn't give her tweet in full with all its weaselly self-justification because we only have 475 words. We have to reduce it to a hard-boiled nugget of telling it like it is.Hate speech isn't protected speech, and rightly so. Your freedom of speech doesn't extend to racism, sexism or homophobia. Whether it should extend to transphobia is a live debate and I can see both sides of that, but if your position is that Rowling's fundamentalism about it should be protected speech, then I respectfully join issue with you.—S Marshall T/C 10:35, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
- I think "freedom of speech" is a red herring here because the facts are pretty clear that Rowling regularly does say transphobic things, including misgendering specific people, on Twitter and that's a big part of why people are annoyed at her. It doesn't matter if she is legally right that she can't be punished for it. That is not the notable part of her statement. Loki (talk) 13:46, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
- We have to explain why the trans community and allies are annoyed with Rowling. We can't do that fairly and accurately unless we discuss her refusal to stop misgendering people. We shouldn't give her tweet in full with all its weaselly self-justification because we only have 475 words. We have to reduce it to a hard-boiled nugget of telling it like it is.Hate speech isn't protected speech, and rightly so. Your freedom of speech doesn't extend to racism, sexism or homophobia. Whether it should extend to transphobia is a live debate and I can see both sides of that, but if your position is that Rowling's fundamentalism about it should be protected speech, then I respectfully join issue with you.—S Marshall T/C 10:35, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
- From the sources it seems that she's reacting to the Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill and saying she'll misgender whomever she wants. Is this a correct reading? If so, then we have a scholarly source for the first part (Whited) and would need one for the second. Victoria (tk) 20:59, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
- I think it's more general than the Gender Reform Bill? The Independent article is about Rowling's reaction to the Gender Reform Bill, but it says at paragraph 8:
Harry Potter author Rowling has frequently argued online that trans women are not women and last week vowed to continue “calling a man a man” despite what she called the “ludicrous law”.
This is accurate: she has frequently argued this online in several different contexts. In fact Rowling's gender-critical tweets go back before the Bill was passed. (It passed in 2021, but the law wasn't enforced until 2024 to allow time for enforcement training. Rowling's gender-critical behaviour goes back to December 2019, although at that time she was speaking much more mildly and hesitantly than she does now.)—S Marshall T/C 22:12, 23 April 2024 (UTC)- Yes, I understand that it's not new but because there are proposed sanctions my sense from across the pond is that it's escalating. Can we write something like,
Rowling continues to oppose gender self-designation,(cited to Whited p. 7)
and last weekvowed to continue “calling a man a man” despite what she called the “ludicrous law”.
(Independent) Basically the post about people who menstruate says it all, but I'm getting the sense it has to be spelled out? Maybe? I thought the Henderson quote that it invalidate "People like me" spelled it out, but maybe not? Word count is always a problem ... Victoria (tk) 23:31, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, I understand that it's not new but because there are proposed sanctions my sense from across the pond is that it's escalating. Can we write something like,
- I think it's more general than the Gender Reform Bill? The Independent article is about Rowling's reaction to the Gender Reform Bill, but it says at paragraph 8:
Third draft (3.2)
Current 454 words | Proposed 472 words |
---|---|
Rowling's responses to proposed changes to UK gender recognition laws,[1][2][e] and her views on sex and gender, have provoked controversy.[5] Her statements have divided feminists;[6][7][8] fuelled debates on freedom of speech[9][10] and cancel culture;[11] and prompted declarations of support for transgender people from the literary,[12] arts[13] and culture sectors.[14] 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,[15][16] 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".[16][f] In another controversial tweet in June 2020,[20] Rowling mocked an article for using the phrase "people who menstruate",[21] and tweeted that women's rights and "lived reality" would be "erased" if "sex isn't real".[22][23] LGBT charities and leading actors of the Wizarding World franchise condemned Rowling's comments;[24][25][g] GLAAD called them "cruel" and "inaccurate".[31] Rowling responded with an essay on her website[32] 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.[33] 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.[33][34][35] Writing of her own experiences with sexism and misogyny,[36] 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".[37] Rowling's statements – beginning in 2017[5][38][39] – have been called transphobic,[40][41] and she has been referred to as a TERF, a "trans-exclusionary radical feminist".[41][42][43] She has rejected these characterisations and the notion that she holds animosity towards transgender people, saying that her viewpoint has been misunderstood.[32][40][39] Criticism of Rowling's views has come from the Harry Potter fansites MuggleNet and The Leaky Cauldron;[44] and the charities Mermaids,[20] Stonewall,[45] and Human Rights Campaign.[46] 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.[47] 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 X a list of transgender women, and wrote that they were "men, every last one of them".[48] Police Scotland stated it had not received any complaints over the posts[49] and that "no action [would] be taken" as they were not illegal.[50][51] |
Rowling has controversial views on sex and gender.[5] She has been called transphobic,[40] called a TERF ("trans-exclusionary radical feminist") and a gender-critical feminist.[52][42][43] particularly since 2019 when she expressed support for Maya Forstater which sparked controversy, shocked her fans,[53] divided feminists,[6][7][54] fuelled debates on freedom of speech[9][55] and cancel culture,[11] and prompted declarations of support for transgender people from the literary,[56] arts[57] and culture sectors.[58] Rowling has said she would rather go to jail than use a trans woman's preferred pronouns.[59] Rowling wrote that she stood with Forstater, whose employment contract with the London branch of the Center for Global Development was not renewed after she expressed gender-critical views.[15][16] Rowling went on to write 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".[16][h] Harry Potter scholar Lana Whited writes that in the next six months "Rowling herself fanned the flames as she became increasingly vocal".[61] In June 2020,[61] Rowling mocked the phrase "people who menstruate",[21] and tweeted that women's rights and "lived reality" would be "erased" if "sex isn't real".[22][15] Potter scholar Tolanda Henderson writes the June 2020 post revealed Rowling's "stance that invalidates nonbinary people like me".[62] There have been substantial negative effects to Rowling's reputation: fans turned away from her work, boycotted events, and publishers became reticent to accept her work.[63] Criticism of Rowling's views has come from the Harry Potter fansites MuggleNet and The Leaky Cauldron,[62] and the charities Mermaids,[20] Stonewall,[64] and Human Rights Campaign.[65] LGBT charities the Wizarding World spoke out against her stance.[24] Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Watson, Rupert Grint, and Eddie Redmayne and others expressed support for the transgender community.[66] GLAAD called the the comments "cruel" and "inaccurate".[31] 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.[47] Rowling rejects these characterisations and denies being transphobic,[32][40] in an essay she posted to her website on June 10, 2020,[32] where she stated that her views on women's rights were informed by her experience as a survivor of domestic abuse and sexual assault.[5][33] 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",[33][67][68] she believes that public spaces, such as restrooms, should only be "same-gender space".[69] Whited calls this a "public manifesto", which was the "final straw" for fans.[69] Beginning in 2020, literary scholars, including Tison Pugh and Whited suggest that French literary critic Roland Barthes concept of "The Death of the Author" (to separate the author from the text) applies to Rowling;[70][71] Henderson believes this does not apply because Rowling "will not shut up" and that "trans-exclusionary themes [are] baked right into the text".[62] |
Discussion of third draft
I've actioned many of the comments made on this page and encorporated into the next draft. There are still issues to be worked out & the text is growing, but this keeps it moving. Victoria (tk) 23:09, 22 April 2024 (UTC) P.s if anyone is interested, my work can be seen here. Victoria (tk) 23:12, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
- I think this draft is a lot better than past drafts as far as WP:NPOV and covering recent sources goes, but a lot of the wording is awkward. I'd rather split up some of the longer sentences here. Loki (talk) 03:16, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
- The Hate Crimes para doesn't belong in the current; it is not a consensual change, and we should be comparing to where we started before all those changes.[2].
- I'm thrilled that you pushed forward, but the word count is simply too high in relation to the overall size and weight of sources on her entire life and work. I agree with Loki on splitting some sentences, but first trimming will be needed.
- The context (changes of laws) has been eliminated, and stating Duggan's opinion as fact, before explaining the context and evolution of statements, could be leading the reader. We repeat gender-critical later, so that leading sentence isn't needed. Get the context first (changes in laws), then in to opinions of the scholars whose focus is on gender issues.
- I'm not sure we should use our precious word count on a laundry list of he said-she said, which was previously rejected; dropping that entire sentence will help contain the bloat.
- Pending still is to work out the sentence that she did NOT say; how about if we delete that sentence entirely, and the "lived reality" tweet in favor of the more recent tweet suggested by Wikifouf at #Misgendering? We might use the Hate Crimes para in some form to incorporate that tweet, which I agree with Wikifouf is a better way of summing up her most recent stance.
- How about if we trim some of her older statements like the "lure of womanhood" bit ?
- Overall, tightening is needed to this version, as well as getting back the context and keeping under 475 words. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 08:55, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
- Re: point 3: when "gender-critical" is repeated in the first paragraph it is in the context of Forstater's views, not Rowling's.
- The draft writer was aiming for a simple declarative sentence to open the section. If we're considering the Duggan source not enough context for this declaration, shouldn't we be aiming to back it up more instead of returning to vagueness? I would like to stress that "gender-critical" in the context of the Duggan article is already nuancing the language used there, and it is a term Rowling has used to describe her own views. Umdlye (talk) 13:04, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
Just wanted to comment that the reference in this draft to Forstater misgendering a colleague is incorrect. I am unable to see the source quoted, so unsure where this comes from, but a reading of the court documents [3] [4] would show this was not the case as confirmed in this interview with her solicitor [5]. Daff22 (talk) 09:50, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
- I'll admit I like the first sentence less in version three than in version two but it is, in general, very good. Simonm223 (talk) 13:17, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
- We're now at version 3.1. I've commented out a few things here & will clean up later. It's easier for me to action quickly before comments get lost on talk. I went with the first sentence until we get consensus on it (speaking for myself, I like it), but, yeah, maybe the change in laws should be put back in. It's not in Duggan. I also went with misgendering as it was until we get a better source & agree on wording. Sandy which sentence/section are you referring to re "he said, she said"? Victoria (tk) 14:48, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
- The bit about which actors support her or not ... we went over that several times during the FAR and decided it wasn't a good use of word count. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:47, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
- I mean it certainly presents a pretty clear picture of an age-divide with regard to reactions to her antics; and I think it's also relevant that the three actors who were the central stars of the movie adaptation of her books all distanced themselves from her. Simonm223 (talk) 17:30, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
- I think we need to reconsider the decision made during the FAR. In my view it's important to have at least Radcliffe mentioned b/c his comments made to The Trevor Project are covered in sources, and probably we should have Watson too. We could maybe slit the difference, mention some, shove others into a note. I hadn't considered Simonm223's point, but that's valid too. I'll add to unresolved issues. Victoria (tk) 19:58, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
- My opinion is that the responses of Radcliffe, Watson and Grint are particularly relevant because of their prior position as something of mentees of Rowling's. However including that some of the older Potter actors supported Rowling would allow for some balance and neutrality rather than making it look like all the actors distanced themselves. So basically I'd strongly defend keeping in mention of the younger stars and would support mention of the older actors in the spirit of balance but don't see them as being as critical from a WP:DUE perspective. Simonm223 (talk) 20:02, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
- I think you're right. When I was thinking about this, it seemed to me that having Harry, Hermione and Bellatrix agreeing is something. So if anything, I'd want to see Helena Bonham Carter, but the list as is seems ok. Let's see what others say. Victoria (tk) 20:13, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
- @Simonm223 @Victoriaearle I would maybe suggest using the framing used by Sutherland Borah in Ivory Tower, who writes: "The films’ millennial-age stars—Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Watson, Rupert Grint, Bonnie Wright, Katie Leung, and Eddie Redmayne—expressed their support for the trans community." Mentions the three most relevant actors of HP (+ main actor of FB) without implying a consensus from the cast against Rowling's rhetoric, because it singles out the millennials. WikiFouf (talk) 21:40, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
- Perfect! Thanks so much. Do you have a page number off hand? If not I'll access it a bit later. Victoria (tk) 21:45, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
- Perfect, thanks! Simonm223 (talk) 22:12, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
- p. 375 WikiFouf (talk) 22:31, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
- I don't mean to rain on the parade, but I'm not at all satisfied with Draft 3, but don't have time to weigh in for a few more days. If I had time, I'd put up a Draft 4, but can't get to it just yet ... please remember that we need to come up with something that a broader audience will approve when we get to a point of putting it forward via something final, and I don't think we're headed that way just yet. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:00, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
- That's fine. I just put up the final one I'll work on. I wanted to do something with the reading I'd done, so jumped in while I could. We do need to work in the UK gender recognition laws (which needs linking), the misgendering needs to be sorted, and I'm not crazy about the stucture, but I'm a big believer in working the content until it's right. If it's going in the wrong direction, then we've discovered what we don't what. So it's all good. Victoria (tk) 02:20, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
- I don't mean to rain on the parade, but I'm not at all satisfied with Draft 3, but don't have time to weigh in for a few more days. If I had time, I'd put up a Draft 4, but can't get to it just yet ... please remember that we need to come up with something that a broader audience will approve when we get to a point of putting it forward via something final, and I don't think we're headed that way just yet. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:00, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
- Perfect! Thanks so much. Do you have a page number off hand? If not I'll access it a bit later. Victoria (tk) 21:45, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
- My opinion is that the responses of Radcliffe, Watson and Grint are particularly relevant because of their prior position as something of mentees of Rowling's. However including that some of the older Potter actors supported Rowling would allow for some balance and neutrality rather than making it look like all the actors distanced themselves. So basically I'd strongly defend keeping in mention of the younger stars and would support mention of the older actors in the spirit of balance but don't see them as being as critical from a WP:DUE perspective. Simonm223 (talk) 20:02, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
- The bit about which actors support her or not ... we went over that several times during the FAR and decided it wasn't a good use of word count. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:47, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
- We're now at version 3.2, which has only small changes in response to today's comments. I've tweaked the first sentence a bit. Victoria (tk) 02:20, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
- I very strongly prefer "Rowling is a gender-critical feminist" to "Rowling has controversial views on sex and gender". The second version does not give any relevant information about what her views actually are, and also violates MOS:CONTROVERSIAL. Loki (talk) 03:22, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
- I agree, starting with something about what her actions are (or at the very least, why they're controversial) is more encyclopedic than just saying "her views are controversial". -sche (talk) 20:12, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
- Disagree, "gender-critical feminist" is one of various labels that have been used to characterize her views and singling it out wouldn't be NPOV. I think we should write something along the lines of "Her views have been associated with transphobia and gender-critical feminism" WikiFouf (talk) 22:30, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
- I'm treading carefully here because my personal opinion of what to call Rowling would probably violate BLP standards; which is why I've mostly left this distinction alone. But I think we may be over-thinking this a bit. I guess where I'd start would be an examination of how Wikipedia frames the TERF occupation of the term. And the answer is that Wikipedia frames the TERF occupation of the term quite well. As such I'd weakly support "gender-critical feminist," notwithstanding my personal misgivings regarding the incompatibility of gender-essentialism with feminism, provided the designation has a wikilink on it to the associated Wikipedia article. Simonm223 (talk) 12:50, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
- The various responses ("sparked controversy, shocked her fans ..."): were they to her comments generally or her support of Forstater in 2019 specifically? Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 20:20, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
- Good question. First of all, I put that in as placeholder and changed from from this version because in my view we have to be careful re what goes in Wiki voice & at this point it's best for someone else to come up with the next draft. As to your question: recent scholarly sources say her support of Forstater shocked/alienated and to muddy waters even more, framed in terms of fans vs broader population. Victoria (tk) 20:35, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
- I very strongly prefer "Rowling is a gender-critical feminist" to "Rowling has controversial views on sex and gender". The second version does not give any relevant information about what her views actually are, and also violates MOS:CONTROVERSIAL. Loki (talk) 03:22, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
- The third draft concentrates on how Rowling's views have been received in the Harry Potter community and by diversity activists. But it says nothing at all about how this is playing in the wider world of mainstream UK politics. This is proving quite significant as the latest development is that the SNP leader now faces a vote of no confidence in which Ash Regan holds the balance of power. And Regan is very much an ally of Rowling. See JK Rowling may have the last laugh...
- This follows prominent statements of support for Rowling by both Conservative and Labour representatives – U.K. Prime Minister Backs J.K. Rowling..., Labour’s shadow justice secretary ‘agrees’ with JK Rowling’s ‘gender-critical’ views. It appears that Rowling is getting support across the political spectrum and so is quite influential.
- Andrew🐉(talk) 06:55, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
- Not sure we can assume that's because "Rowling is influential" rather than just because both transgender rights supporters and gender criticals span the political spectrum, despite what the culture warriors would have us believe. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 08:47, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Potter scholar Tolanda Henderson writes the June 2020 post revealed Rowling's "stance that invalidates nonbinary people like me"
garden-pathed me the first few times I read it, how aboutPotter scholar Tolanda Henderson wrote that Rowling's June 2020 post revealed a "stance that invalidates nonbinary people like me"
. Also I don't think there's any need for the information about Forstater to be cleft in two by the "would rather go to jail" thing. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 09:04, 26 April 2024 (UTC)- Discussion seems to have petered out now. Can we confirm that 3.2 is how we want to go? I still don't love it using wiki voice to call Rowling any kind of feminist but, as I was saying before, I'll accept it as long as it wiki-links to Gender critical feminist Simonm223 (talk) 01:18, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
- We could probably do some more work on it. I don't think that it's perfect yet, though it's definitely a large improvement. Loki (talk) 01:50, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
- It needs more work in my view. I'm tied with some spring projects & can't get back here immediately but I've been letting it percolate. I'm thinking it's gone too far in the direction of what others think of Rowling rather than focusing on what Rowling believes. Ideally, since this is her bio & a BLP, the latter should come first. When my time frees up, I can take another crack at it, but in the meantime more than happy if someone else gives it a try. Victoria (tk) 02:28, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
- Discussion seems to have petered out now. Can we confirm that 3.2 is how we want to go? I still don't love it using wiki voice to call Rowling any kind of feminist but, as I was saying before, I'll accept it as long as it wiki-links to Gender critical feminist Simonm223 (talk) 01:18, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
Fourth draft
Sincere apologies for the delay in posting this. I've re-ordered the ideas as well as cutting and rewriting.—S Marshall T/C 11:28, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
Historic (454 words) | Proposed (401 words) |
---|---|
Rowling's responses to proposed changes to UK gender recognition laws,[1][2][a] and her views on sex and gender, have provoked controversy.[5] Her statements have divided feminists;[6][7][8] fuelled debates on freedom of speech[9][10] and cancel culture;[11] and prompted declarations of support for transgender people from the literary,[12] arts[13] and culture sectors.[14] 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,[15][16] 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".[16][b] In another controversial tweet in June 2020,[20] Rowling mocked an article for using the phrase "people who menstruate",[21] and tweeted that women's rights and "lived reality" would be "erased" if "sex isn't real".[22][23] LGBT charities and leading actors of the Wizarding World franchise condemned Rowling's comments;[24][25][c] GLAAD called them "cruel" and "inaccurate".[31] Rowling responded with an essay on her website[32] 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.[33] 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.[33][34][35] Writing of her own experiences with sexism and misogyny,[36] 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".[37] Rowling's statements – beginning in 2017[5][38][39] – have been called transphobic,[40][41] and she has been referred to as a TERF, a "trans-exclusionary radical feminist".[41][42][43] She has rejected these characterisations and the notion that she holds animosity towards transgender people, saying that her viewpoint has been misunderstood.[32][40][39] Criticism of Rowling's views has come from the Harry Potter fansites MuggleNet and The Leaky Cauldron;[44] and the charities Mermaids,[20] Stonewall,[45] and Human Rights Campaign.[46] 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.[47] 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 X a list of transgender women, and wrote that they were "men, every last one of them".[48] Police Scotland stated it had not received any complaints over the posts[49] and that "no action [would] be taken" as they were not illegal.[50][51] |
Rowling is a gender-critical feminist.[52][42][43] She has often used Twitter and her blog to share thoughts on trans people, mostly in the context of proposed legal changes in Scotland that would make it easier to transition. She has said that "the majority of trans-identified people not only pose zero threat to others, but are vulnerable ... Trans people need and deserve protection",[53][54] but she opposes gender self-recognition.[55] She feels that some transwomen are a threat to women [56] and trans-positive messages can be a threat to children.[56] She has tweeted a list of transwomen, writing that they are "men, every last one of them". Many people, including some of the principal film stars connected with her work, have condemned her remarks,[57] although sales of Harry Potter books grew by 28% after she made them.[57] Controversy over Rowling's gender-critical messaging has developed over time. Although it started in 2017,[58] it became more fraught in 2019 when she expressed support for Maya Forstater,[59] whose employment contract with the London branch of the Center for Global Development was not renewed after she expressed gender-critical views.[15] Rowling wrote 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".[16][d] Harry Potter scholar Lana Whited writes that in the next six months "Rowling herself fanned the flames as she became increasingly vocal".[60] In June 2020,[60] Rowling mocked the phrase "people who menstruate",[21] and tweeted that women's rights and "lived reality" would be "erased" if "sex isn't real".[61][15] Rowling's views have impacted her reputation. Fans turned away from her work, boycotted events, and publishers hesitated to accept her work.[62] Criticism of Rowling's views has come from the Harry Potter fansites MuggleNet and The Leaky Cauldron,[63] and the charities Mermaids,[20] Stonewall,[64] and Human Rights Campaign.[65] LGBT charity the Wizarding World spoke out against her stance.[24] Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Watson, Rupert Grint, and Eddie Redmayne and others expressed support for the transgender community.[66] GLAAD called Rowling's comments "cruel" and "inaccurate".[31] 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.[47] Rowling rejects these characterisations and denies being transphobic.[32][40] In an essay she posted to her website on 10 June 2020,[32] she said her views on women's rights arose from her experience as a survivor of domestic abuse and sexual assault.[58][33] |
Discussion of fourth draft
I think we need to look carefully at what the sources are saying. For example, Steinfeld says J.K Rowling has been labeled a TERF (2nd para)(as opposed to saying she is); Schwirblatt says that one side of the Twitter community labeled her a TERF in reaction to her #IStandWithMaya tweet (p. 368); Whited says "Rowling’s manifesto led some people to label her as a trans-exclusionary radical feminist (TERF)", (p.7). This is the reason I kept changing the first sentence; sometimes in response to comments here, sometimes in response to sources. Bottom line is that we have to be careful what we put in Wiki voice. That's why hedging is good, though it does result in tortured prose. But that's often characteristic of writing here. Victoria (tk) 15:29, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
- Would we prefer "Rowling's views are gender-critical"? I'm looking for a simple declarative sentence without vagueness, evasion, or waffle of any kind.—S Marshall T/C 16:36, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
- I would support that if we feel like we need to for sourcing purposes, though I would say that we can use sources that phrase it like that to source "is a gender-critical feminist" in most cases. Depends some on the particular source, though. Loki (talk) 17:57, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
- It's a reasonable fallback. I can't imagine a good faith Wikipedian reading the sources and then denying that she's gender-critical. I'd prefer gender-critical feminist because our page on gender-critical feminism so clearly captures what Rowling says.—S Marshall T/C 19:37, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
- A couple of thoughts. First, we have to hew to the sources. If references exist for the sentence as written, then we should just swap out sources rather than use the ones that don't exactly support it. Another idea would be to use a three-pronged thesis, something along the lines of "Rowling's views about sex and gender have alienated fans, affected her reputation and [fill in the blank]". I suspect something like that would be easier to source.While I'm here a couple of other nitpicks: there's no source for the sentence "She has tweeted a list of transwomen, writing that they are "men, every last one of them". Right now it's cited to Pape but that article is about Ratcliffe if my memory is correct. Also, "principal film stars connected with her work, have condemned her remarks" is in the 2nd para & again in the 3rd. One mentioned should be deleted.The structure is looking much much better! Victoria (tk) 22:49, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, the duplication of principal film stars is one of my nitpicks, and I have a suggestion for how to fix it. If we're on the right track overall, maybe rather than add a list, I could just put up the next draft fixing these nitpicks? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 11:59, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
- Re: the inclusion of: 'She has tweeted a list of transwomen, writing that they are "men, every last one of them".':
- I think it's right that this incident is included because it's notable and there's not much point discussing her views on transgender people if we entirely omit what she's saying to and about transgender people.
- We should, however, be saying "trans women" rather than "transwomen".[1] A point of note is that "transwoman" is deliberately used as a dog whistle by people who deny trans people are of the gender with which they identify; per MOS:GIDINFO, we should use people's gender identity affirmatively. Using "transwomen" as a separate noun differentiates them from other, cisgender women. By contrast, "trans woman" is labelling someone as a woman who happens to be trans.[2]
- As mentioned, we also need to provide references for this sentence. Here are some first options to consider:
- "Police say JK Rowling committed no crime with tweets slamming Scotland's new hate speech law". AP News. 2 April 2024.
- Brooks, Libby (3 April 2024). "JK Rowling's posts on X will not be recorded as non-crime hate incident". The Guardian.
- "J.K. Rowling will not face action under Scottish hate crime laws, police say". Reuters.
- "JK Rowling in 'arrest me' challenge over Scottish hate crime law". BBC News. 1 April 2024.
- Beal, David Leask, James (2 May 2024). "JK Rowling challenges police: Arrest me under Scottish hate crime law". The Times.
{{cite web}}
: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link) - Sands, Leo (10 April 2024). "Scotland's hate speech law ignites culture war far outside its borders". Washington Post.
- A couple of thoughts. First, we have to hew to the sources. If references exist for the sentence as written, then we should just swap out sources rather than use the ones that don't exactly support it. Another idea would be to use a three-pronged thesis, something along the lines of "Rowling's views about sex and gender have alienated fans, affected her reputation and [fill in the blank]". I suspect something like that would be easier to source.While I'm here a couple of other nitpicks: there's no source for the sentence "She has tweeted a list of transwomen, writing that they are "men, every last one of them". Right now it's cited to Pape but that article is about Ratcliffe if my memory is correct. Also, "principal film stars connected with her work, have condemned her remarks" is in the 2nd para & again in the 3rd. One mentioned should be deleted.The structure is looking much much better! Victoria (tk) 22:49, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
- It's a reasonable fallback. I can't imagine a good faith Wikipedian reading the sources and then denying that she's gender-critical. I'd prefer gender-critical feminist because our page on gender-critical feminism so clearly captures what Rowling says.—S Marshall T/C 19:37, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
- I would support that if we feel like we need to for sourcing purposes, though I would say that we can use sources that phrase it like that to source "is a gender-critical feminist" in most cases. Depends some on the particular source, though. Loki (talk) 17:57, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
Sources
|
---|
References
|
- I do think it's important to provide context as to why she did make this thread: the perceived possibility that misgendering trans people might become illegal in Scotland under the new act. Although the threshold for criminality is a lot higher than a lot of people seem/seemed to believe, as discussed in the Washington Post article above and by Humza Yousaf who himself said he wasn't surprised her comments weren't criminal, she made this thread to be the one to take up the challenge over the chance such comments were now criminal. 13tez (talk) 21:17, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
- 13tez agree on your comments, but I am not finding the specific quote about "men, every last one of them" in the sources above ... which one has it ? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:36, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
- Ah ha ... found in The Guardian (my first preference for sourcing is usually AP or Reuters, but The Guardian works). SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:38, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
- 13tez agree on your comments, but I am not finding the specific quote about "men, every last one of them" in the sources above ... which one has it ? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:36, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
- I do think it's important to provide context as to why she did make this thread: the perceived possibility that misgendering trans people might become illegal in Scotland under the new act. Although the threshold for criminality is a lot higher than a lot of people seem/seemed to believe, as discussed in the Washington Post article above and by Humza Yousaf who himself said he wasn't surprised her comments weren't criminal, she made this thread to be the one to take up the challenge over the chance such comments were now criminal. 13tez (talk) 21:17, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
- I'd prefer that alernate (16:36, 1 May) as well. Victoria's three-pronged idea works, too; I still dislike the declartive sentence in WikiVoice. And we don't know how she "feels"; we know what she has stated. Overall, I think this draft is headed the right direction. I've got my usual list of nitpicks that I'll put up if others agree that this draft is the way to go overall. I also want to point out that this kind of structured process works!!! If we get it close enough on the next version to call it final, we can ping the world for approval before installing, and then move on to using the same process to re-do the lead. Holding off on my list of nitpicks until others indicate this is close. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 11:44, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
- With a reminder that this is where we started (some elements are still missing). SandyGeorgia (Talk) 11:51, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
Fifth draft
Historical 429 words | Draft 5; 468 words |
---|---|
Rowling's responses to proposed changes to UK gender recognition laws,[1][2][a] and her views on sex and gender, have provoked controversy.[5] Her statements have divided feminists;[6][7][8] fuelled debates on freedom of speech,[9][10] academic freedom[4] and cancel culture;[11] and prompted declarations of support for transgender people from the literary,[12] arts[13] and culture sectors.[14] 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,[15][16] 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".[16][b] In another controversial tweet in June 2020,[20] Rowling mocked an article for using the phrase "people who menstruate",[21] and tweeted that women's rights and "lived reality" would be "erased" if "sex isn't real".[22][23] LGBT charities and leading actors of the Wizarding World franchise condemned Rowling's comments;[24][25][c] GLAAD called them "cruel" and "inaccurate".[31] Rowling responded with an essay on her website[32] 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.[33] 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.[33][34][35] Writing of her own experiences with sexism and misogyny,[36] 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".[37] Rowling's continual statements – beginning in 2017[5][38][39] – have been called transphobic by critics[40][41] and she has been referred to as a TERF.[41][42][43] She rejects these characterisations and the notion that she holds animosity towards transgender people, saying that her viewpoint has been misunderstood.[32][40][39] Criticism of Rowling's views has come from the Harry Potter fansites MuggleNet and The Leaky Cauldron;[44] and the charities Mermaids,[20] Stonewall,[45] and Human Rights Campaign.[46] 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.[47] As Rowling's views on the legal status of transgender people came under scrutiny,[4] she received insults and death threats[48][49] and discussion moved beyond the Twitter community.[50] Some performers and feminists have supported her.[50][51] Figures from the arts world criticised "hate speech directed against her".[52] |
Rowling has espoused views referred to as gender-critical.[53][54][55] She has often shared opinions on transgender rights, mostly in the context of proposed legal changes in Scotland that would make it easier to transition.[1][2][d] She has suggested that children and cisgender women are threatened by trans women and trans-positive messages.[56] 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".[57] Her remarks have provoked condemnation,[5][11][58] while sales of Harry Potter books following some of her comments grew by 28% during the COVID-19 lockdown.[59][60] Controversy over Rowling's gender-critical messaging started in 2017.[61] It became more fraught in 2019 when she defended Maya Forstater,[62] whose employment contract with the London branch of the Center for Global Development was not renewed after she expressed gender-critical views.[15] 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".[16][e] Harry Potter scholar Lana Whited writes that in the next six months "Rowling herself fanned the flames as she became increasingly vocal".[65] In June 2020,[65] Rowling mocked the phrase "people who menstruate",[21] and tweeted that women's rights and "lived reality" would be "erased" if "sex isn't real".[66][15] Rowling's views have impacted her reputation. As her views on the legal status of transgender people came under scrutiny,[4] she received insults and threats[48][67] and discussion moved beyond the Twitter community.[50] Fans turned away from her work, boycotted events, and publishers hesitated to accept her work.[68] Criticism came from the Harry Potter fansites MuggleNet and The Leaky Cauldron,[69] and LGBT charities Mermaids,[20] Stonewall,[70] and Human Rights Campaign.[1] GLAAD called Rowling's comments "cruel" and "inaccurate".[71] Leading actors of the Wizarding World spoke out against her stance;[24][25] Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Watson, Rupert Grint, Eddie Redmayne and others declared support for the transgender community.[72][f] 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.[47] Rowling rejects these characterisations and denies being transphobic.[32][74] In an essay posted on her website in June 2020 – that Tolando Henderson[69] and Whited state left trans people feeling betrayed[75] – Rowling said her views on women's rights arose from her experience as a survivor of domestic abuse and sexual assault.[61][33] 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.[33][76][77] 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".[78] |
Discussion of fifth draft
I think the fourth draft is a great improvement. In Draft 5, I tried to address the following (which I consider minor):
- Address the uncited statement "every last one of them" sentence.
- Address the lead declarative sentence.
- Work back in some of the laws so readers (particularly those not from the UK) are given some idea what these laws are.
- Fix duplicate on supporting actors.
- Threats to her safety which was deleted is supported by Whited
- Transwomen to trans women
- Address the word feels
- The broader introduction to this section in the article already addresses that she often/frequently uses twitter, so some redundancy there.
- Fix all the citation formatting to agree with the article style.
SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:39, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- PS, this statement needs a more concrete time frame: "although sales of Harry Potter books grew by 28% after she made them" ... I haven't had a chance to check Pape, but we should specify change from x year to y or something. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:44, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- Here's the source that Pape cites:
- Sweney, Mark (21 July 2020). "Harry Potter books prove UK lockdown hit despite JK Rowling trans rights row". The Guardian. Retrieved 3 May 2024.
- SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:52, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- Added, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:01, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- Here's the source that Pape cites:
- I'm afraid I'm going to bang on about starting each paragraph with a simple declarative topic sentence again. I think encyclopaedia writers are educators, and I feel it's important to write in an educational way. Introduce each idea before we explain it.
- The new draft's first paragraph begins with a compound sentence, which means a sentence with sub-clauses. Let's preface it with: "Rowling's views are gender-critical."
- The second paragraph begins with a compound sentence. We can fix that by changing "Controversy over Rowling's gender-critical messaging started in 2017, and became more fraught in 2019..." to "Controversy over Rowling's gender-critical messaging started in 2017. It became more fraught in 2019..."
- Done. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:20, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- The third and fourth paragraphs start well.
- I know I've said this several times, and I'm sorry to keep badgering on about it.—S Marshall T/C 12:08, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- I understand and respect some editors' desire for starting paragraphs with topic sentences, but I've seen it cause problems at other articles, where it led to accusations of OR. If my suggested first sentence is too complex, I'm confident better writers than I (which is almost everyone :) can fix that without using a declarative sentence that has other problems (for example, as in the fixes in your suggestion #2, which works). You're not badgering about it; I hear you, but disagree that the way one writes an essay is always the best way to write an encyclopedia. If those are your only two issues with Draft 5, we are making progress !!! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:12, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- Also, with the change suggested by 13tez, the first sentence no longer seems overly complex. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:04, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- Could you be more specific about what these "other problems" are? Rowling's views are, very clearly and obviously, gender-critical. I'm concerned that it could come across as POV if we're evasive or obfuscatory about this.—S Marshall T/C 15:10, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- Why label her in WikiVoice when the succeeding paragraphs make it possible for the reader decide ? Always write in a way that let's the reader decide ... SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:13, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- PS, in fact, that's quite why I like your rewrite in Draft 4 -- it sticks to saying what she said to let the reader decide. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:25, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- Because we're an encyclopaedia, so we have to write concise summary of our topic. I thought we'd agreed on "Rowling's views are gender-critical".—S Marshall T/C 16:00, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, per discussed here, where I continue my concern about the missing context (changes to and proposed laws). Her comments have consistently opposed changes to laws. I made this adjustment to hew more closely to discussion above. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:36, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- I only tonight realized that the fourth draft had taken the prior sources about "labeling her as a TERF", and used them for the declarative that she is gender-critical; we can't do that (and this is a BLP). All sources say "some labeled her" as a TERF. The first sentence will need work. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:00, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, per discussed here, where I continue my concern about the missing context (changes to and proposed laws). Her comments have consistently opposed changes to laws. I made this adjustment to hew more closely to discussion above. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:36, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- Because we're an encyclopaedia, so we have to write concise summary of our topic. I thought we'd agreed on "Rowling's views are gender-critical".—S Marshall T/C 16:00, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- I don't think
Always write in a way that let's the reader decide
is true, and in fact I think that's specifically bad advice a lot of the time. We don't "let the reader decide" whether Lee Harvey Oswald killed JFK or not, we just say that he did. - Similarly, we should not do a lot of hedging about whether Rowling is a gender-critical feminist if the sources say she is (and they do). Loki (talk) 16:31, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- See related comments here from Victoriaearle about how we are misapplying labels. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:37, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- Well, the choices seem to be, accept Sandy's watering-down or go to RFC. I don't mind which. If we accept Sandy's watered-down version then we should simplify "Rowling has used the internet to express gender-critical views" to "Rowling has expressed gender-critical views".—S Marshall T/C 16:41, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- As I said somewhere else on this page, it helps process-wise to focus on the good first, before moving on to the difficult. Are we yet at a place where, besides these few sticking points, we think we're headed in the right direction or where we want to be ? Spend some time finding where we agree before moving on to sorting disagreements. Overall, since Draft 4, I'm pleased with the direction, where we are doing more of letting her words speak for themselves, and less of he-said, she-said and lists of supporters and opposers, while also focusing better now on recent scholarly sources, with limited reliance on news sources or recentism. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:46, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- Also, trimmed (internet is stated in global introduction to the entire section anyway). SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:49, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- Well, the choices seem to be, accept Sandy's watering-down or go to RFC. I don't mind which. If we accept Sandy's watered-down version then we should simplify "Rowling has used the internet to express gender-critical views" to "Rowling has expressed gender-critical views".—S Marshall T/C 16:41, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- See related comments here from Victoriaearle about how we are misapplying labels. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:37, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- PS, in fact, that's quite why I like your rewrite in Draft 4 -- it sticks to saying what she said to let the reader decide. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:25, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- Why label her in WikiVoice when the succeeding paragraphs make it possible for the reader decide ? Always write in a way that let's the reader decide ... SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:13, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- Could you be more specific about what these "other problems" are? Rowling's views are, very clearly and obviously, gender-critical. I'm concerned that it could come across as POV if we're evasive or obfuscatory about this.—S Marshall T/C 15:10, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- Also, with the change suggested by 13tez, the first sentence no longer seems overly complex. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:04, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- I understand and respect some editors' desire for starting paragraphs with topic sentences, but I've seen it cause problems at other articles, where it led to accusations of OR. If my suggested first sentence is too complex, I'm confident better writers than I (which is almost everyone :) can fix that without using a declarative sentence that has other problems (for example, as in the fixes in your suggestion #2, which works). You're not badgering about it; I hear you, but disagree that the way one writes an essay is always the best way to write an encyclopedia. If those are your only two issues with Draft 5, we are making progress !!! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:12, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
Minor tweaks
We've got five (5) instances of "expressed". Can we simplify all of them please? Suggest: find/replace "expressed the view that" to "said", "expressed support for" to "supported", and then "expressed that" to "said".—S Marshall T/C 09:56, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- S Marshall I changed some others also. Does changing the first expressed to espoused (adopt or support as a cause, belief, or way of life) help address your concern that the first sentence is "watered down"? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:35, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- I still aver that we should open with "Rowling is a gender-critical feminist". My position is that she's so undeniably gender-critical and so undeniably feminist that it's wrong to omit those words. If we absolutely must shy away from that, then okay, we should go to "Rowling has gender-critical views." With the full stop immediately after "views" and no tacked-on hedges or qualifications.—S Marshall T/C 17:31, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- We still disagree on the first part (I hoped that espoused would help move us closer towards each other's position), but on the second part, where then would you work in the bit about which laws she opposed? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:32, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- For the overview paragraph that comes first, I would write: Rowling has gender-critical views. She has often shared thoughts on trans people, mostly in the context of proposed legal changes in Scotland that would make it easier to transition. I'd push back the detail about which laws, specifically, to the history paragraph.—S Marshall T/C 22:58, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- By the time I did all that, it was at 485 words (getting too long), so did this. Cuts the first sentence to a simple declarative, but had to make some cuts elsewhere (no meaning lost I hope). SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:51, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- For the overview paragraph that comes first, I would write: Rowling has gender-critical views. She has often shared thoughts on trans people, mostly in the context of proposed legal changes in Scotland that would make it easier to transition. I'd push back the detail about which laws, specifically, to the history paragraph.—S Marshall T/C 22:58, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- We still disagree on the first part (I hoped that espoused would help move us closer towards each other's position), but on the second part, where then would you work in the bit about which laws she opposed? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:32, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- I still aver that we should open with "Rowling is a gender-critical feminist". My position is that she's so undeniably gender-critical and so undeniably feminist that it's wrong to omit those words. If we absolutely must shy away from that, then okay, we should go to "Rowling has gender-critical views." With the full stop immediately after "views" and no tacked-on hedges or qualifications.—S Marshall T/C 17:31, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
Further queries
S Marshall what are we citing from page 17 of Whited here ??
- She opposes gender self-recognition,[55] ...
that page is the footnotes. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:03, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- Take the Whited citation out, I suggest. Is it strictly necessary to cite that she opposes gender self-recognition?—S Marshall T/C 17:31, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- S Marshall yes, I think so, because what she actually opposes is gender self-recognition as it applies to "legal" gender status without additional processes ... again, we have to get the context ... it's not individuals living how they want to live that she has opposed, rather the laws involved. That's why I was hoping to see exact wording from Whited ... SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:24, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- She literally puts hashtag #notoselfID on her tweets.—S Marshall T/C 18:51, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- We still need to source that statement. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:56, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- Okay. According to this BBC article, the Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill would make anyone over the age of 16 who'd lived in their acquired gender for three months eligible to apply for a gender recognition certificate. This would remove the requirement for doctor's reports. At paragraphs 9 and 10, the BBC say:
- We still need to source that statement. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:56, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- She literally puts hashtag #notoselfID on her tweets.—S Marshall T/C 18:51, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- S Marshall yes, I think so, because what she actually opposes is gender self-recognition as it applies to "legal" gender status without additional processes ... again, we have to get the context ... it's not individuals living how they want to live that she has opposed, rather the laws involved. That's why I was hoping to see exact wording from Whited ... SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:24, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
It remains a hotly contested issue, however, with critics saying "self identification" would undermine the safety of women-only spaces. JK Rowling has previously argued the new law would harm the most vulnerable women.
Ms Rowling tweeted: "I stand in solidarity with @ForWomenScot and all women protesting and speaking outside the Scottish Parliament. #NoToSelfID."
- It's my position that this reduces to "Rowling opposes gender self-recognition", although if you want to go to "self-identification" instead (as closer to the source), then I would accept that.
- As a cross-check that this is a fair characterization of what Rowling really does say, I refer you to her blog post here, which says at paragraph 26:
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.
- I'd very much prefer it if this could be said without obfuscation or waffle, please.—S Marshall T/C 23:26, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- I, as usual, second the desire to avoid waffling and obfuscation. The issues with this section as it stands are primarily an excess of WP:FALSEBALANCE and overly-complicated wordings that obscure simple facts. Loki (talk) 23:37, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- On saying it simply, is that covered (now) with "proposed legal changes in Scotland that would make it easier to transition"? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:06, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
- No, it still doesn't say she opposes gender self-recognition anywhere that I can see.—S Marshall T/C 01:02, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
- Whited page 7 may work -- there are three moving pieces now, including the UK/Scottish law/legal stuff to fix, including the first declarative sentence, which was still pushing what the sources say -- see Victoriaearle at "Discussion of fourth draft"). We should keep in mind that this is a BLP and hew closely to sources, and avoid stating something as fact in WikiVoice. I'll work further on the Scotland legal bit and self-identification part tomorrow. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:43, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
- I very much agree that
not wanting to say something as fact in WikiVoice
is the main remaining hurdle we have here.—S Marshall T/C 16:03, 5 May 2024 (UTC)- S Marshall, now that Victoria has also weighed in, I'll move forward with Draft 6. Since all the earlier drafts were yours and Victoria's, I wanted to wait 'til I had heard from both of you before putting up the next, but we're at a point where we need a reboot on the talk page to see what's left! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:29, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
- PS, it's gotten hard to find what's left to do on this talk page :) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:29, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
- I very much agree that
- Whited page 7 may work -- there are three moving pieces now, including the UK/Scottish law/legal stuff to fix, including the first declarative sentence, which was still pushing what the sources say -- see Victoriaearle at "Discussion of fourth draft"). We should keep in mind that this is a BLP and hew closely to sources, and avoid stating something as fact in WikiVoice. I'll work further on the Scotland legal bit and self-identification part tomorrow. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:43, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
- No, it still doesn't say she opposes gender self-recognition anywhere that I can see.—S Marshall T/C 01:02, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
- On saying it simply, is that covered (now) with "proposed legal changes in Scotland that would make it easier to transition"? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:06, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
- I, as usual, second the desire to avoid waffling and obfuscation. The issues with this section as it stands are primarily an excess of WP:FALSEBALANCE and overly-complicated wordings that obscure simple facts. Loki (talk) 23:37, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- I'd very much prefer it if this could be said without obfuscation or waffle, please.—S Marshall T/C 23:26, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
Is this too-closely paraphrased from Duggan 161 ?
- and has implied that some transgender women are a threat to women and trans-positive messages can be a threat to children.[56]
SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:20, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- The original reads: "[Rowling] not only suggests that trans individuals are a threat to women and that trans-positive discourses are dangerous to children". I weakened that to "some" transgender women and "can be" a threat to children, which is more consistent with what Rowling says. I'm certainly content for that to be rephrased in fewer words.—S Marshall T/C 17:31, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- Not my strength, so I hope someone will give it a go ... it's a bit too close for comfort. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:25, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- "Some" here feels too weak, especially when combined with "implied": evident in her actual words is a strong and repeated emphasis on the threat of trans women with some hedging sometimes. If we want to keep the word count down I'd just drop "some" and "can be". Otherwise I'd go with
and has suggested that children and cis women are threatened by trans women and trans-positive messages
. Loki (talk) 23:34, 4 May 2024 (UTC)- Did that, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:52, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
Citations to fix
- I looked at the Vanity Fair article being used as a reference for "Rowling rejects these characterisations and denies being transphobic." It's from 2023 and quotes her from a podcast she did rather than the article used as the other reference for this statement. I think the two following articles which touch on her same comments (in the podcast) might be better references than the Vanity Fair article:
- 13tez (talk) 00:14, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- Agree; swapped in BBC as it is not paywalled and links endure. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:41, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- The reference currently used to support "Criticism has come from ... Human Rights Campaign." currently has nothing to do with the HRC criticising Rowling. It's talking about Dave Chappelle saying he's "team TERF" and then says "TERF views 'deny the validity of transgender people and transgender identities,' said Sarah McBride, national press secretary for the Human Rights Campaign." We can substantiate the HRC criticising Rowling with this article instead.
- Similarly, Wizarding World isn't even mentioned in the reference used to substantiate "LGBT charity the Wizarding World spoke out against her stance."
- You'll probably prefer to use this article to substantiate GLAAD's comments rather than the current reference from USA Today. 13tez (talk) 00:31, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for checking those, 13tez; it had not occurred to me that our citations could have gotten corrupted in the journey. I will track back on these, if not today, then first thing tomorrow. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:26, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- Human Rights Campaign: I used Milne, Reuters instead, as it is freely available and NYT is paywalled. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:44, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- On Wizarding World, that got mangled in Draft 4 (it is not an LGBT charity); I've restored to what is in the article now, which is correct. My apologies for not seeing the error when I copied text from Draft 4 to Draft 5. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:18, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- On GLAAD, USA Today is as reliable as AP -- why do the work to switch citations, since USA Today does verify the content? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:22, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- USA Today is as reliable as AP -- why do the work to switch citations, since USA Today does verify the content?
- I've seen a widespread aversion to using references from news sources that aren't from the most reputable outlets (NYT, Reuters, AP news, The Guardian, etc) in past discussions and what you said above ("my first preference for sourcing is usually AP or Reuters"). I just thought you might prefer to use the AP article. 13tez (talk) 12:50, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- OK, then ... will switch it in when next on real computer. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:21, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- Done, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:26, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
13tez feedback
- We should probably change "Scotland's Hate Crime Law enacted in 2024" to "Scotland's Hate Crime and Public Order Act". There are multiple acts that make up Scotland's hate crime legislation, so we should be specific. We could retain the fact that it came into force in 2024, but the article on the act already covers that, and we're trying to summarise here.
- Should the section's content be in roughly chronological order or have more context as to when she said/did what? For example, her "April fool's thread" was this year and is at the start of the section, but she said "Trans people need and deserve protection" in 2020, and it is at the end of the section. Presently, you could easily be left with the impression that she said the former first and the latter later, even though the opposite is true and her comments have escalated over time. Could it make it easier for the reader to chart the change in her views and speech over time by having the contents of the section ordered chronologically rather than thematically?
- Should we rephrase 'She has tweeted a list of trans women, writing that they are "men, every last one of them".'? My thinking is that the specific quote isn't the biggest issue of her comments in this incident. Imho the bigger issue (when compared to her misgendering them) is that she listed famous trans women alongside sexual offenders who are also trans women in what has been called "an apparent attempt to draw a connection between trans people and sexual perversion".[1] Furthermore, it would enable the use of more of the possible references I listed earlier, which cover the incident without the specific quote, and which you've said before are your preferences for sourcing from news articles. Would it make sense to re-write it without the specific quote, but to summarise what she did to capture its spirit (listing famous trans women alongside trans women who are sexual offenders, mock them, and misgender them)? Should we also mention this was a response to the new act and speculation (albeit unfounded) that misgendering could become a criminal offence?
- Should we seek a higher-quality independent/secondary sources for the first sentence in the last paragraph ("Rowling rejects these characterisations...")? We're currently citing Vanity Fair and her own statement, which is obviously biased on if she's transphobic, and since we're not using it to reference direct quotes it would probably be better to use somebody else's analysis/summarisation of what she's said (in a reliable source) than to do so ourselves. Similarly, we could use this article to reference the fact that her essay was published on 10 June 2020 rather than the essay itself. 13tez (talk) 14:56, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
References
- ^ Lavietes, Matt (2 April 2024). "J.K. Rowling will not be arrested for comments about transgender women, police say". NBC News. Archived from the original on 3 April 2024. Retrieved 14 April 2024.
- Did the first. On the second, I tried to get chrono order in Draft 5, but couldn't make it work. On the third, suggest that be better explored in the sub-article ?? We're covering it broadly to avoid going too much into recentism/news sources, although it's too new for mention in a scholarly source. Will work on the fourth; we can do it without using news sources, since Whited 2024 covers her "manifesto", but since this is her bio, her own words should also be cited/linked as primary, backed by the secondary. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:12, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- 13tez if you could just add URLs on talk, that would help avoid the constant need to add reflist-talk to this page to avoid mucking up subsequent sections. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:16, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- Worked in secondary sources, added back some Henderson for more secondary analysis, but left the news sources for accessibility, since Whited is paywalled. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:44, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- Is "a background of proposed changes to UK gender recognition laws" definitely accurate? My own understanding had been that the issue was largely based on proposed changes to the law in Scotland. I remember reading that Rowling donated to a legal case seeking to overturn the inclusion of trans women in the broader category of women in a (pretty beige) Scottish law (Gender Representation on Public Boards (Scotland) Act 2018) after it was granted judicial review. I did have the impression that proposed legal changes were chiefly in Scotland since the UK government decided not to change the GRA in September 2020 and there has been a back-and-forth between the UK and Scottish governments over whether Scotland can pass acts of this kind (see Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill). Maybe this is an issue of timing if this was written before the September 2020 decision and while Rowling was voicing opposition to reforms? Certainly since the decision, however, Scotland is the only place gender recognition laws have had proposed or actualised changes. It might be worth mentioning Scotland has its own devolved Parliament which can pass bills on devolved matters, similar to states in the USA.
- Regarding what's said in the references used, the Reuters reference says "Rowling is unhappy that Scotland plans to relax the law". The Guardian says "she felt compelled to write about after reading of the Scottish government’s latest progress towards changing gender recognition laws." Pedersen says "a new women's cooperative constellation has been established in Scotland around the issue of the Scottish Government's proposed reforms of the Gender Recognition Act." Suissa says "in 2017, Rowling shared an article critiquing a proposed change to the United Kingdom’s Gender Recognition Act (2004), which was interpreted by some commentators as a change that would allow trans women to access women’s spaces, such as bathrooms". Duggan says "These debates about sex and gender are not abstract. In the UK, they have been triggered partly by proposed legislative change, in the form of changes to the 2004 Gender Recognition Act which would allow individuals to change their legal sex on the basis of self-ID, without meeting any diagnostic or other criteria."
- From what I can tell, Rowling was, circa 2017-2020, voicing opposition to proposed changes to the (UK-wide) Gender Recognition Act 2004 and that, since the UK government decided not to pursue such changes, she has been voicing opposition to proposed and actualised changes to the law (or even entirely new laws?) from the Scottish Parliament which are inclusive of trans women as women. Do you agree with this assessment, and do you think we should re-write the way this is described? I don't think it's accurate to say her opposition is to proposed changes to UK gender recognition laws since, as far as I can tell, it has mostly been to proposed and passed changes to gender recognition laws in Scotland. 13tez (talk) 16:14, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- No, I think it's accurate and reflected in the sources used; first it was UK Gender Recognition, then on to Scotland Hate Crime. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:31, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- Rowling has certainly voiced opposition to the Hate Crime and Public Order Act, which some incorrectly thought made misgendering trans people a criminal offence, but changes re gender law in Scotland also includes acts like the Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill, which sought to make it easier for trans people to change their legal gender, and the Gender Representation on Public Boards (Scotland) Act 2018, which includes some trans women (those with gender recognition certificates) in its definition of "woman". We probably need to find some references as to which specific laws, bills, and proposed changes she's spoken out against. Maybe relating to how she called Sturgeon an eraser of women's rights, IIRC. 13tez (talk) 16:50, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- I think the sources we have now cover it. We are already at 470 words ... an addition of 40 words. Can this detail be explored at Political views of J. K. Rowling? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:56, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- Here's what I was thinking of - Rowling called Sturgeon "destroyer of women's rights" over the Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill (which the Scottish Parliament passed but the UK gov later blocked). In that sense, she's voiced opposition to that bill, donated to a legal case trying to overturn trans inclusion in the Public Boards (Scotland) Act 2018, and tried to directly challenge the Hate Crime and Public Order (Scotland) Act. This is far more opposition than she's ever made to proposed or actualised UK-wide laws: she only opposed possible reforms to the GRA while the consultation was ongoing, and the UK government is pretty much in agreement with her now.
- Re too many words, I'm not suggesting we explore each of these instances here. I'm suggesting we change "a background of proposed changes to UK gender recognition laws" to "a background of proposed changes to Scottish and UK gender recognition laws" since there are many more instances of her being opposed to a proposed change to Scottish law (and I'm sure I could go and dig out even more) than UK law. 13tez (talk) 17:04, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for this:
I'm suggesting we change "a background of proposed changes to UK gender recognition laws" to "a background of proposed changes to Scottish and UK gender recognition laws"
It helps to keep proposals brief and readable :) I will work that in as soon as I get a moment ... things suddenly got complicated around my household! But, since the United Kingdom includes Scotland, why would that not be redundant ? Would you rather we just add to the footnote to include a citation related specifically to Scotland? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:08, 3 May 2024 (UTC)- Scotland has its own devolved Parliament (separate from the UK Parliament) which can pass bills on devolved matters in a manner similar to states in the USA. In this sense, saying Scottish law separately is like saying the law of a state in the USA separately from the USA's federal law (sort of). Most of her opposition has been to acts and bills in Scotland, since she basically agrees with the current UK government on trans issues. 13tez (talk) 17:16, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- I'm going to be out the rest of the afternoon. I think we have the UK issue broadly covered in the UK footnote, and regardless if they ended up agreeing, her tweets were intially related to those UK proposed laws. Could you give me one high quality source that I could use to work in Scotland on gender recognition when I'm home later today? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:37, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- I'm not suggesting we cover her opposition to Scottish laws (separately or in detail), only to say that her opposition has been to "Scottish and UK gender recognition laws" rather than to "UK gender recognition laws" because most of her opposition has been to proposed changes to Scottish gender recognition laws rather than UK gender recognition laws.
- To make it more concrete, the three acts/bills which I mentioned Rowling opposing earlier are acts of the Scottish Parliament. This means they only apply in Scotland, and not the rest of the United Kingdom (England, Wales, and Northern Ireland). This is the sense in which they are Scottish gender recognition laws rather than UK gender recognition laws. Most of her opposition has been to changes in gender recognition laws proposed or passed by the Scottish Parliament. Therefore, most of her opposition has been to proposed (or implemented) changes in Scottish gender recognition laws. Her only opposition to changes in UK gender recognition laws (I can find) is when she only opposed the UK-wide proposal (dropped in 2020) of reforming the Gender Recognition Act 2004. She also opposed changes to Scottish gender recognition laws at that time. Since then, she has only opposed proposed changes to Scottish gender recognition laws because, as far as I can find, there haven't been any more proposed changes to UK gender recognition laws.
- "her tweets were intially related to those UK proposed laws"
- Her initial statements were not only related to proposed changes to UK gender recognition laws. In her June 2020 essay, she says "On Saturday morning, I read that the Scottish government is proceeding with its controversial gender recognition plans, which will in effect mean that all a man needs to ‘become a woman’ is to say he’s one." She is referring to the Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill. It's also mentioned in the references currently in use. The Reuters reference says "Rowling is unhappy that Scotland plans to relax the law so that trans people can change their birth certificates without having to provide a medical diagnosis." The Guardian says "she felt compelled to write about after reading of the Scottish government’s latest progress towards changing gender recognition laws." Pedersen says "a new women's cooperative constellation has been established in Scotland around the issue of the Scottish Government's proposed reforms of the Gender Recognition Act."
- "Could you give me one high quality source that I could use to work in Scotland on gender recognition when I'm home later today?"
- Please could you tell me what qualifies as a high-quality source? I've seen the term used in talk pages a lot, but I've never seen anything in WP:P&G that actually defines source quality.
- You might find these sources helpful:
- 13tez (talk) 18:42, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- 13tez I'm truly at a loss for what you want added and why so much discussion about it. The footnote already mentions the Scottish Gender Recognition Reform Bill that you want added (which as you note is discussed in the Reuters source already given), and since Scotland is part of the UK, I don't know how I can add the words "and Scotland" to that text without it being obviously redundant. Perhaps someone else is better able to understand what you're asking for, as I'm not seeing it. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:48, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- I'm truly at a loss for what you want added
- Thanks for trying to work through it regardless. I'm suggesting we say that her opposition has been to "Scottish and UK gender recognition laws" rather than to "UK gender recognition laws" because most of her opposition has been to proposed changes to Scottish gender recognition laws rather than UK gender recognition laws.
- Scotland is part of the UK, I don't know how I can add the words "and Scotland" to that text without it being obviously redundant.
- As discussed, the majority of her opposition to proposed or implemented changes to gender recognition laws has been within Scottish law passed by the Scottish Parliament, not UK-wide law passed by the UK Parliament. Even though Scotland is part of the UK, its devolution allows it to pass its own laws that don't apply to other parts of the UK. It's like how bills passed by the California State Legislature don't apply in any other state, so they're "Californian law" and not "American law", even though California is part of the USA. In the same way, Scots law only applies to Scotland, so it is not UK law. For example, The Alcohol etc. (Scotland) Act 2010 makes it illegal to buy alcohol in supermarkets in Scotland after 10PM, but being part of Scots law, this doesn't apply in any other part of the UK. It wouldn't make sense to call this "UK law" when it only applies in Scotland. I discussed it more above ("To make it more concrete..."). I appreciate this might be hard to understand because Scotland is part of the UK if you're not from the UK yourself, but it's a matter of correctness.
- Thanks! 13tez (talk) 23:09, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- It's hard for me to understand too, and I'm as British as roast beef. I don't see any equivalency with US state law vs US federal law. In the US state law is subordinate to federal law. The UK operates parallel legal systems: the Law of England and Wales, Scots law, and Northern Ireland which is its own thing again. None are subordinate. When you cross the Scottish border you enter a different legal world.—S Marshall T/C 19:00, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- I really don't want to get bogged down in a political science discussion (perhaps we should move to a talk page?), but:
- None are subordinate.
- This is not true. There are reserved matters: areas in which only the UK Parliament can legislate and the devolved legislatures cannot.
- When you cross the Scottish border you enter a different legal world.
- Again, this isn't really true. Although Acts of the Scottish Parliament now apply to you, UK-wide legislation created by the UK Parliament still does as well. This is why Scotland has seats in the House of Commons. 13tez (talk) 19:46, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- It's hard for me to understand too, and I'm as British as roast beef. I don't see any equivalency with US state law vs US federal law. In the US state law is subordinate to federal law. The UK operates parallel legal systems: the Law of England and Wales, Scots law, and Northern Ireland which is its own thing again. None are subordinate. When you cross the Scottish border you enter a different legal world.—S Marshall T/C 19:00, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- 13tez I'm truly at a loss for what you want added and why so much discussion about it. The footnote already mentions the Scottish Gender Recognition Reform Bill that you want added (which as you note is discussed in the Reuters source already given), and since Scotland is part of the UK, I don't know how I can add the words "and Scotland" to that text without it being obviously redundant. Perhaps someone else is better able to understand what you're asking for, as I'm not seeing it. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:48, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- I'm going to be out the rest of the afternoon. I think we have the UK issue broadly covered in the UK footnote, and regardless if they ended up agreeing, her tweets were intially related to those UK proposed laws. Could you give me one high quality source that I could use to work in Scotland on gender recognition when I'm home later today? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:37, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- Scotland has its own devolved Parliament (separate from the UK Parliament) which can pass bills on devolved matters in a manner similar to states in the USA. In this sense, saying Scottish law separately is like saying the law of a state in the USA separately from the USA's federal law (sort of). Most of her opposition has been to acts and bills in Scotland, since she basically agrees with the current UK government on trans issues. 13tez (talk) 17:16, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for this:
- I think the sources we have now cover it. We are already at 470 words ... an addition of 40 words. Can this detail be explored at Political views of J. K. Rowling? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:56, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- Rowling has certainly voiced opposition to the Hate Crime and Public Order Act, which some incorrectly thought made misgendering trans people a criminal offence, but changes re gender law in Scotland also includes acts like the Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill, which sought to make it easier for trans people to change their legal gender, and the Gender Representation on Public Boards (Scotland) Act 2018, which includes some trans women (those with gender recognition certificates) in its definition of "woman". We probably need to find some references as to which specific laws, bills, and proposed changes she's spoken out against. Maybe relating to how she called Sturgeon an eraser of women's rights, IIRC. 13tez (talk) 16:50, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- No, I think it's accurate and reflected in the sources used; first it was UK Gender Recognition, then on to Scotland Hate Crime. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:31, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- On the second, I tried to get chrono order in Draft 5, but couldn't make it work.
- Yeah that's reasonable. Do you think it might be helpful to say when she said/did all this stuff, since it will be ordered thematically?
- On the third, suggest that be better explored in the sub-article ?? We're covering it broadly to avoid going too much into recentism/news sources, although it's too new for mention in a scholarly source.
- I'm not suggesting we should give a summary of the type I proposed as well as the quote currently included. I'm suggesting we replace the current text with a summary of the sort I proposed, so long as it's roughly the same length as the current sentence. I think this would give readers a better picture of what she said than what's currently included for the reasons I mentioned before.
- Will work on the fourth; we can do it without using news sources, since Whited 2024 covers her "manifesto", but since this is her bio, her own words should also be cited/linked as primary, backed by the secondary.
- I don't see why we shouldn't use news sources, but if you reference it from academia, that's fine. I think it's arbitrary. However, I think we should rely mostly on secondary sources because of WP:BLPPRIMARY and the following from WP:BLPSTYLE: "BLPs should be written responsibly, cautiously, and in a dispassionate tone, avoiding both understatement and overstatement. Articles should document in a non-partisan manner what reliable secondary sources have published about the subjects, and in some circumstances what the subjects have published about themselves." 13tez (talk) 19:14, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- Re
it might be helpful to say when she said/did all this stuff
, yes, absolutely; I know a few people are reluctant to add any extra words, but I think we can afford to include "in 2017", "in 2023", etc so people understand the chronology. -sche (talk) 21:56, 3 May 2024 (UTC)- -sche, I've just looked over the draft with an eye to adding dates, and I can't find a place where the dates aren't already included or implied. The first paragraph is an overview, and every other para seems to have dates where they are needed. Could you provide a concrete example where they are missing? It's good to avoid writing that reeks of WP:PROSELINE, which I hope we've done. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:39, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- I understand the reasoning to not include dates in an overview section. I was personally thinking of: She has tweeted a list of trans women, writing that they are "men, every last one of them." Even though we will want brevity in an overview, it's worth weighing that up against the benefit of making it more obvious how her rhetoric has changed over time by including the dates of her comments. 13tez (talk) 00:04, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- Added date on that one (could you all start a new sub-section when you start a new issue-- following this discussion is getting very hard-- I think I got everything, but it's hard to tell). SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:46, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- I understand the reasoning to not include dates in an overview section. I was personally thinking of: She has tweeted a list of trans women, writing that they are "men, every last one of them." Even though we will want brevity in an overview, it's worth weighing that up against the benefit of making it more obvious how her rhetoric has changed over time by including the dates of her comments. 13tez (talk) 00:04, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- -sche, I've just looked over the draft with an eye to adding dates, and I can't find a place where the dates aren't already included or implied. The first paragraph is an overview, and every other para seems to have dates where they are needed. Could you provide a concrete example where they are missing? It's good to avoid writing that reeks of WP:PROSELINE, which I hope we've done. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:39, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- Re
- Scots Law is certainly included in the phrase "UK law". This article definitely shouldn't try to explain the distinction between Scots Law and the Law of England and Wales, and it shouldn't try to summarize the competence of the respective parliaments. To avoid getting bogged down in that I do prefer "UK law", particularly when no law anywhere in the UK has the effect of doing any of the things at issue!—S Marshall T/C 23:30, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- I'm still at a loss; I added "Scottish and" to the draft, but I'm fairly certain that is open to criticism for redundancy. Should I now remove it again? This has seemed to be a full page of bogging down on something seems redundant, but maybe that's only me. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:46, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- Hey, thanks for your thoughts.
- This article definitely shouldn't try to explain the distinction between Scots Law and the Law of England and Wales, and it shouldn't try to summarize the competence of the respective parliaments.
- I'm not trying to, but almost all of her opposition to proposed gender-related legislation has been within Scots law. I just think that should be reflected by saying "Scottish and UK law".
- no law anywhere in the UK has the effect of doing any of the things at issue
- The Gender Representation on Public Boards (Scotland) Act 2018 includes trans women in its definition of women. Rowling has donated to a legal case brought by For Women Scotland seeking to overturn this. As discussed, it's one of several bills in Scots law she's publicly opposed.
- Scots Law is certainly included in the phrase "UK law".
- Scots law is one of the legal systems within the UK, but Scots law is different from the laws passed from the UK Parliament. It's honestly probably a semantical point and not worth discussing further: there are probably more productive things we could be talking about. At this point, I've explained my reasoning, so it's probably just best to let consensus decide and move on to something else.
- Thanks! 13tez (talk) 23:50, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- Ok, if you want to move on, but I want to register that I'm not able to follow your position on this and in fact think I'm misunderstanding you quite badly. You're surely aware that the Westminster parliament writes Scottish law, and that more Scottish law originates in Westminster than in Holyrood?—S Marshall T/C 00:55, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, I'm aware that many (not all) acts of the Parliament of the United Kingdom apply to the whole of the UK, including Scotland. I'd be interested to read an article discussing what proportion of Scots law is created in Westminster vs Holyrood, excluding common law.
- Political science aside, my reasoning to add Scottish law explicitly was that most of her opposition was to bills/acts of the Scottish Parliament which are exclusively part of Scots law, and a lot of her campaigning (for lack of a better word) has taken place within Scotland and to assist groups like For Women Scotland who are trying to change Scots law. This isn't relevant to the rest of the UK. This is ultimately because the Conservative UK government wouldn't propose or enact any gender identity law she would oppose, but the SNP Scottish government did several times. See exhibits A, B, and C.
- To me, the test is what you'd say if it was California (or another US state) and the USA instead of Scotland and the UK. Imagine she'd publicly opposed proposed and enacted Californian state law several times and opposed proposed changes to US federal law once. Would you say "Rowling has expressed gender-critical views against a background of proposed changes to Californian and US gender recognition laws" or just "US gender recognition laws"? If you're of the former opinion, we should say "Scottish and UK laws" and, in the latter case, just "UK laws". 13tez (talk) 01:33, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- I agree with S Marshall re not following this at all, and it's taking a huge portion of this talk page. Please try to remember that Wikipedia's audience is global (not only beyond UK in the English-speaking world, but beyond the English-spearking world as well). For the huge majority of our readers (who may not understand what is going on in the UK with this whole matter anyway), complicating it with a further parliamentary issue isn't adding anything helpful. The UK includes Scotland, and the relevant laws are in the footnote for those readers who want to know what proposals were made and what laws were involved. We're risking now the talk page being so long that the earlier drafts -- which may contain bits we may want to revisit -- will soon have to be archived. I hope I have incorporated everything now (we're still stalled on the opening sentence), but it's become hard to follow the talk page as there aren't separate sub-heads for separate topics. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:52, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- I agree with 13tez here, actually. It's not accurate to say that she objects to UK law if what she actually objects to is laws passed by the Scottish Parliament. Loki (talk) 11:27, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- The current (Draft 5) mentions both (Scottish and UK). SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:23, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- Should we add the Gender Representation on Public Boards (Scotland) Act 2018 to the list of laws she's opposed? I say this because she's donated to a legal case trying to challenge its inclusion of trans women in its definition of "woman". If we are providing a list, it should probably be complete, unless we say "laws such as" or something similar to indicate it's an incomplete list. 13tez (talk) 17:33, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- It doesn't strike me that specifically was part of the whole brouhaha; see footnote d, where everything there is cited to a scholarly source. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:50, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- @SandyGeorgia, I'm (very) sorry that this is taking so much time, but we are now phrasing it differently: "legal changes in the UK/Scotland" now vs "Scottish/UK laws" previously. I think the former indicates geography and Scotland is in the UK, so its laws are in the UK (albeit only one part of it), so I think we can say "...mostly in the context of proposed legal changes in the UK that..." Even though all but one of these instances (as far as I can tell) was within exclusively Scottish law, she did also oppose proposed UK-wide legal changes too, so it wasn't just legal changes in Scotland. I think (hope), then, that we can probably all agree on: "mostly in the context of proposed legal changes in the UK that would"?
- I was proposing adding the Gender Representation on Public Boards (Scotland) Act 2018 to footnote d. You can read about her opposition to it in Political_views_of_J._K._Rowling#Transgender_issues ("In February 2024, Rowling donated £70,000 to a crowd-funding appeal..."). Is the footnote one of the places in the article where we're only using references from academia? 13tez (talk) 00:41, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
- Sorry to be repeating myself, but saying it once again. The scholarly/academic sources are provided to demonstrate issues that are covered in recent scholarly sources (due weight). We also sometimes, but rarely, use non-scholarly sources to provide accessible text when others are paywalled, more background, or out of necessity when a recent issue warrants it. I don't mind adding this content to the footnote; I would mind expanding the article body to include it, when it's not something mentioned in scholarly sources or that has received the amount of coverage other issues have (due weight). I'll add it in the footnote of Draft 6. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:26, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
- It doesn't strike me that specifically was part of the whole brouhaha; see footnote d, where everything there is cited to a scholarly source. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:50, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- Should we add the Gender Representation on Public Boards (Scotland) Act 2018 to the list of laws she's opposed? I say this because she's donated to a legal case trying to challenge its inclusion of trans women in its definition of "woman". If we are providing a list, it should probably be complete, unless we say "laws such as" or something similar to indicate it's an incomplete list. 13tez (talk) 17:33, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- The current (Draft 5) mentions both (Scottish and UK). SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:23, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- I agree with 13tez here, actually. It's not accurate to say that she objects to UK law if what she actually objects to is laws passed by the Scottish Parliament. Loki (talk) 11:27, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- Ok, if you want to move on, but I want to register that I'm not able to follow your position on this and in fact think I'm misunderstanding you quite badly. You're surely aware that the Westminster parliament writes Scottish law, and that more Scottish law originates in Westminster than in Holyrood?—S Marshall T/C 00:55, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- Can't we just link to Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill, which is mentioned in at least one source. Victoria (tk) 19:18, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- We do; it's in footnote d, and has been since the FAR version. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:47, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
Feedback (Victoria)
A few remarks:
- First sentence - will revisit after re-reading sources (hopefully sooner than later)
- Maybe a bit of prose tightening for this phrase "She has often shared opinions on transgender rights" >> possibly try something like "She is vocal about transgender rights ...."
- "She has suggested that children and cisgender women" >> if she still believes this (which seems to be the case) then maybe consider writing in the present tense >> "She suggests that children and cisgender women ..." This would probably involve tense changes throughout & might need discussion
- Sales of Harry Potter books during Covid >> not sure it's needed & could be cut to save words
- 2nd para looks good
- 3rd para looks good
- Tolando >> Tolonda (I had to double check!)
That's all for now. Victoria (tk) 15:22, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks, Victoria; I was waiting for you before resuming, as the talk page has gone outta control. I will work your comments, and the stragglers left over from above, in to a new Draft 6, in a new level two heading, because we are now at a talk page length that will necessitate archiving of the five previous drafts. I feel more comfortable starting a new level 2 given that you seem broadly satisfied with the direction so far -- need a few hours to work in everything. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:27, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
- Sounds good. Victoria (tk) 15:46, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
- Continued at #Reboot: Draft 6 (near final). SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:09, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
- Sounds good. Victoria (tk) 15:46, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
This sentence in the lead is very weasel word-y, isn't it? "expressed her opinions" is such a vague way of describing active attacks - it doesn't even make it clear if she's for or against trans people - and it goes on to carefully isolate criticism. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.9% of all FPs. 13:43, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
- If you could please read the work progressing on the talk page, it would help towards not bloating an already lengthy talk page with dated commentary. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:10, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
- I don't see how noting a particular point about the lead - and noting a tag being added - is redundant to other sections not talking about the specific wording. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.9% of all FPs. 18:52, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
- @Adam Cuerden I do not understand which of "She has publicly expressed her opinions on transgender people and related civil rights since 2017." are weasel words; especially as the following sentences contain [partial] information on how other people have interpreted these publicly-expressed opinions, and events which have followed. Bazza 7 (talk) 13:32, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- Nor do I, but since that phrase is nowhere in any of the proposed drafts, the section is just distracting from work being done. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:13, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- It's vague to the point of meaningless on what her views are. It's functionally identical to "She said something", not making it at all clear what her views are. Weasel words are using vague language that substitutes for actually saying anything on a point.
- As the lead stands, the transphobia section consists of two sentences, where the entire content is:
- "She publicly said some undefined opinions about transpeople since 2017"
- Some people don't like what she said.
- I mean, there's some attempts to list what groups dislike her views (some worked into the weasel word "critics"), but it doesn't really say anything about what Rowling actually said, thinks, or did. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.9% of all FPs. 21:14, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- Nor do I, but since that phrase is nowhere in any of the proposed drafts, the section is just distracting from work being done. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:13, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- @Adam Cuerden I do not understand which of "She has publicly expressed her opinions on transgender people and related civil rights since 2017." are weasel words; especially as the following sentences contain [partial] information on how other people have interpreted these publicly-expressed opinions, and events which have followed. Bazza 7 (talk) 13:32, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- I don't see how noting a particular point about the lead - and noting a tag being added - is redundant to other sections not talking about the specific wording. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.9% of all FPs. 18:52, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
"Transgender people" section should be re-titled as "Transphobia"
Why are we white-washing her transphobic views? Representing overt transphobia as simply her "views on transphobic people" is reductive. It makes her views sound way more benign than they really are, violating NPOV in the process. 98.116.173.242 (talk) 02:42, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
- No, it shouldn't. Because it labels her, and leaves no room in a section like that for any supportive or neutral views of transgender people, and this is a WP:BLP which must maintain a neutral point of view. There is no ban on representing her transphobia in a section entitled Views on Transgender people, and well-sourced content on her transphobic views are welcome in that section. The heading is fine as it stands. Mathglot (talk) 02:59, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
- Reinforcing this - WP:BLP has a very specific and strident set of guidelines about how we can refer to a person and, in order for us to just say "Rowling is a transphobe," we would need the vast preponderance of reliable sources, including, in her case, academic sources to say "Rowling is a transphobe." Otherwise we simply cannot. That's why you'll see the fiddly and fussy discussions over minutia above. There's a pretty widespread sentiment right now that the article, as it stands, is not neutral or accurate regarding how Rowling has expressed her political views surrounding the rights of trans people. And a lot of effort is going into trying to correct that within the bounds of what we can do on Wikipedia. For more, though, we must use other venues than Wikipedia. Simonm223 (talk) 13:23, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
- No it shouldn't, for reasons already explained. But since Rowling's comments have been made in the context of changes to laws, a more apt section heading would be something like Transgender rights. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:17, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- 98.116.173.242: This is an idea riddled with bias and cannot be accepted. I agree with @Simonm223, this page is very left-leaning and biased. I think it needs radical changes, personally. Scientelensia (talk) 14:21, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
- I think you should probably go back and re-read what I said. Because my concern is that it is not neutral in that it under-plays the extent to which Rowling is transphobic but that we should make sure that changes happen within the appropriate boundaries of WP:BLP. Simonm223 (talk) 14:57, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
Reboot: Draft 6 (near final)
- First five drafts can be reviewed at #Proposed text for "Transgender people" section; previous discussions and source dumps in Talk:J. K. Rowling/Archive 16.
Draft 6
NOTE!!!! I have reversed the order (draft vs. historical) compared to earlier versions because it's easier to edit with the draft first. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:53, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
Draft 6: 459 words | Historical: 429 words |
---|---|
Rowling espouses gender-critical views.[1][2][3] Since 2017,[4] she has written frequently about transgender rights, mostly in the context of proposed changes to UK gender recognition laws that would make it easier to transition without a medical diagnosis.[5][6][7][a] She opposes gender self-recognition[12][13][b] and suggests that children and cisgender women are threatened by trans women and trans-positive messages.[15] 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".[16] Controversy over Rowling's gender-critical messaging accelerated in 2019 when she defended Maya Forstater.[17] When Forstater's employment contract with the London branch of the Center for Global Development was not renewed after she expressed gender-critical views,[18] 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".[19][c] According to Harry Potter scholar Lana Whited, in the next six months "Rowling herself fanned the flames as she became increasingly vocal".[24] In June 2020,[24] Rowling mocked the phrase "people who menstruate",[25] and tweeted that women's rights and "lived reality" would be "erased" if "sex isn't real".[26][18] Rowling's views have impacted her reputation. As her views on the legal status of transgender people came under scrutiny,[9] she received insults and threats[27][28] and discussion moved beyond the Twitter community.[29] While her remarks provoked condemnation,[10][30][31] sales of Harry Potter books grew during the COVID-19 lockdown.[32][33] Fans turned away from her work and boycotted events, and publishers hesitated to accept her work.[34] Criticism came from the Harry Potter fansites MuggleNet and The Leaky Cauldron,[35] and LGBT charities Mermaids,[36] Stonewall,[37] and Human Rights Campaign.[5] GLAAD called Rowling's comments "cruel" and "inaccurate".[38] Leading actors of the Wizarding World spoke out against her stance;[39][40] Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Watson, Rupert Grint, Eddie Redmayne and others declared support for the transgender community.[41][d] 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.[45] Rowling rejects these characterisations and denies being transphobic.[14][46] In an essay posted on her website in June 2020 – that left trans people feeling betrayed[12][35] – Rowling said her views on women's rights arose from her experience as a survivor of domestic abuse and sexual assault.[47][48] 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.[48][49][50] 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".[51] |
Rowling's responses to proposed changes to UK gender recognition laws,[5][6][e] and her views on sex and gender, have provoked controversy.[10] Her statements have divided feminists;[7][52][53] fuelled debates on freedom of speech,[54][55] academic freedom[9] and cancel culture;[30] and prompted declarations of support for transgender people from the literary,[56] arts[57] and culture sectors.[58] 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,[18][19] 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".[19][f] In another controversial tweet in June 2020,[36] Rowling mocked an article for using the phrase "people who menstruate",[25] and tweeted that women's rights and "lived reality" would be "erased" if "sex isn't real".[60][61] LGBT charities and leading actors of the Wizarding World franchise condemned Rowling's comments;[39][40][g] GLAAD called them "cruel" and "inaccurate".[65] Rowling responded with an essay on her website[14] 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.[48] 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.[48][66][67] Writing of her own experiences with sexism and misogyny,[68] 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".[69] Rowling's continual statements – beginning in 2017[10][70][71] – have been called transphobic by critics[72][73] and she has been referred to as a TERF.[73][74][75] She rejects these characterisations and the notion that she holds animosity towards transgender people, saying that her viewpoint has been misunderstood.[14][72][71] Criticism of Rowling's views has come from the Harry Potter fansites MuggleNet and The Leaky Cauldron;[76] and the charities Mermaids,[36] Stonewall,[77] and Human Rights Campaign.[78] 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.[45] As Rowling's views on the legal status of transgender people came under scrutiny,[9] she received insults and death threats[27][79] and discussion moved beyond the Twitter community.[29] Some performers and feminists have supported her.[29][80] Figures from the arts world criticised "hate speech directed against her".[81] |
Sources
|
---|
References
Notes
|
Discussion of draft 6
My intent was to work in everything mentioned under Draft 5, recognizing that the first sentence may still be a sticking point. My apologies if I missed anything (it's been quite a chore to keep up with this talk page :).
Going forward, could people please remember that we are now at a state which is approaching final and would like others to weigh in, so please try to keep your feedback chronological, brief, and within a separate fourth-level heading when starting a new issue. All that said, I think great progress has been made, in a collegial and collaborative environment!! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:53, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
- Sandy, for consistency with the previous drafts, I think these need to be flipped with the new one on the right and the historical on the left. Unless I'm missing something? Victoria (tk) 20:28, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
- I left a note about that at the top of #Draft 6; when editing to make changes, it's easier if the version being edited is first. I often had to start over, as I entered changes in the old version when trying to change the draft, so having the draft first is easier. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:08, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
First sentence: feedback needed
- This is a substantial improvement. I'd delete "espoused" without replacement, and I'd simplify "Beginning in" to "Since", and then I'm happyish with it.—S Marshall T/C 00:26, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
- Implemented beginning in --> since.. On the opening sentence, now that the rest of the para gives more context (the laws and the self-identification without diagnosis), I would probably be OK with that as well, but I'll wait to hear from others before implementing that change in the draft. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:48, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
- It reads okay without "espoused". If we keep it, suggest converting to present tense - "espouses". Lets see what others say. Victoria (tk) 13:29, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
- I prefer the version without "espoused", and I agree if we do keep it, it should at least be present tense. Loki (talk) 14:12, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
- Changed to present tense. On the rest, my concern is that we cite three scholarly sources who quite carefully do not label her as such, rather state that some do. Wikipedia does not lead; it follows sources. I'd feel much better about flat out labeling her if we had three scholarly sources which did that. (I've included the exact quotes from the sources; the reasons we can't label her flat out are already covered in the section just above this one, #"Transgender people" section should be re-titled as "Transphobia". And the section name should be "Transgender rights".) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:27, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
- Followup from WP:BLP:
"Material about living persons added to any Wikipedia page must be written with the greatest care and attention to verifiability, neutrality, and avoidance of original research."
In the interest of moving forward, I have attempted to find a compromise ("espouses views") for this area of disagreement. I have always been willing to install content developed by consensus on talk to the article even when I disagree with that content; I can't do that in this case, as without sources, I believe the proposed changes to the first sentence breach BLP. We can't label Rowling "gender-critical" in the absence of high-quality sources that do so. The sources we have so far do not do that. Our options at this point are: 1) find scholarly sources labeling her outright, 2) wait for more feedback, 3) someone besides me installs the draft should consensus form to add what I believe to be a BLP breach, or 4) run an RFC (do we install before the RFC, or wait a full month to get something installed, or find an interim compromise?). SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:56, 6 May 2024 (UTC)- It's really important to be fully immersed in the sources to understand the nuances, and I'm not convinced an RFC would be helpful at this point. I'm fine with "espouses" because that's really the best that can be done with the sources. I'm wondering whether the sources support that she's outspoken? If so, can we simply say something along the lines that "Rowling has been vocal about her gender-critical beliefs". Sorry, I'm not feeling well today, so this is just brainstorming and an imperfectly framed idea and I don't have sources open to check, so feel free to ignore. P.s - thanks Sandy for the work on the talkpage - I got caught in a number of edit conflicts earlier. Victoria (tk) 18:22, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
- After walking away for a bit of perspective & then re-reading this evening, "espouses" seems fine to me. Victoria (tk) 23:17, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
- Followup from WP:BLP:
- It reads okay without "espoused". If we keep it, suggest converting to present tense - "espouses". Lets see what others say. Victoria (tk) 13:29, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
- Implemented beginning in --> since.. On the opening sentence, now that the rest of the para gives more context (the laws and the self-identification without diagnosis), I would probably be OK with that as well, but I'll wait to hear from others before implementing that change in the draft. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:48, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
- Scholarly sources are written for scholars, so there are things they don't say.
- The sun is quite large and rather hot. But you won't find a paper in an astronomical journal that says so. The paper might give specifics of the sun's temperature at various depths, its diameter, its mass, its density or its circumference. But if you need to explain in a Wikipedia article that the sun is big and hot, scholarly sources are no good at all. Because the astronomy professors are writing for an audience that knows about stars, there are things they don't have to say and they don't waste words on.
- Therefore you need a source that says the sun is big and hot, you have to go to a non-academic source.
- But, Sandy, I want to ask you to stop and think here. If, as it seems, you can genuinely read the sources on Rowling and not think she has gender-critical views, then really, how objective are you about this?—S Marshall T/C 00:13, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
- I agree with you that we shouldn't require scholarly sources specifically if we have good quality WP:NEWSORG ones. But I do sympathize somewhat with Sandy here: this is a featured article on a BLP and we do need to make sure we can clearly source everything we say about her. Loki (talk) 02:17, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
- Re S Marshall, the "sun is hot" analogy doesn't apply to this situation for two reasons.
- We have three high-quality sources (that multiple editors seem to agree are good scholarly sources) that quite specifically are not silent on the topic, as an astronomy professor may be on whether the sun is hot. The academics we have so far do address the matter by specifically not saying that JKR is a TERF, rather they clearly state that some say she is, while others disagree. Silence on the "sun is hot" is not the situation here.
- Since the sun is not a living person, Wikipedia doesn't have a Wikipedia policy to make sure we don't defame it.
- We can't use lower quality sources to refute good academic sources that we have on this matter, and Wikipedia can't be the first to say something that high quality sources, when specifically addressing the matter, have not said as far as we know. Re your final question, perhaps you would stop and think about whether you want to be the first editor in several years to personalize a discussion on this, or the FAR, talk page? What any of us thinks is irrelevant; our content is guided by policy and sources. If there really are no scholarly sources or academics willing to label JKR a TERF, then we should be moving forward on an alternate way to frame the first sentence; compromise should not be hard, considering there are many ways to frame the sentence. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:51, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
- All right then.
- We need one phrase that encapsulates J. K. Rowling's views on sex and gender. In draft 6, we've already decided and agreed that she:
- Opposes gender self-recognition;
- Accuses trans women of being men;
- Believes sex is real, or at least, warns of dire consequences of thinking sex isn't real; and
- Denies being transphobic.
- These are of course the precise views we cover in Gender-critical feminism, with a long string of academic references for the definition. But also at issue here is the law, and there's also a legal definition of what gender-critical views are, from the judgment in Maya Forstater -v- CGD Europe & ors. They include: The belief that sex is immutable and not to be conflated with gender identity... [which are] ...absolutist in nature and whereby... [Forstater would] ...refer to a person by the sex she considers appropriate even if it violates their dignity and/or creates an intimidating, hostile, degrading or offensive environment. According to the Tribunal, this is the element of gender-critical views that amounts to a protected philosophical belief. It's even more simply encapsulated (at page 3) as: the Claimant’s belief as to the immutability of sex. (This is the Law of England and Wales. Unfortunately for 13tez, Maya Forstater's case isn't about Scots Law.)
- Therefore, J. K. Rowling's views on sex and gender meet both the academic and legal tests for what a gender-critical belief is. QED.
- The objection is that a sufficiently academic source doesn't say so. Wikipedia does have a problem with this. We use hedges like: "[Donald] Trump's political positions are viewed by some as right-wing populist" (from Political positions of Donald Trump), because to say Donald Trump is a right wing populist in wikivoice would be sooo controversial.—S Marshall T/C 08:07, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
- I feel it should be pointed out that this section "[Forstater would] ...refer to a person by the sex she considers appropriate even if it violates their dignity and/or creates an intimidating, hostile, degrading or offensive environment." is the Appeal Tribunal quoting the first instance judgement, and was an interpretation disputed in that appeal. The Appeal judgement found that "On a proper reading of the Judgment, the Tribunal was stating that the Claimant would not use preferred pronouns whenever she considered it appropriate not to do so. That must mean that she would not use them where she considered it to be relevant. If that is correct, then the description “absolutist” would appear to be something of a misnomer as her position was more nuanced and context dependent." Absolutism and an automatic rejection of preferred pronouns are not therefore part of the legal definition of the protected gender-critical belief in the UK. Daff22 (talk) 11:56, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
- We need one phrase that encapsulates J. K. Rowling's views on sex and gender. In draft 6, we've already decided and agreed that she:
Unnecessary attribution ?
Re
In an essay posted on her website in June 2020 – that Tolonda Henderson[35] and Whited state left trans people feeling betrayed[12] – Rowling said her views ...
Could we drop the attribution, and make this just:
In an essay posted on her website in June 2020 – that left trans people feeling betrayed[12][35] – Rowling said her views ....
My impression is that this is a widely supported statement, so that the attribution is creating a false impression, not needed, and only clunking up the sentence. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:56, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
- Imv: Yes, drop it.—S Marshall T/C 18:02, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
- I agree we can drop the attribution there. Loki (talk) 18:03, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
- Done, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:55, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
Thoughts from Scientelensia
Regarding this part: “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".”
- Could it be changed to this (or a shorter version of it)? “After the Hate Crime and Public Order (Scotland) Act 2021 had come into force in April 2024, Rowling, who resides in Edinburgh, took to X to criticise the bill, stating that "freedom of speech and belief" was at an end if accurate description of biological sex was outlawed. She further posted a list of transgender women, and wrote that they were "men, every last one of them".[1] Rowling also said: "Scottish lawmakers seem to have placed higher value on the feelings of men performing their idea of femaleness, however misogynistically or opportunistically, than on the rights and freedoms of actual women and girls."[2]”
My main criticsm of this draft (though it is much better than before) is that:
- The actors who didn’t support Rowling are in the main text, the others are merely a note. I understand the difference between main and supporting actors, but it does seem that those who oppose Rowling are being given more prominence. Intentions could be misconstrued. As for scholarly sources (which Sandy Georgia wanted; these are surely adequate I hope):[3][4][5][6] (for example). From Scientelensia (17:47, May 7, 2024)
- Another main criticism is that this paragraph…
- Fans turned away from her work, boycotted events, and publishers hesitated to accept her work. Criticism came from the Harry Potter fansites MuggleNet and The Leaky Cauldron, and LGBT charities Mermaids, Stonewall, and Human Rights Campaign. GLAAD called Rowling's comments "cruel" and "inaccurate". Leading actors of the Wizarding World spoke out against her stance; Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Watson, Rupert Grint, Eddie Redmayne and others declared support for the transgender community. 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.
- …almost wholly only lists critics from organisations. No support for her has been mentioned at all, which arguably displays bias as there was a lot of support for her also. From Scientelensia (20:04, May 7, 2024)
- The last paragraph also fails to mention any praise for JK Rowling’s essay; only criticism. Only the views of trans people are considered. See for example: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-55350905. From Scientelensia (20:08, May 7, 2024)
References
- ^ "J.K. Rowling Mocks Trans Women To Defy Scotland's New Hate Crime Law: "I Look Forward To Being Arrested"". deadline.com. Archived from the original on 1 April 2024. Retrieved 3 April 2024.
- ^ "JK Rowling in 'arrest me' challenge over hate crime law". BBC News. 1 April 2024. Retrieved 8 April 2024.
- ^ "Ralph Fiennes: Verbal abuse directed at JK Rowling is disgusting and appalling". The Telegraph. 24 October 2022. Retrieved 13 December 2022.
{{cite web}}
: CS1 maint: url-status (link) - ^ "'It's horrendous': Helena Bonham Carter defends JK Rowling and Johnny Depp". The Guardian. 28 October 2022. Retrieved 30 November 2022.
{{cite web}}
: CS1 maint: url-status (link) - ^ "JK Rowling: Miriam Margolyes says anger at Harry Potter author over trans views has been 'misplaced'". The Independent. 19 April 2022. Retrieved 16 December 2022.
{{cite web}}
: CS1 maint: url-status (link) - ^ "Robbie Coltrane says JK Rowling transphobia critics 'hang around waiting to be offended'". The Independent. Retrieved 7 May 2024.
{{cite web}}
: CS1 maint: url-status (link)
Thoughts from Victoria
A couple of thoughts to keep things moving.
- First, there's been a sustained effort to improve what's currently in the article & in my view that's a Good Thing. Pats on the back all around!
- Second, re first sentence. What we have is honestly fine. There are other options too. I'm not convinced that Wikipedia:CONTROVERSY applies - it's an essay about articles rather than about one section in an BLP. Following that line of thought, then we can write something like Rowling's remarks/comments (pick the word) have been/are controversial. This Glamour article (very long) has been continually updated for a number of years & is cited by a number of the literary critics. The verbiage they use is that J.K. Rowling has come "under fire" for controversial tweets (not verbatim, but very very close). We should either stick with the first sentence as written in Draft 6 or consider rewriting along the lines of the controversial tweets verbiage.
- Third, re scholarly sources: Rowling is a productive writer - something like 20 works in 25 years - and the reason this article exists is because of her writing career. Because she's a writer, literary critics do what literary critics do - hence scholarly sources. For this topic in Rowling's bio, those sources simply distill news sources and are now the desired secondary sources.
- Fourth, I think Scientelensia raises points that are maybe worth considering. Back when we were discussing Draft 3 it became clear that draft had veered into discussing what others were saying about Rowling, rather than what Rowling says/believes. To veer back, we might consider trimming or even cutting the text in the third para beginning from "Criticism came from the Harry Potter fansites ... " possibly to the end of the paragraph. If so, the text can focus on Rowling & there'd be fewer words.
Personally, I think we're almost there. In fact, I think we could take the "it's good enough" route and say that Draft 6 is good to go. What do others think? Victoria (tk) 23:22, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
- My general thoughts are that while there are things I'd change if I could write it entirely myself, I think that Draft 6 is basically fine and I'm not that interested in getting in a big fight about what are essentially small quibbles. Loki (talk) 23:41, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
- I'm concerned that the proposal has veered into non-neutral territory by overfocusing on one academic writer (Whited) rather than a thorough and representative survey of the relevant literature. A survey of the entire literature would not have seen us drop the one sentence in the article that is most likely to endure beyond what any Hollywood star said or thinks. "Her statements have divided feminists; fuelled debates on freedom of speech, academic freedom and cancel culture ... " and more). But this is not a hill worth dying on; I wouldn't mind if we install and move on, but if I had my druthers we'd move the list of all actors and organizations to footnotes (who is surprised at the list of charities?), and restore and expand instead the content that will endure beyond Hollywood -- that is, the overall and lasting cultural effects of the whole brouhaha as reflected in a variety of scholarly sources. A thorough and representative survey of the relevant literature produces scholarly analyses of linguistics, hate speech, fandom, feminism, women's rights, trans rights, etc -- much more than passing opinions of Radcliffe, Watson and anyone else who spends the GDP of a small country to attend the Met Gala. I don't think the draft is POV enough to tag it as such, the POV is subtle, and I won't protest if it goes in, but somewhere along the way, neutrality was dropped in the content that was excised. My solution is different than Scientelensia's; rather than add in those who support her, delete all of that recentism, and focus on a survey of the literature and the broader issues raised. But if someone wants to install now, I won't object. I still believe the section heading should be "Transgender rights". I don't think Draft 6 is FA material, but the rest of the article is, so neither do I think a FAR is in order; it's good enough, but won't endure. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:25, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
- Your solution would work also, but there would also have to be rigorous testing to ensure that the selection of literary works constitutes an unbiased interpretation. Scientelensia (talk) 16:19, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
- 1. Looking back at Victoria's fourth point, I agree; that's where in my view most precious real estate (word count) is misspent on excess detail, and trimming that would give us room to work back in some neutrality and replace some RECENTISM with enduring content.
could becomeCriticism came from the Harry Potter fansites MuggleNet and The Leaky Cauldron, and LGBT charities Mermaids, Stonewall, and Human Rights Campaign. GLAAD called Rowling's comments "cruel" and "inaccurate". Leading actors of the Wizarding World spoke out against her stance; Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Watson, Rupert Grint, Eddie Redmayne and others declared support for the transgender community.
by moving the detail to a footnote. That word count could be better used on more enduring issues.Criticism came from Harry Potter fansites, LGBT charities, and leading actors of the Wizarding World.
- 2. Whited may have said this, but here's where neutrality is particularly lost:
"Fans turned away from her work, boycotted events, and publishers hesitated to accept her work."
In fact, book sales increased, Universal Studios is expanding Harry Potter World, a TV series is in the works, Maya Forstater was exonerated, etc ... so while the statement is true to some extent and for many people, it's factually inaccurate in terms of leaving out the big picture, and redundant to territory already covered in the first point above. Dropping the sentence is an alternative to discuss. - 3. Looking back at Draft 4 reveals the problem with trying to write an encyclopedic entry with topic sentences: doing so can result in a POV construction that leads the reader (I forget which article is on a record number of FACs for this very problem, which has proven insurmountable). Grouping like content logically by paragraphs avoids wasting wordcount in ways that risk leading the reader or telling the reader what a paragraph is about; just the facts, and let the reader make their own decision.
- 4. I agree with Scientelensia that the sentence
she tweeted a list of trans women, writing that they are "men, every last one of them"
needs a few more clauses for context and relevance, although I wouldn't take as many words as Scientelensia suggests. - 5. And after doing that wordcount reduction, use the gained space to rework and update the enduring content based on a survey of the literature, which was:
Her statements have divided feminists; fuelled debates on freedom of speech and cancel culture; and prompted declarations of support for transgender people from the literary, arts and culture sectors
... we seem to have lost academic freedom, and there's plenty of scholarly literature on how fandom has evolved, and the power of Twitter. - We could put in Draft 6 now, but it is POV and we'll be back here in less than two years to repair the damage we inflicted. Victoriaearle I had my turn; are you interested in working up Draft 7 ?SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:55, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
- PS, my separate and growing concern is that none of the three main FA authors have shown up to update the rest of the article to reflect Whited 2024, so if that doesn't happen, we're likely to end up at FAR anyway. I think we made a mistake in over-relying on Whited for transgender content, but she certainly should be used for updating literary content. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:58, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
- @SandyGeorgia You suggest Criticism came from Harry Potter fansites, LGBT charities, and leading actors of the Wizarding World., but that implies (to me) all "leading" actors, which isn't true. Either define "leading actors", or quantify with "most", "some", etc. Bazza 7 (talk) 21:13, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
- Yep, I wasn't trying to wordsmith the thing yet ... just give the broad points I'd do if we started over. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:23, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
- Sandy please excuse my brevity, but I'm not at all able at this time. Will get back here when able. Sorry. Victoria (tk) 23:27, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
- 1. Looking back at Victoria's fourth point, I agree; that's where in my view most precious real estate (word count) is misspent on excess detail, and trimming that would give us room to work back in some neutrality and replace some RECENTISM with enduring content.
- Your solution would work also, but there would also have to be rigorous testing to ensure that the selection of literary works constitutes an unbiased interpretation. Scientelensia (talk) 16:19, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
Draft 6.3
Since I agree that all of Sandy's proposed elisions improve the text, I've made them. I've made no effort to add the suggested new content, and I view cutting words as more important.—S Marshall T/C 16:31, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
Draft 6.3: 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. She 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 with the Center for Global Development 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 impacted her reputation. As her thoughts on the legal status of transgender people came under scrutiny,[8] she received insults and threats[26][27] and discussion moved beyond the Twitter community.[28] While her remarks provoked condemnation,[9][29][30] 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;[29] 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[26][75] and discussion moved beyond the Twitter community.[28] Some performers and feminists have supported her.[28][76] Figures from the arts world criticised "hate speech directed against her".[77] |
Sources
Sources
|
---|
References
Notes
|
Discussion of Draft 6.1
Thanks for getting the ball rolling on this, S Marshall, and I hope Victoria feels better soon. I am traveling today and won't be able to peek in 'til tomorrow. Bst, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:49, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
- Agreed, thanks. As a newcomer to this discussion, I have to ask why are we just relying on one critic, Whited, whose opinion seems at ace level very pro-trans. What gives Whited the right to be here? Would it be useful to insert another critic to level the bias, or remove reference to Whited together?
- Also, in terms on labelling JKR, if a label is needed, gender-critical is indeed appropriate and applicable. Scientelensia (talk) 18:46, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
- If you can find a proper Rowling scholar who doesn't think Rowling's a trans-exclusionary feminist, go ahead and cite them.—S Marshall T/C 20:23, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
It's getting pretty good, actually; focused mostly on what she actually said rather than endless tedious recounting of what other people think of it. As to the discussions about whether to say "gender-critical", that seems to be a reasonable label to use, one that is frequently used as a self-label by people expressing views of a similar nature to JKR's, not a pejorative name like "TERF" or "transphobe". The point of disagreement is in the apparent lack of her actually self-labeling this way; it seems JKR hasn't applied any sort of ideological or political label to herself, preferring her views to speak for themselves. This makes it harder to put a label on her, but if one is to be applied, this one seems fairly reasonable. *Dan T.* (talk) 18:33, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
Weird characterisation
"Since 2017,[4] she has written frequently about transgender rights, mostly in the context of proposed changes to UK gender recognition laws that would make it easier to transition without a medical diagnosis."
I don't get why we're using such a weirdly unspecific wording as "about". Like "she has written frequently against transgender rights" says something. If we can't get the sentence to say something with actual meaning, then the sentence is filler and should be scrapped: as it is, the only part that seems to be meaningful is "since 2017".
Well, there's also the part about the gender recognition laws being the main focus... I have to ask if that's supported by sources as a general rule, or if the sources only say that she reacted at three times to such laws. It's kind of hard to make such a general statement with sources locked to very narrow periods of time. If the statement is something like "initially in response to..." then that's much easier to support.
Like, the draft's a massive improvement, but that one sentence... Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.9% of all FPs. 22:45, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
- And, she's not writing about or against transgender rights. She's writing about the law and the definition of a woman, with a focus on access to female-only spaces. I'll get my thinking cap on.—S Marshall T/C 10:22, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
- Actually why not just say that?
Since 2017 she has written about the law and the definition of a woman. She is concerned about proposed changes to UK law that would make it easier to transition without a medical diagnosis, and about freedom of speech. She is particularly interested in how increased transgender rights would affect access to female-only spaces and legal protections for women.
- The downside is, it's long.—S Marshall T/C 10:31, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
- I think, as long as that doesn't replace the sentences after the one under discussion, that it's okay, but I do worry we're skirting the line of falling into the gender critical movement's framing of itself. As the rest of the paragraph explains, her views are very anti-transwomen. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.9% of all FPs. 13:22, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
- I wouldn't just say anti-trans woman. She has expressed some pretty serious contempt for trans men too, just in the "poor deluded girls" framing that often gets people to mistake condescension for concern.
- I agree that "about" is bad and "against" is better. But maybe something like
She has frequently opposed proposed laws that would expand transgender rights, such as...
would be even better? Loki (talk) 14:43, 12 May 2024 (UTC)- True, though her views on transmen aren't as widely reported (and more-or-less don't appear in the rest of the proposed paragraph) so it's a little harder to source with the restrictions on sources Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.9% of all FPs. 16:10, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
- I wouldn't write "opposed proposed". You might say I'm disposed to oppose opposed proposed.—S Marshall T/C 16:22, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
- True, though her views on transmen aren't as widely reported (and more-or-less don't appear in the rest of the proposed paragraph) so it's a little harder to source with the restrictions on sources Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.9% of all FPs. 16:10, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
- I think, as long as that doesn't replace the sentences after the one under discussion, that it's okay, but I do worry we're skirting the line of falling into the gender critical movement's framing of itself. As the rest of the paragraph explains, her views are very anti-transwomen. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.9% of all FPs. 13:22, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
- How about:
Since 2017 she has written about transgender people. She resists proposed changes to UK law that would make it simpler to transition without a medical diagnosis. She is concerned about how easier transitions could affect access to female-only spaces and legal protections for women.
- Better?—S Marshall T/C 19:06, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
- This works! Scientelensia (talk) 19:08, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
- Now up as draft 6.2.—S Marshall T/C 19:14, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
- I still don't like it because IMO
Since 2017 she has written about transgender people
is meaningless without saying which way she has written about them. We could cut that sentence and just have:
Loki (talk) 23:28, 12 May 2024 (UTC)Since 2017 she has resisted proposed changes to UK law that would make it simpler to transition without a medical diagnosis. She is concerned about how easier transitions could affect access to female-only spaces and legal protections for women.
- She hasn't, though. She started writing about trans issues in 2017 but the resistance to legal changes dates to 2019 at the earliest, so that's counterfactual.—S Marshall T/C 23:43, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
- Was there any commentary of particular prominence or noteworthiness in 2017 or 2018? If not, one could say something like "While she had made some comments beginning in 2017, her views first came to widespread prominence in 2019..." and then jump into the Maya Forstater stuff and the proposed changes to UK law. If her extremely early views are going to hurt an otherwise clear and consise description of what she did, cut out the information or isolate it to its own sentence. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.9% of all FPs. 01:56, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
- That's a lot of extra words though.—S Marshall T/C 06:48, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
- Was there any commentary of particular prominence or noteworthiness in 2017 or 2018? If not, one could say something like "While she had made some comments beginning in 2017, her views first came to widespread prominence in 2019..." and then jump into the Maya Forstater stuff and the proposed changes to UK law. If her extremely early views are going to hurt an otherwise clear and consise description of what she did, cut out the information or isolate it to its own sentence. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.9% of all FPs. 01:56, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
- She hasn't, though. She started writing about trans issues in 2017 but the resistance to legal changes dates to 2019 at the earliest, so that's counterfactual.—S Marshall T/C 23:43, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
- I still don't like it because IMO
- Now up as draft 6.2.—S Marshall T/C 19:14, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
- This works! Scientelensia (talk) 19:08, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
- In draft 6.3, I've cut the disputed sentence.—S Marshall T/C 06:54, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
Suissa and Sullivan
Continue this at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#Suissa and Sullivan, please.—S Marshall T/C 15:19, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
|
---|
We've discussed anove what an odd source this is, and how it has sections that are clearly pro-gender critical movement. The introduction explicitly states that transwomen are not women, and that transgender people need no mord rights than already offered under UK law at the time. In the revised draft, it's used once. Does it have to be used at all? Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.9% of all FPs. 16:13, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
My draft uses that source as a reference for: "[Rowling] received insults and threats". Not a single part of WP:FRINGE or WP:PROFRINGE is relevant.—S Marshall T/C 19:31, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
|