Sideswipe9th (talk | contribs) Tag: Reply |
LokiTheLiar (talk | contribs) →Suissa and Sullivan: Reply Tag: Reply |
||
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 = 19 |
||
|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__ |
||
== "Transgender people" section should be re-titled as "Transphobia" == |
|||
== Recent changes to transgender people section == |
|||
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 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. |
|||
: 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) == |
|||
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. |
|||
::: 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 === |
|||
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) |
|||
'''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) |
|||
{| class="wikitable" |
|||
: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) |
|||
! style="width: 30em;" | Draft 6: 459 words |
|||
::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) |
|||
! style="width: 30em;" | Historical: [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=J._K._Rowling&oldid=1202117364#Transgender_people 429 words] |
|||
:::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) |
|||
: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) |
|||
|| {{Main|Political views of J. K. Rowling#Transgender rights}} |
|||
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) |
|||
<!-- Overview --> |
|||
: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. |
|||
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| |
|||
: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) |
|||
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> |
|||
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) |
|||
}} 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| |
|||
=== Reflist=== |
|||
{{reflist-talk}} |
|||
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/> |
|||
===Draft Proposal for Willoughby content=== |
|||
}} 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> |
|||
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. |
|||
<!-- 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> |
|||
[[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> |
|||
{| 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) |
|||
|- |
|||
|| 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> |
|||
|} |
|} |
||
{{cot|Sources}} |
{{cot|Sources}} |
||
{{reflist-talk}} |
{{reflist-talk}} |
||
{{notelist-talk}} |
|||
{{cob}} |
{{cob}} |
||
====Discussion of Willoughby proposal ==== |
|||
=== Discussion of draft 6 === |
|||
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) |
|||
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) |
|||
: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 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) |
|||
:: |
::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) |
||
:::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) |
|||
:::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) |
|||
: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'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) |
|||
:::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) |
|||
==== First sentence: feedback needed ==== |
|||
== Any objections to modifying final sentence in lede in the following way == |
|||
*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 don't know if we need a formal RfC for this change but here we go: |
|||
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) |
|||
"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." |
|||
::[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) |
|||
==== Thoughts from Scientelensia==== |
|||
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) |
|||
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".” |
|||
: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) |
|||
* 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>” |
|||
::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) |
|||
My main criticsm of this draft (though it is much better than before) is that: |
|||
:::I don't see how that fixes the issues. |
|||
* 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) |
|||
:::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) |
|||
* Another main criticism is that this paragraph… |
|||
::::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) |
|||
: 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. |
|||
: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. |
|||
: …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) |
|||
: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) |
|||
* 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) |
|||
::{{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}} |
|||
{{reflist-talk}} |
|||
::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) |
|||
=== |
==== 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 [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. |
|||
*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? [[User:Victoriaearle|Victoria]] ([[User talk:Victoriaearle|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. [[User:LokiTheLiar|Loki]] ([[User talk:LokiTheLiar|talk]]) 23:41, 8 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
Ok, so that it's clearer for everyone, here's where we're at with the proposed changes to the lead: |
|||
: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) |
|||
{| class="wikitable" |
|||
::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) |
|||
! style="width: 30em;" | [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=J._K._Rowling&oldid=1165322330 Current] |
|||
:::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. |
|||
! style="width: 30em;" | Proposed (adds 20 words) |
|||
:::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. |
|||
|| These views have been criticised as transphobic by LGBT rights organisations and some feminists, but have received support from other feminists and individuals. |
|||
:::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. |
|||
|| 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. |
|||
:::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=== |
|||
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) |
|||
And transgender people section: |
|||
{| class="wikitable" |
{| class="wikitable" |
||
! style="width: 30em;" | |
! style="width: 30em;" | Draft 6.3: 403 words |
||
! style="width: 30em;" | |
! style="width: 30em;" | Historical: [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=J._K._Rowling&oldid=1202117364#Transgender_people 429 words] |
||
|- |
|- |
||
|| 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: |
|||
|| {{Main|Political views of J. K. Rowling#Transgender rights}} |
|||
* [[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> |
|||
<!-- Overview --> |
|||
|| 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: |
|||
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 --> |
|||
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 --> |
|||
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 --> |
|||
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}} |
|||
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}} |
* [[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> |
|||
|} |
|} |
||
==== Sources ==== |
|||
{{cot|Sources}} |
{{cot|Sources}} |
||
{{reflist-talk}} |
{{reflist-talk}} |
||
{{notelist-talk}} |
|||
* {{Cite journal|last=Duggan|first=Jennifer|date=28 March 2021|title=Transformative readings: Harry Potter fan fiction, trans/queer reader response, and J. K. Rowling|journal=[[Children's Literature in Education]]|volume=53 |issue=2 |pages=147–168 |doi=10.1007/s10583-021-09446-9|pmid=35645426 |pmc=9132366 |s2cid=233661189 }} |
|||
*{{cite book |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}} |
{{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 Draft 6.1 ==== |
|||
: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) |
|||
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) |
|||
::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) |
|||
: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? |
|||
==It's time to include anti-transgender activist in the first sentence== |
|||
: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) |
|||
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. |
|||
::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==== |
|||
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) |
|||
"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... <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) |
|||
*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) |
|||
*:Actually why not just say that? |
|||
::{{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.}} |
|||
::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) |
|||
:::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 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 {{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) |
|||
:::::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) |
|||
::::::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}} |
|||
So, if I'm understanding discussion properly, perhaps [[WP:ONUS]] Suissa and Sullivan is out and we can finally move on with getting this back to FA level? <span style="text-shadow:grey 0.118em 0.118em 0.118em; class=texhtml">'''[[User:Adam Cuerden|Adam Cuerden]]''' <sup>([[User talk:Adam Cuerden|talk]])</sup><sub>Has about 8.8% of all [[WP:FP|FPs]].</sub></span> 14:37, 26 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
:I agree. Someone should make a draft 7, if we feel it's necessary. [[User:LokiTheLiar|Loki]] ([[User talk:LokiTheLiar|talk]]) 22:55, 26 May 2024 (UTC) |
|||
: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. |
|||
: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) |
Revision as of 22:55, 26 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. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
"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)
|
So, if I'm understanding discussion properly, perhaps WP:ONUS Suissa and Sullivan is out and we can finally move on with getting this back to FA level? Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs. 14:37, 26 May 2024 (UTC)