110
I'm not OK with burning them
But OMG it's a kid book. It's fine. For pre-teens. Everybody obsessing over it passed 16 must see a psychologist imo
As a psychotherapist, let me tell you, it would be a good idea if more adults read some children's books sometimes.
It would be a good idea if they read any book, so yeah that tracks.
A kids book owned by someone who is using the money and fame to campaign to destroy the lives of a bunch of my friends and millions of others.
You can like the book at whatever age idc, but please understand the sentiment that the author should not be getting revenue from those books because they are trying to legally define people out of existence. I'm not a fan of erasing media and, not having read the books, I have no way to be offended by their content, but I do not want Rowling profiting from their sale. Spread pirated digital copies in place of print until it ends up in public domain.
I used to be of that opinion, but after a series of conversations about it I came around to the idea that any engagement, even non-commercial, has the effect of promoting the brand.
I'm just waiting for her to die so we can do like Lovecraft and enjoy the books while hating the author.
everyone's pretty much on board with burning Harry Potter books.
No they aren’t.
Not really down with burning the books, just that Rowling is using money from the series to fund a campaign against trans people.
I’m not going to spend money that someone is going to use to turn around and attack my rights with.
Like, if I was in the UK - it would be illegal for me to piss basically anywhere. Trans women are supposed to use the men’s, but because trans men are autistic self hating lesbians (the kind of shitty propaganda that bitch funds) we don’t exist and can’t piss in the men’s or the women’s.
I’m not very opposed to the mediocre children’s book series for their content - it’s just typical “the status quo is good actually.” I’m not going to give money to people who are using their money to hurt me.
When you reveal yourself to be a bigoted, hateful person, most evolved and compassionate people tend to dislike you.
Not enough people. You still see people talking about it, citing their Hogwarts houses, playing the games, squeeing about news of the TV show snd so on as if nothing was amiss, and dismissing any concerns about the profits going to persecute trans people as some kind of weird Peta-tier puritanism. It’s still considered acceptable in the mainstream to be into HP and be accepted as a good person.
Yeah seriously, I'm not sure I've seen any anti HP sentiment in years except from people directly affected. And references just keep cropping up everywhere
The setting is fun. The author is garbage. Also don't think too hard about the characters or the way different magical races are portrayed.
Yeah if you start analysing it and paying the slightest attention with -phobias in mind the whole thing starts looking at bit sus.
The first movie has a couple possibly problematic things ("you're supposed to be a good athlete, it's in your genes"), but I feel like a lot of it goes away the longer the movies continue.
The goblins made me go "uhh..." even when I first saw the first movie as a teen.
When you pay the game you realize how few women and non-white characters there were.
Which game lol
Hogwarts legacy
When I played it, I felt like they kinda bent over backwards for representation. An Indian spells teacher, an African fortune telling teacher, a Japanese broom coach, etc... Plus not to mention all the classmates that are straight up from other countries, and that mention other countries in their conversations.
There's also the married interracial lesbian witch couple, the trans witch who runs the Three Broomsticks and the letter you can find that implies she and Garlick were a thing back when they were younger.
A lot of the NPCs felt like specific middle fingers right to JK imo
In order to burn her books, you first have to purchase them, and at that point you've defeated your own purpose.
Yep - I think the best strategy is what Richard Stallman suggested in 2005 - don't give her money under any circumstances.
I'd suggest not giving the works any form of oxygen; definitely don't buy the books or watch the movies for money, including on a streaming site that pays royalties, or buy branded merchandise. But also don't borrow them from a library (libraries use that as a signal to buy more), promote them by talking about them in any kind of positive light, don't encourage your kids dress up as a character (builds hype and creates demand), use analogies drawn from the books, or otherwise support them.
As far as books about wizards and educational institutions, Terry Pratchett's Discworld series is way better anyway - they have more realistic character interactions and social dynamics (despite being a comic fantasy), and it makes for a much better read.
why does that 2005 article reference events from 2009?
People burning books usually burn other people's books, not their own.
:shrug: Someone bought them.
What about shooting cases of Bud light
And it's not like the books changed. Just the people reading them.
"It's the work of the devil!"
Maybe they were right all along. 🤔
Persecuting infidels has always been a universally popular occupation. The Christianity etc is only a justification.
I don't want to burn the books, just strip Rowling of ownership so she doesn't profit off of them any further is all. Maybe put them in the public domain early
If wishes were horses, beggers would ride.
One of this things is within your power; the other, isn't.
That said, burning her books only benefits her. If you want you hurt her, find someone who wants to buy and read them, and give them yours.
I got threatened with a ban on Blahaj because I pointed out basically this when somebody posted a picture of a burning Harry Potter book. It wasn't even a criticism, it was just pointing out how funny life is that, for completely opposing reasons, trans people (and allies) and crazy Fundamentalists would both support what was happening in the picture.
The author (who was apparently a mod) made some comment about "hurr durr, mah both sides" and deleted my comment. It was very confusing, as my comment showed I clearly supported one of those sides (since I even referred to the Fundamentalists as crazy).
The crazy fundamentalists support her now. It’s all over Facebook.
There’s a difference between burning a book as a political statement because the author is actively harming you, and having a meltdown because the book has magic in it.
It also makes me uncomfortable that you characterize this as “sides.” As a trans person, my “side” is that I deserve to live, have access to medical care, and be treated equitably. Treating this like it’s an issue with “sides” is fucked up - one “side” thinks that all trans people should be forced back into the closet or detransitioned against our will, the other “side” just wants to be fucking alive.
Yeah, you're missing the point.
They (the mod who deleted it) mentioned "both sides." I said that two groups, for that one particular thing, both arrived at the "J.K. Rowling is bad" conclusion, and those two groups are fairly diametrically opposed. Not two sides, two separate groups.
My commentary on their "both sides" was that it was a weird take, since it's clear (if there were two sides) which "side" I was on.
The why, though, wasn't the issue, and I was attaching no commentary on their motivations (with the exception of calling the Fundeamentalists crazy, because, like... "magic is real and evil and a made-up story about a magical school promotes magic" is preeettttty crazy). It was purely the irony of seeing that post and realizing crazy Fundamentalists also hate Rowling. It's like that "two strong arms clasping together" meme, with two groups that have nothing (or worse) to do with each other having one particular thing in common.
And look, I get it. It is a touchy subject, and trans people have been getting shit on for too long (especially now) and assuming the worst intentions of comments made is probably correct way more often than it should be. But even the slightest read into anything I've said shows no ill-will against trans people and their allies (and lots against crazy Fundamentalists who believe in magic).
this post was submitted on 29 Jun 2025
110 points (85.3% liked)
Showerthoughts
35569 readers
1128 users here now
A "Showerthought" is a simple term used to describe the thoughts that pop into your head while you're doing everyday things like taking a shower, driving, or just daydreaming. The most popular seem to be lighthearted clever little truths, hidden in daily life.
Here are some examples to inspire your own showerthoughts:
- Both “200” and “160” are 2 minutes in microwave math
- When you’re a kid, you don’t realize you’re also watching your mom and dad grow up.
- More dreams have been destroyed by alarm clocks than anything else
Rules
- All posts must be showerthoughts
- The entire showerthought must be in the title
- No politics
- If your topic is in a grey area, please phrase it to emphasize the fascinating aspects, not the dramatic aspects. You can do this by avoiding overly politicized terms such as "capitalism" and "communism". If you must make comparisons, you can say something is different without saying something is better/worse.
- A good place for politics is c/politicaldiscussion
- Posts must be original/unique
- Adhere to Lemmy's Code of Conduct and the TOS
If you made it this far, showerthoughts is accepting new mods. This community is generally tame so its not a lot of work, but having a few more mods would help reports get addressed a little sooner.
Whats it like to be a mod? Reports just show up as messages in your Lemmy inbox, and if a different mod has already addressed the report, the message goes away and you never worry about it.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS