Where do we stand on Harry Potter?

[Undrave]

Last Saturday the 7 year old went to a classmates birthday party (transgender male), and when we got there, he was dressed as Harry Potter. Kinda broke my heart. I mean, you don't want to ruin a fandom for a 7 year old, but you know at some point they are going to have their heart broken after finding out what JK is all about.

Oof that’s rough. Maybe touch on it with the parents and find some alternative they could subtly steer him towards with some gifts? Naturally ween him off that particular fandom into something else, ya know? I wish little boys had something like the Owl House… they can still watch it, but it’s not quite the same as having a role model.

Bust out Power Rangers Mystic Force?

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Oof that’s rough. Maybe touch on it with the parents and find some alternative they could subtly steer him towards with some gifts? Naturally ween him off that particular fandom into something else, ya know? I wish little boys had something like the Owl House… they can still watch it, but it’s not quite the same as having a role model.

My son really identified with Adventure Time, which it's hard to go wrong with.

 

[Undrave]

There's a great clip on Youtube of Brennan Lee Mulligan and Matt Mercer talking about the world building. Little things like why use owls if you can just teleport to people all the way up to the fact that the wizards have so much power to make the world a better place and actively choose not to. It also reminds me of Brennan's character Evan Kelmp calling out the Sorting Hat for what it is: tracking/ability sorting people into groups. As his character is told, it is Known and True that who you are at 11 is who you will be forever.

The Wizarding World is just a metaphor for British Upperclass and the innate ‘Magic Power’ you need to attend Hogwart (AKA a Private Prep School) is just having money.

 

[MGibster]

I think it's difficult coming to the terms with the more problematic aspects of the creators of many of the works we love so much. I missed the Potter train, I was in my early twenties when the first book was released in the United States and had no interest in what I thought of as a kid's book. In fact, I thought Harry Potter was the name of the author until the 2nd book came out. But the Harry Potter series holds a special place in my heart because it was the first book that my neices were truly enthusastic about reading. And one of those nieces won't have anything to do with Potter these days because of Rowlings attitude towards transgender people.

So what should the policy of the board be? I certainly want everyone here to be welcome and free to be who they are. But the truth of the matter is that some of the people who have influenced gaminglit, including Gary Gygax, H.P. Lovecraft, Robert E. Howard, and others engaged in behavior or held beliefs we find offensive and unacceptable today. If we have discussions on the history of D&D, there's a good chance any of those names might pop up, which would count as a microaggression with the potential to make some people feel less than welcome.

 

[Undrave]

My son really identified with Adventure Time, which it's hard to go wrong with.

Of course! I completely forgot about that one! Steven Universe is another solid male-led one. It even has strong trans imagery near the end!

 

[TheSword]

All due respect to Izzard (which is a lot, honestly), but there's a number of mitigating factors to that statement, including:
1) The wealthy tend to stick up for each other, regardless of any other issues
2) Joanne is notoriously litigious when it comes to people publicly calling her a transphobe.
3) Izzard last chimed in on this over a year ago, and needless to say some stuff has gone down in the interim
4) She was wrong then and she is wrong now.

JK Rowling is a transphobe. She actively spreads transphobic lies and propaganda, she supports anti-trans legislation, she signal-boosts anti-trans hate groups, and she will shill for any anti-feminist men's rights activist as long as they agree with her about trans people. The time for this debate has long since past. The only way you can credibly claim that she isn't transphobic is to deny the very existence of transphobia, which is what a lot anti-trans activists do, because they want you to see me and people like me as perverts and predators and not as people just trying to live our god-damned lives in peace.

I totally get that you have a different view to Eddie and I respect that but I don't think it is as simple or straightforward as you make it out to be. Writing off someone, who is equally entitled to their opinion because you think they're rich and scared of being sued isn't open and shut. She didn't have to go on the record.

I don't think anyone sensible can see Rowling's views as anything but shaped by her own experiences and desire to protect women even though she may be wrong. However eroneously, or outdated her views, they're coming from a good place. She doesn't deserve death threats and threats of pipe bombs. I remember when the Admiral Duncan was pipe bombed in London, people died, dozens were injured. When I see so called supporters of the LGBT community, of my community, making threats like that it makes me sick.

I'm not interested in justifying JK Rowling's views. Just don't want to see judgement being passed in absentia. Mods can make their decision as they will. I won't get into the politics of it.

 

[Gradine]

So what should the policy of the board be? I certainly want everyone here to be welcome and free to be who they are. But the truth of the matter is that some of the people who have influenced gaminglit, including Gary Gygax, H.P. Lovecraft, Robert E. Howard, and others engaged in behavior or held beliefs we find offensive and unacceptable today. If we have discussions on the history of D&D, there's a good chance any of those names might pop up, which would count as a microaggression with the potential to make some people feel less than welcome.

I can only speak for myself, though others have voiced similar things in this thread: the biggest difference here is the immediate and direct threat to people's rights, healthcare, and even lives, that the property unequivocally represents through its sole creator. There is no 1:1 comparison, modern or historical, to this. It is a case study of one, and in case you were wondering how that's going, in the UK a 16-year-old trans girl was stabbed to death, and Jake's friends and allies have responded by tweeting "40%" and other suicide-related memes at trans people. Alongside deadnaming and misgendering the poor girl. And there's a shockingly straight line between that behavior and Joanne's School for Special Scar Boys

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

So what should the policy of the board be? I certainly want everyone here to be welcome and free to be who they are. But the truth of the matter is that some of the people who have influenced gaminglit, including Gary Gygax, H.P. Lovecraft, Robert E. Howard, and others engaged in behavior or held beliefs we find offensive and unacceptable today. If we have discussions on the history of D&D, there's a good chance any of those names might pop up, which would count as a microaggression with the potential to make some people feel less than welcome.

Personally, I view this in a few different ways.

I wrote a thread a while ago about trying to discuss these issues.

D&D General - The Art and the Artist: Discussing Problematic Issues in D&D

A topic that has been regularly arising recently has concerned the continuing use of certain material in Dungeons & Dragons; sometimes the question is whether the material is problematic (as in legacy material), sometimes whether the material should be updated (as in material in newer books)...

www.enworld.org

I think it's complicated. Personally, JK Rowling is sui generis in terms of her effect, both because she personally profits from all the Potter stuff and because she is using that money to actively hurt people. For that reason, on a personal level, I cannot countenance any of my money going to support anything associated with her or Harry Potter- whether it's the books, or games, or even going to Universal Theme Parks.

I know that the world is complicated, and that there are difficult choices everywhere, and that I will always be complicit in some evil simply by participating in our capitalist system, but to me this is a clear-cut example of how I chose to do at least one thing for a good reason.

So in terms of spending money, I will do that on my own behalf and I will advocate that others do it as well. Harry Potter is not a necessary good, and you should spend your money on other things. Eventually, if enough people act on it, then companies will stop giving her money to license Harry Potter and we might accomplish at least a little good.

As far as the board goes, I think people can and should discuss what they want or need to, subject to board and moderator rules. I try to keep in mind that this subject is deeply personal and hurtful to many people that come here, and so I don't really find it necessary to talk about on a regular basis. Not to put to fine a point on it, but Harry Potter is increasingly irrelevant to modern fantasy generally, and was never particularly relevant to D&D specifically.

Point people to stuff that's good, and that doesn't carry all that baggage.

 

[Gradine]

More fun stuff from the video game side of things:

 

[TheSword]

More fun stuff from the video game side of things:



View attachment 275562
View attachment 275563

And if she had liked the post stating that he committed domestic violence and was separated from his kids that might be relevant. She didn't though, she liked the post saying saying he was inspired by the books and enjoyed working on the computer game. You can't expect her to run a background check on every poster.

Stuff like this doesn't help the cause. It makes it look like a witch hunt. Just like blaming her for Brianna Ghey's death does.