Transgender rights discussion

These abusive billionaires seem to live such fecking miserable lives. Haven't you got a bouncy castle made from chinchilla fur you can go have fun on, or some realistic humanoid robot you can kick around your palace? Why are you slumming it down here with us destitutes taking Ls at every opportunity.
 
so apparently her latest book centres around a character who gets criticised online for being transphobic and racist

and it’s over 1000 pages long :lol:

That's not accurate*. Just like the previous novel in the series was vilified inaccurately, too. It's easy to jump on Rowling looking for problems in everything she says and does since her Tweets, but I still think she's being treated very harshly for largely innocuous comments by the perpetually offended by everything crowd. For those knocking the books for apparently containing similar such transgressions, maybe they should try reading them in their entirety instead of cherry picking a few sentences and spitting their dummies out.

*I'm a little over half way through and maybe the murdered-very-early character you refer to comes back to life in the second half and gets such criticism but I think it's unlikely. Maybe the detectives dig up some more salacious tweets and chatroom logs, but again i can't see it. Is the central character criticised for being a bitch? Yep. For being self-centred and egotistical? Absolutely. Money-orientated and misanthropic? Sure. The assertions being made though, not so much.

What I would say generally is that the Strike series is suffering the same issues as Potter in the later novels, in that (to quote King), she's developing 'diarrhoea of the typewriter': the tweets and chatroom sections of this book are fecking hard work, and her insistence on writing accents word for word instead of, (again King), making it a one-time-and-done to get the point across kind of thing grows very old very quickly - and it's even worse in the Audible version.

edited 'been' to 'being'
 
Last edited:
Never read any of her books but from those exerts she's not a good writer, is she? I don't think I could more than a couple of pages of that bland style.
 
That's not accurate*. Just like the previous novel in the series was vilified inaccurately, too. It's easy to jump on Rowling looking for problems in everything she says and does since her Tweets, but I still think she's been treated very harshly for largely innocuous comments by the perpetually offended by everything crowd. For those knocking the books for apparently containing similar such transgressions, maybe they should try reading them in their entirety instead of cherry picking a few sentences and spitting their dummies out.

We have pretty different views on what's innocuous, but with people like Rowling it's always a pattern more than any one statement. For instance she'll post a link to a pin with a simple feminist message on it, completely innocent, but she'll be so unlucky that this shop also coincidentally sells some of the most vile anti-trans shit you'll ever see. Unlucky.

She's now praising anti-woman Christian conservatives like Matt Walsh because of their shared opinions on trans people (though she'll not go so far as calling him an ally, in contrast to some of her friends). She's saying that the whole bathroom thing is providing "cover for predators", yet it has never happened. When three people post a picture of themselves outside of her home with protest signs she has no qualms about connecting that to a wider point about how not only the "trans movement" but trans people supposedly behaves (even though none of them were trans), yet she has no problem with gender critical people who has done way more explicit doxxing of people who aren't famous with not very hard to find houses. When her overtly anti-trans real life friends are asked to leave a Pride parade she'll frame it as "lesbians no longer welcome at pride" when it's just an obvious lie that it had anything to do with them being lesbians, but because their open and basically only active goal as a group is to oppose so-called "transgenderism". She'll say that the medical threatment trans people get is a form of conversion theraphy (something that coincidentally matches perfectly with the common gender critical views that trans women are men and that trans men are lesbians under attack, and is probably ironic given her pen name), and she'll booze around with groups like LGB Alliance, people like Maya Forstater and so many more. She'll say that the "gender identity movement" is nakedly misogynistic and a threat to women. And in Linehan style, so so so much more.

Trans women are men, trans women are a physical threat to women and a threat to women's rights, women are under attack and the LGB Alliance is great. That's what Rowling believes, innocuously or not.
 
We have pretty different views on what's innocuous, but with people like Rowling it's always a pattern more than any one statement. For instance she'll post a link to a pin with a simple feminist message on it, completely innocent, but she'll be so unlucky that this shop also coincidentally sells some of the most vile anti-trans shit you'll ever see. Unlucky.

She's now praising anti-woman Christian conservatives like Matt Walsh because of their shared opinions on trans people (though she'll not go so far as calling him an ally, in contrast to some of her friends). She's saying that the whole bathroom thing is providing "cover for predators", yet it has never happened. When three people post a picture of themselves outside of her home with protest signs she has no qualms about connecting that to a wider point about how not only the "trans movement" but trans people supposedly behaves (even though none of them were trans), yet she has no problem with gender critical people who has done way more explicit doxxing of people who aren't famous with not very hard to find houses. When her overtly anti-trans real life friends are asked to leave a Pride parade she'll frame it as "lesbians no longer welcome at pride" when it's just an obvious lie that it had anything to do with them being lesbians, but because their open and basically only active goal as a group is to oppose so-called "transgenderism". She'll say that the medical threatment trans people get is a form of conversion theraphy (something that coincidentally matches perfectly with the common gender critical views that trans women are men and that trans men are lesbians under attack, and is probably ironic given her pen name), and she'll booze around with groups like LGB Alliance, people like Maya Forstater and so many more. She'll say that the "gender identity movement" is nakedly misogynistic and a threat to women. And in Linehan style, so so so much more.

Trans women are men, trans women are a physical threat to women and a threat to women's rights, women are under attack and the LGB Alliance is great. That's what Rowling believes, innocuously or not.

If it wasn't clear, I was referring to the books. That said for, reasons of internet and time, I don't want to get into the rest of the discussion but based only on what you've written in your reply to me my views appear to align more with Rowling's than with yours, the conversion therapy comment she made according to your reply aside: my sister, (nee brother for clarity) is transgender and it's coloured my point of view pretty heavily in favour of more rights for tg people, and I believe she did the right thing - including the physical treatments.

Quickly on the 'hidden' messages in the innocent Tweet: while having not seen it, it still makes me think my point is somewhat valid... I mean, maybe there really was a hidden subtext that she fully intended to be there, but then again people will find anything in anything. Thanks for the considered reply.
 
If it wasn't clear, I was referring to the books. That said for, reasons of internet and time, I don't want to get into the rest of the discussion but based only on what you've written in your reply to me my views appear to align more with Rowling's than with yours, the conversion therapy comment she made according to your reply aside: my sister, (nee brother for clarity) is transgender and it's coloured my point of view pretty heavily in favour of more rights for tg people, and I believe she did the right thing - including the physical treatments.

Quickly on the 'hidden' messages in the innocent Tweet: while having not seen it, it still makes me think my point is somewhat valid... I mean, maybe there really was a hidden subtext that she fully intended to be there, but then again people will find anything in anything. Thanks for the considered reply.

I know you were mostly talking about the books, but when you referred to her tweets you were connecting how you see her work interpreted to how you see her real world beliefs published on twitter being interpreted, no? Not trying to start a discussion, you don't want that and that's completely fine, just clarifying whether or not I misunderstood.

I'm very happy that you're supporting your sister. That's great and I hope she's doing well. Negative reactions from family and the wider social circle is a big factor in some very sad statistics, so she's "lucky" in the sense that she seemingly has what should be the norm. Some unsolicited advice, and you're perfectly entitled to tell me to feck off because it's none of my business: unless you're very sure about her views on the matter, please consider not bringing up groups like LGB Alliance or people who share their views.
 
I know you were mostly talking about the books, but when you referred to her tweets you were connecting how you see her work interpreted to how you see her real world beliefs published on twitter being interpreted, no? Not trying to start a discussion, you don't want that and that's completely fine, just clarifying whether or not I misunderstood.

I'm very happy that you're supporting your sister. That's great and I hope she's doing well. Negative reactions from family and the wider social circle is a big factor in some very sad statistics, so she's "lucky" in the sense that she seemingly has what should be the norm. Some unsolicited advice, and you're perfectly entitled to tell me to feck off because it's none of my business: unless you're very sure about her views on the matter, please consider not bringing up groups like LGB Alliance or people who share their views.

I do think people look for stuff that isn't necessarily there in her tweets and her work, but probably don't know enough about it to have a firmer view than that. I will say this, without really wanting to drag other posters into it, but the post I initially replied to quoted a tweet that literally has nothing to do with racism or transphobia from Rowling, or includes any in any of the images tweeted, which kinda proves my point. All the 'tweets' shown in those images from the book are from the first few chapters, so as I said initially there may be stuff later on that I haven't read yet.

A lot of the family initially disowned her, but most have come round as far as I know (my mum's sister is OK with it now, and she was the worst by all accounts, the younger generations just got on with it). We don't discuss her 'status' really these days as she underwent the procedures probably 8 or so years ago now.
 
Never read any of her books but from those exerts she's not a good writer, is she? I don't think I could more than a couple of pages of that bland style.

She wrote a series called Harry Potter, they did alright I think.
 
She wrote a series called Harry Potter, they did alright I think.

Is Stephenie Meyer a good writer? According to a 2019 article I found, Twilight is the 6th best selling fantasy series of all time, above A Song of Ice and Fire, the Wheel of Time, Artemis Fowl, Discworld, etc. Since the article is 3 years old she's probably passed the Chronicles of Narnia as well, and she might be creeping up on The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings (probably not that one considering the TV series). She is by all accounts a wildly successful author. So is she a good writer?
 
Is Stephenie Meyer a good writer? According to a 2019 article I found, Twilight is the 6th best selling fantasy series of all time, above A Song of Ice and Fire, the Wheel of Time, Artemis Fowl, Discworld, etc. Since the article is 3 years old she's probably passed the Chronicles of Narnia as well, and she might be creeping up on The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings (probably not that one considering the TV series). She is by all accounts a wildly successful author. So is she a good writer?

I've read and watched the Harry Potter series, and will soon go to Harry Potter world...and I've seen the Twilight films.

None of the rest though.
 
Inappropriate Behavior
No clue where to properly put this, but it deserves a couple minutes of your time…


If only they could use their weaponized autism to make the world a better place instead of harassing people.
She went to a hotel, and took a picture with her cat, telling fans she was safe.
KiwiFarms users identified her hotel by the bedsheets and the threats increased.
I thought all internet users are trackable. Why are cops not stopping this?
 
Is Stephenie Meyer a good writer? According to a 2019 article I found, Twilight is the 6th best selling fantasy series of all time, above A Song of Ice and Fire, the Wheel of Time, Artemis Fowl, Discworld, etc. Since the article is 3 years old she's probably passed the Chronicles of Narnia as well, and she might be creeping up on The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings (probably not that one considering the TV series). She is by all accounts a wildly successful author. So is she a good writer?

No, her writing is nowhere near the level of J.K. Rowling. I could not get through the first 50 pages of the first Twilight Book. I agree with this assessment:
"The real difference is that Jo Rowling is a terrific writer and Stephenie Meyer can't write worth a darn" - Stephen King
 
Is there any writer in that genre who is obviously better than Rowling? I read a couple of the HP books and never felt they were particularly badly written.

I think with Harry Potter you have to parse out the various aspects of Rowling's writing. Her ability to build and describe a engaging fantasy world kids (and often teenagers and weird adults) wanted to live in is possibly unique. On the other hand, she's truly dreadful at writing characters who do, think and say realistic things, and the world she built, whilst engaging, wasn't internally consistent enough to hang complicated, logical plots on. Those things don't really matter in kids books, but they increasingly do in YA fiction, which the HP series started shifting into by the 3rd book, and in the adult crime fiction set in the 'real world' which she's focussed on since.
 
Is there any writer in that genre who is obviously better than Rowling? I read a couple of the HP books and never felt they were particularly badly written.

Of course. They probably couldn't have written Harry Potter, but if we make the assumption that writing ability and success aren't linked 1:1, then there are many fantasy authors I'd say are clearly better writers.
 
I think with Harry Potter you have to parse out the various aspects of Rowling's writing. Her ability to build and describe a engaging fantasy world kids (and often teenagers and weird adults) wanted to live in is possibly unique. On the other hand, she's truly dreadful at writing characters who do, think and say realistic things, and the world she built, whilst engaging, wasn't internally consistent enough to hang complicated, logical plots on. Those things don't really matter in kids books, but they increasingly do in YA fiction, which the HP series started shifting into by the 3rd book, and in the adult crime fiction set in the 'real world' which she's focussed on since.

I started rereading the books some years ago, and I was very surprised. Some of the best magicians in the world say it's impossible to steal the ***********'s stone because the defense system they set up is so extremely good, and what do they mean? You have to pay some attention to the first year school curriculum, be a somewhat competent broom rider, a mediocre chess player and being able to solve a pretty basic riddle. I know it's a children's book, but until I reread them I didn't know how much of a children's book it actually is.
 
Is there any writer in that genre who is obviously better than Rowling? I read a couple of the HP books and never felt they were particularly badly written.

I outgrew HP right around the moment the last book came out, about a year later, read 3 of these and loved them. No idea if they hold up now, but everything was better: world-building, plot, characters.
 
Is there any writer in that genre who is obviously better than Rowling? I read a couple of the HP books and never felt they were particularly badly written.

By genre if you just mean fantasy in general then yeah there’s a shit ton of writers who exceed her

If you’re referring solely to children/YA books in this vein then no idea. When I was growing up I can definitely think of series or writers who I thought were better but can’t really gauge it as an adult
 
I started rereading the books some years ago, and I was very surprised. Some of the best magicians in the world say it's impossible to steal the ***********'s stone because the defense system they set up is so extremely good, and what do they mean? You have to pay some attention to the first year school curriculum, be a somewhat competent broom rider, a mediocre chess player and being able to solve a pretty basic riddle. I know it's a children's book, but until I reread them I didn't know how much of a children's book it actually is.

If you want an adeventure story about 10 year olds to hold up to the question "does it really make sense that those random kids are solving this?", then it's going to be a pretty boring book. And that's without the whole fantasy issue.
 
If you want an adeventure story about 10 year olds to hold up to the question "does it really make sense that those random kids are solving this?", then it's going to be a pretty boring book. And that's without the whole fantasy issue.

Sure, but there are varying degrees to this. While the Hardy Boys, Bobbsey Twins and Nancy Drew might not be the pinnacle of detective fiction I find them all less jarring. And while it plays on familiar tropes like the hubris of grownups and how kids are brushed up, "Voldemort couldn't possibly know how the horsey moves" is just several steps too far for me.
 
Sure, but there are varying degrees to this. While the Hardy Boys, Bobbsey Twins and Nancy Drew might not be the pinnacle of detective fiction I find them all less jarring. And while it plays on familiar tropes like the hubris of grownups and how kids are brushed up, "Voldemort couldn't possibly know how the horsey moves" is just several steps too far for me.
I abhor and I really mean the word here , abhor the Harry Potter series but wasn't it literally written for 7 year olds or something?
 
Sure, but there are varying degrees to this. While the Hardy Boys, Bobbsey Twins and Nancy Drew might not be the pinnacle of detective fiction I find them all less jarring. And while it plays on familiar tropes like the hubris of grownups and how kids are brushed up, "Voldemort couldn't possibly know how the horsey moves" is just several steps too far for me.
There’s definitely levels to it, it’s what I found so annoying about Star Wars. Any criticism I’d make about the plot would just be met with “pff, you want some realism in a movie with lightsabers and flying aliens?”

Well, yes. A little bit at least. Otherwise what’s the point? You have to have some rules if you’re going to have any tension.
 
Probably more 10-15, though YA fiction is usually defined as 12-18 I think.
Can't imagine any 15 year olds enjoying philosophers stone but you seem to be right, according to the internet the character was 11 years old in the first book so that must be the target audience.

Still it's semi competently written and the world is kinda imaginative so I guess it could be worse.
 
Probably more 10-15, though YA fiction is usually defined as 12-18 I think.

As a rule of thumb, I'd say each book is written for kids who are a couple of years younger than the age the protagonists are meant to be. The problem is that by the time she gets to Goblet of Fire she's reached the limit of her ability to write about and for 'older' audiences.
 
I remember finding Harry Potter dull as shit, and was right around the correct age for it when all the hype was about the first time round. Everyone in my class would rush out and get the latest book which was about 400 pages long. Sod that, thought 9 year old me.
 
As a rule of thumb, I'd say each book is written for kids who are a couple of years younger than the age the protagonists are meant to be. The problem is that by the time she gets to Goblet of Fire she's reached the limit of her ability to write about and for 'older' audiences.

I either stopped after that one or don't remember anything from 5 and 6 if I did read those, so that tracks.
 
Is Stephenie Meyer a good writer? According to a 2019 article I found, Twilight is the 6th best selling fantasy series of all time, above A Song of Ice and Fire, the Wheel of Time, Artemis Fowl, Discworld, etc. Since the article is 3 years old she's probably passed the Chronicles of Narnia as well, and she might be creeping up on The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings (probably not that one considering the TV series). She is by all accounts a wildly successful author. So is she a good writer?
Loved all the Harry Potter books. My son & I were of the time where we'd wait in the bookstore at midnight for them to open the boxes when the latest book arrived. Rowling will be remembered with Charles Dickens, unless this campaign to cancel her succeeds.
Loved the Lord of the Rings. Did you think Tolkien was a good writer?
Loved the first couple of Wheel of Time books, but they got sloooooow and booooring rather quickly.
Hated GRR Martin. Read about 3 chapters of the 1st book and stopped. I thought he was not a good writer.

I missed the start of this thread, what Rowling has done lately? Have to say I usually agree with her.
 
I see that child who lay upon her bosom and who bore my name, a man winning his way up in that path of life which once was mine. I see him winning it so well, that my name is made illustrious there by the light of his. I see the blots I threw upon it, faded away. I see him, foremost of just judges and honoured men, bringing a boy of my name, with a forehead that I know and golden hair, to this place - then fair to look upon, with not a trace of this day's disfigurement - and I hear him tell the child my story, with a tender and a faltering voice.
It is a far, far better thing that I do, than I have ever done; it is a far, far better rest that I go to, than I have ever known - Charles Dickens


“You’re a Wizard Harry!” - J K Rowling
 
I see that child who lay upon her bosom and who bore my name, a man winning his way up in that path of life which once was mine. I see him winning it so well, that my name is made illustrious there by the light of his. I see the blots I threw upon it, faded away. I see him, foremost of just judges and honoured men, bringing a boy of my name, with a forehead that I know and golden hair, to this place - then fair to look upon, with not a trace of this day's disfigurement - and I hear him tell the child my story, with a tender and a faltering voice.
It is a far, far better thing that I do, than I have ever done; it is a far, far better rest that I go to, than I have ever known - Charles Dickens


“You’re a Wizard Harry!” - J K Rowling
Yeah, I've never read any book by Dickens. I started a couple. Language too flowery for my tastes -- but if you like it, that's great.
Anyway. Dickens. Rowling. I'd put her above Lewis Carroll.
 
I think it's kind of crazy that people attack and try to cancel anyone with a differing opinion to the 'woke' narrative these days.