Retroversy

I do wonder to what extent your average Joe Schmoe who isn’t extremely online can be held accountable for not understanding, or understanding the full scope of, J.K. Rowling’s transphobia, given the way it is reported on in most media.

I’m not even talking about the willfully ignorant stuff done in bad faith, like perpetuating myths about her having become the victim of “cancel culture” or perhaps most importantly, never giving trans people the right to freely and fairly talk about matters that directly affect them.

I’m talking about more subtle things. Pitfalls even outlets that do wish to at least consider the notion that a beloved children’s author may be a truly terrible person, fall into. You know, phrasings like “she has been accused of transphobia” or “she allegedly holds transphobic views”. Hedging that is added to create the impression of journalistic neutrality, but in the end completely undersells the problem, passing Rowling’s virulent and dangerous transphobia off as just “an unfortunate quirk” or “an opinion we simply don’t agree with”.

By far the most infuriating example of this is the constant use of the use “statements”. News outlets will not write that Rowling is transphobic, they’ll write that she has made transphobic statements. One look at Rowling’s online presence in the last few years should tell you she has been doing a lot more than “making statements”. Saying that Rowling has made “transphobic statements” is a bit like saying Roger Ebert “made some statements about film” or Albert Einstein “made some statements on physics”. It completely undersells not only how important those people saying these things was to those people and the topic they talked about, but also the repercussions of these words.

It makes it sound as if Rowling’s transphobia is casual and off-the-side, that she is occasionally and unfortunately transphobic on top of all the other things she is. That simply isn’t true. Transphobia (or “gender critical feminism”, as she herself would put it) is J.K. Rowling’s main activity at this point. It’s arguably more important to her than writing, at least in terms of how much clout she can get out of it.

So when your average Joe Schmoe reads the news — even from a reputable source — and reads that “J.K. Rowling has made transphobic statements“, that’s not going to register as particularly vile to him; because to Joe, if he already knows what being transgender even is, the whole trans rights “debate” will probably seem to him like either a difficult political conundrum he’s not going to get involved in because he thinks he’s got bigger fish to fry, or a nuanced issue “both sides” have a point on, because that’s just how many (privileged) people tend to think about anything.

Yet if Joe Schloe were to read “J.K. Rowling is transphobic“, if he were to be told the truly heinous things Rowling has said and done, he might actually realize that these words and deeds are unacceptable. This, at the very least, is what YouTuber Jessie Gender experienced when she talked to a Joe Schmoe about Howarts Legacy, after which he admitted to her that he had never known or realized just how far Rowling’s hatred for trans people went.

As happy as it makes me to hear that, if properly informed, Joe Schmoe – or at least this Joe Schmoe — will make sure he’s on the right side of history, I am not naive. There are people — lots of people — who will continue to support Rowling even when her mask’s off entirely. Yet the fact that news outlets, desperate to appear “neutral”, will continue to legitimize her hatred by passing it off as merely “statements” — knowing full well how tolerant most privileged people are towards an occasional bigoted oopsie — has me worried.

I understand why firmly condemning someone’s words and deeds in your reporting is seen as a faux-pas unworthy of a prestigious, quality news outlet. Yet we need to understand that there are some issues you simply need to take a firm stance on.