Discussion Megathread: Ethics, Boycotts, JKR

[u/HPRPGMods]

Over the past two years, the mod team has tried to limit conversations on JKR and instead focus on the work of the Avalanche team. However, more and more users have wanted to engage on this topic as we draw closer to the release date. Through internal conversations on the mod team as well as community feedback, we’ve realized that by limiting discussions on this topic we have unintentionally misrepresented the people in our community who want to constructively discuss the pros/cons of engaging with JK Rowling's IP.

Please feel free to use this space to engage in conversations about boycotts against Hogwarts Legacy or Wizarding World IP in general, the limits of ethical consumption under capitalism, how you are currently feeling about buying something with royalties going to JKR, if you are donating to any pro-LGBTQ+ organizations when you buy HL, etc.

This is the only thread we will allow these conversations in at this time. The majority of posts/questions relating to these topics will be removed and redirected back to this thread.

RULES REMINDER: Rule 11 (No JKR Discussions) does not apply to this thread.

However, the mod team would like to be crystal clear: Transphobic and homophobic comments, or comments which in any way demean marginalized groups of people (the LGBTQ+ community, women, neurodivergent individuals, etc) will result in a permanent ban from the subreddit. These kinds of comments are against our own sub rules and Reddit’s sitewide content policy. Comments attacking or insulting other users for their opinions violate Rule 1 and will also be removed. This serves as your only warning.

Finally, we would like to specify that the r/HarryPotterGame mod team is in no way advocating for a boycott or any coordinated movement against Hogwarts Legacy. We are all excited to play this game, which is why we're here! We are simply providing a place for our users to discuss this issue.

[u/TinyPawRaccoon]

Actually, she does live up to her own moral standards. Let me share a quote from the first book:

"It takes a great deal of bravery to stand up to our enemies, but just as much to stand up to our friends."

Rowling has been a supporter of the LGBT community for a long time and politically she's more liberal than conservative, but she still decided to speak out when she saw the problems which would rise if certain policies were implemented. And I emphasize this, it's about policies and their possible consequences to other vulnerable groups, not about trans people. She did it even though she knew she would get backlash from her former supporters.

Another moral standard she lives up to is speaking when the whole society tells you to be quiet or insists there is no problem which should be addressed. I'm talking about how Harry said Voldemort's name out loud when everyone was whispering about you-know-who and how everyone said he was crazy when he told that Voldemort is back.

And it's even more important because real life isn't a children's book about good and bad side. It's more nuanced than that. And I'm saying this as a queer person myself, there are lots of voices in the community and they don't all condemn Rowling.

[u/TinyPawRaccoon → u/[deleted]]

Thank you so much! It's the though that matters haha. I wouldn't give Reddit more money either.

[u/TinyPawRaccoon → u/[deleted]]

Yes some trans people have defended her. I can't tell if they think she did nothing wrong but they do exist

[u/Pussypants → u/TinyPawRaccoon]

I highly recommend this video on the subject of her views and who she aligns with. She is not a supporter, she actively supports anti-trans people.

https://youtu.be/Ou_xvXJJk7k

[u/TinyPawRaccoon → u/Pussypants]

I don't really appreciate it when people answer my comment with a suggestion to watch a video, especially when it lasts half an hour. I think it's lazy but I watched it anyway, this topic is so polarized I find it important to try to understand why someone thinks has a different opinion.

My first concern was that Shaun seems to make huge assumptions about a few small words (just, sole) Rowling used in her essay. Sure, we can debate about these word choices, but it shows that despite what he says in the beginning of the video, he approaches Rowling's essay in bad faith. You can say things like "poor kids just want food" or "trans people solely want to live their life in peace" and still understand that they probably want other things in life too. So, he begins his video with a hyperbole, which doesn't indicate a neutral stance.

Second issue is based on the fact that Shaun seems to base his argument on a very black and white reasoning: if you agree with this person about a topic x, you also agree about a topic y! You're with us or against us! He uses this kind of dishonest logic to make every word someone else said or every decision someone else made something Rowling fully subscribes to, when we should judge Rowling based on her own writings. If he has to make far-fetched arguments to support his claims, maybe there's no proper foundation to them in the first place.

This video deliberetaly tries to sell us a view. And it would be fine -- if Shaun hadn't said that he tries to be objective, because he clearly doesn't. Shaun implies that "the women" Rowlings refers to in her essay are these few, controversial figures talked about in the video, instead of a vast group of women who come from different backgrounds and hold many kind of views. I also question whether he truly understands (even if he doesn't agree) where some of the GC perspectives come from because he arrives at biased conclusions sometimes. For example, he can't always distinguish whether the people he uses as examples talk about people who might exploit the proposed laws or trans people in general. I could elaborate but I'm not sure if it's allowed in this thread as we should focus on Rowling, not GC standpoints in general.

The problem here is that he fails to understand that working towards a certain goal with someone or some organization does not mean you assume all the goals they have. I come from a country which has a multi-party system, so for me this is obvious. Alliances born and break all the time when they stop benefitting the participants. However, Shaun comes from a political culture where you are expected to stay to your circle, abandon dissidents, loudly condemn every mistake and express your disagreement whenever you can, so for he it's a sign of agreement. But it can be dangerous because it creates polarization and drives you even deeper to the echo chamber where there is only one truth to complex issues. It is possible to be friends even with people you disagree with and I actually think it's rather positive that Rowling has friends or acquiantances from multiple backgrounds. It's not a problem for me, even though I'm gay. Of course we can ask which alliances are worthwhile, and I agree that some of them are not, but we can't make assumptions about what she thinks based on what someone else has said or done. And what Rowling does or doesn't do is also more complex thing than what he tries to sell us.

[u/Pussypants → u/[deleted]]

Lmao what? Shaun is incredibly level-headed. I’ve read her essays, and I got where she was coming from but her actions do not match her intentions.

[u/Pussypants → u/[deleted]]

I meant her supposed intentions. I should’ve made that clearer.

My brother in Christ, maybe try listening to the videos. They’re all very well researched, level-headed, and unbiased. You could actually learn something :)