JK Rowling discusses her wealth and philanthropy

Make your PR postings less obvious.

Cry harder R1, or maybe write her a letter?

What a weird response , R2.

That forehead contains Nicole Kidman levels of Botox. Not a tiny wrinkle in sight.

This is interesting as a canyon-wide gap between what Rowling has done with her money — it’s truly admirable — and what most people tuned into the news would say is the singular cause she cares about: declaring over and over that transgender people are not (and should not be allowed to claim that they are) the gender they feel themselves to be.

So when is she going to speak out in favor of abolishing heterosexual men from working in women’s prisons? If it’s about keeping women safe, why doesn’t she talk about the abuse and power imbalances that go on between male prison wardens and female inmates? There are female prisons in the UK where half the warden population is comprised of men.

We’re waiting Joanne……

Give it a rest R6.

It's appropriate for some men to work in some spaces with violent and aggressive women.

But if it's something you're so worried about why not start a campaign? It would help stop the number of horny female officers hooking up with lags as well.

Discussing charitable donations is a bit crass. She might as well say: "yeah I'm rich, but you should all think I'm amazing for giving some of that money to charity!"

It's in contrast to those whose donations only become public knowledge after their death, because they didn't want to make it public.

I donated to the Trans-Siberian Orchestra, so get off my ass!

R8, she isn't just giving her money to charity, she is setting up and working with the organisations to ensure the work needed is done.

And when you have entitled idiots invited to appear on tv and call her a rich evil woman who could be funding more important things than women's rights who can blame her for speaking about her good work.

For many people what she has done will never be enough.

And this is just what is in the public eye, there will be countless individual stories of generosity that aren't made public.

R5 - not true. She has defended the right of single-sex spaces for women and is clear that biological sex is a reality.

R7 so you’re saying that when women are violent and aggressive their strength equals men? Isn’t that the antithesis of the whole argument that women don’t have the same strength as men, which is the large part of the whole “Let’s keep men out of women’s spaces” debate?

See how quickly the goalposts get moved and how flimsy the arguments become when it comes to heterosexual men.

And “fags”? You’re showing your true colors MAGA.

Is saying trans people aren’t actually the gender they identify with so controversial. Maybe if someone has fully transitioned but many trans women still have penises. How are they women in reality?

[quote]But if it's something you're so worried about why not start a campaign? It would help stop the number of horny female officers hooking up with lags as well.

[quote]And “fags”? You’re showing your true colors MAGA.

This has made me laugh so much.

You're so desperate to be offended you misread "lags" as "fags" so can you claim you've been wounded by homophobia.

I was going to suggest you're Botox Chucky but you're too restrained for him.

I love that she does her diligence on these organizations - which isn't easy or fun to do. She probably was swindled at one time or some of the money went to some gala instead of the actual people in need.

She's a good egg - and she has been right about everything she has stated for biological women.

JK Rowling take on the recent Trans Phenomenon is basically what the wide general public's take on it is, so try to unclutch a little.

It has ALWAYS been, "Do your thing, but only women menstruate and give birth, and when they do we call them 'mothers', so let's not get crazy".

She's a great role model. One of the few to not let immense wealth corrupt her.

Do they count all those Knighted Russian Oligarchs in the list?

R14 Desperate is deliberately ignoring the question you were asked. Are women as strong as men or are they not? Why do men HAVE to work in women’s prisons if the point is to keep women safe from harm and abuse?

You Rowling defenders really are a cowardly bunch incapable of a coherent argument. Kind of like your leader who’s afraid to speak on it in public because her stance would crumble in two seconds if she did.

[quote] You Rowling defenders

that's an understatement

{quote][R14] Desperate is deliberately ignoring the question you were asked. Are women as strong as men or are they not? Why do men HAVE to work in women’s prisons if the point is to keep women safe from harm and abuse?

Some women are stronger than some men.

Most men are stronger than most women.

Hilarious. The PR attempts to make this aging hag seem relevant beyond her back catalogue of teeny bopper magic books and her bigoted perspective are so obvious. Weak effort.

R22 - as are the online attacks by fools like you to take down a successful, self-made woman who did nothing but not blindly accept the trans political agenda and stood up for biological women.

Giving away 200 million pounds to people in need is a really expensive PR tactic - particularly when we didn't know about a lot of this funding which she has been doing for years.

Troll. Everything she has said is true - and you can't refute it so you get pissy and want to take her down. Not everything is about trans - other people exist and there are boundaries for behavior and what's right.

R22 She's probably the most famous living author on the planet. She doesn't need PR. She doesn't agree with your views on trans and that's all you've got to hate her for.

Well not only is JK Rowling a generous philanthropist who supports vulnerable people, the British public agree with her position on the reality of biological sex.

She's famous but not relevant, r24. The last Harry Potter book was published during the Bush administration.

The only way she can get a headline is if she says something nasty about trans people. She's been scraping the bottom of that barrel and that's why she's mouthing off about asexuals and bragging about her philanthropy.

Even if you have a high opinion of her, you can't deny that she chases publicity.

R26 Someone whose books continue to be made into TV series cannot be called irrelevant.

She also hasn't said anything "nasty about trans people". Please give me one example of something transphobic she's said. It shouldn't take you very long as you're so sure about this.

[quote]and you can't refute it

Your meager points have already been refuted.

Trans women are to be kept from female prisons to protect the safety of women, yet not one word is said about the abuse female prisoners go through at the hands of heterosexual male prison guards. Nothing from Rowling or her ilk on changing that? If it's supposed to be about women's safety, why hasn't this issue taken up equal space?

Transwomen are to be kept from female sports because women aren't as strong as men, yet the excuse to keep male prison guards around female prisoners is because "Some women are stronger than men". Not only does that refute a major basis of your whole argument, somehow that same logic doesn't apply to athletic women who have trained for years or their whole lives for sports. Somehow, they're still inferior to men. By that logic then, wouldn't female cops and fireman be weaker than men as well?

Are only women who face the prospect of dealing with transmen suddenly inferior?

And what about male coaches who coach female sports? The majority of female teams are coached by men. How is that not a power imbalance in of itself? Wouldn't it be fairer to have girls coached by women so they're on an even playing field? How can a man understand the strength of any girl or women?

[quote]Not everything is about trans

The only people who are making everything about Trans is Rowling, Nancy Mace and their ilk. They create a problem by punching down on a small minority of society, high five each other when they've public relationed themselves a victory, and never address the problems that could possibly cripple their standing among white heterosexual men.

r29 does remind us that it was the simple statement "Women menstruate" to bring out the hordes and hordes of shriekers denouncing JK Rowling as "transphobic". That was the simple incident that ignited the crazed haters, most of whom likely have no idea this even happened. Shame on them for erasing real women.

I guess that means post menopausal women aren’t women.

Another example of her extreme stupidity.

Only women menstruate R30 and the “what about post menopausal women” isn’t the gotcha you think it is. In the prison population, around 20% of males are in for sex related offenses, females 2%. Trans women that are in prison, that number is close to 50% that are in for sex related offenses.

Your obtuseness isn’t working anymore. Most sane people can understand that most men aren’t rapists, but most sex crimes are committed by men.

Now GO DILATE!

That was a great read. Thanks for posting it OP

[quote]I guess that means post menopausal women aren’t women. Another example of her extreme stupidity.

You sound like the lawyer Robin White who made the argument that if a mother is allowed to take her infant son (A BIOLOGICAL MALE!) into a women's changing room then a 60 year old man (A BIOLOGICAL MALE!) should be allowed in there a well.

Some of you have short memories. Rowling used to get shit before she revealed her opinion on trans issues, mostly for being an average author.

She got pilloried when A Casual Vacancy (her first post Harry Potter) novel was released. By Christ it was shite.

History will be kind to JK Rowling, she is using her vast wealth to support causes that she believes in. She is also one of the few people who dare speak out against the mentally ill lunatics who think it’s completely normal for us all to have to say ‘people with penis’s, ‘people who menstruate’ and ‘birthing partner’.

They should spend their time and energy dealing with their mental health and their issues with hating women. But mostly they should fuck right off away from anything to do with the gay scene. We don’t want you with us, we don’t like you and we pity you.

[quote] But mostly they should fuck right off away from anything to do with the gay scene. We don’t want you with us, we don’t like you and we pity you.

We? Nice try.

R35 - nah, I ran out of pity a long time ago. Pity requires compassion for the misfortunes of others. They've used our compassion against us for far too long.

I'm still laughing at the troon who misread LAGS as FAGS and claimed I was being homophobic.

She's only gone and done it again!

The JK Rowling Women's Fund has been launched, supporting women fighting for their rights.

[quote]The J.K. Rowling Women’s Fund (JKRWF) offers legal funding support to individuals and organisations fighting to retain women’s sex-based rights in the workplace, in public life, and in protected female spaces. It provides women with the means and confidence to bring to justice cases that make legal precedents, force policy change, and make positive contributions to women’s lives in the future.

[quote]We fund legal representation for women and organisations who:

[quote]Have lost their livelihoods or are facing tribunals because of their expressed beliefs

[quote]Are being forced to comply with unreasonable inclusion policies regarding single sex spaces and services, or female-only clubs and events

[quote]Are challenging legislation which takes away the freedoms or protections women are entitled to

[quote]Don’t have adequate means to bring actions to court or to defend themselves

[quote]The JKRWF does not hire a lawyer on your behalf, so you must already have sought legal representation, and have a clear desired outcome to your case.

Just in the last week a lesbian journalist was saying a booking company had cancelled her lesbian event ticketing because it was "trans exclusionary".

And the Scottish nurse who was suspended from her job because she didn't want a male doctor in the female changing room is now suing the union she was a member of for years because they refused to support her.

They just want to pee 🥺🥺🥺

And all the troons are so upset that a woman is doing something for women they've inundated the website with spam requests and threats to piss outside Harry Potter sites.

Charming bunch of ladies.

Protect The Dolls rally in London.

I can’t actually work out the gender of the protesters.

R39 It all seems a bit like closing the stable door after the horse has bolted, given the recent Supreme Court ruling.

It's also interesting that they don't find a lawyer on your behalf, so anyone seeking to make use of the fund has to find their own lawyer who may not want to even commit until funding has been provided and that won't be certain at the time of your initial conversation.

It's not a bad idea per se, I just wonder how much demand there is for it and how much it will actually be used in practice.

I think that's a skewed take R43.

The law has now been clearly established with Maya Forstater, Allison Bailey, Jo Phoenix, Rachel Meade, Roz Adams etc all winning their tribunals and many others have settled their claims. And Joanna Cherry forced the venue in Edinburgh to back down after they cancelled her appearance because she is a TERF.

Lawyers are clearer now what the law is and whether a case can be won or not and what the JKR fund means it that the claimants won't need to crowdfund like many did in the past, such as Sandie Peggie.

The JKR fund means that organisations will think twice about whether they really want to go down the route of cancelling TERF bookings etc when they know there is a chance of legal action and they know there is a chance of legal action they will 1. find expensive to defend and 2. will likely lose.

JKR has challenged Boy George, who called her a "rich bored bully".

There are many differences between us, George, but some are particularly relevant to this debate.

1. You're a man and I'm a woman.

2. You've been wealthy and famous since your early 20s. I didn't become well known until I was well over 30.

3. I've never been given 15 months for handcuffing a man to a wall and beating him with a chain.

4. I believe in freedom of speech and belief.

For more than half my life I was a regular anonymous person. Some of those years were spent in poverty. That's why I understand the importance of single-sex spaces for women who're reliant on state-funded services. That's why I understand why mixed public changing rooms are a problem for women. That's why I have a problem with men 'identifying' into women's rape crisis centres, domestic abuse and homeless shelters that are supposed to be single-sex. I don't stand against gender identity ideology because I personally still need those services, but because my life has taught me exactly how vulnerable women are when they don't have the money/influence I have now.

You yourself have been convicted of violent assault. The overwhelming number of people who commit crimes of violence are male, just like you. That's why I don't want to see men identifying into women's prison cells or any of the spaces mentioned above. Not all men are violent or predatory, but enough are to make safeguarding necessary.

Lastly, I'm a writer who believes in freedom of speech and belief. As we both know, the safe, fashionable thing in the arts world right now is to do exactly what you're doing: parrot TWAW and sneer at the unenlightened plebs who think sex is important and matters. For a man who was once all about non-conformity, George, you couldn't have become more predictably or more tediously conformist.

The girls are fighting!

It's a pretty good mike drop, I grant her that.

[quote]For a man who was once all about non-conformity, George, you couldn't have become more predictably or more tediously conformist.

She's got a point.

All of that and she will mostly be remembered for being an insufferable, nasty, vile cunt. Nobody involved with any of her works (books & movies) wants to have anything to do with her and have all distanced themselves from her and come out publicly against her. The public have pulled away from her legacy which she has repeatedly sullied.

She talks about tedious but that long winded, ranting lecture she gives Boy George at R45 says more about how much of a tedious cunt she is than anything else.

She has become a very unpleasant and very disliked person. If that's the kind of legacy she wants to leave to be remembered by then that's her choice.

R49=trans loon!

R50

With the exception of the trans loons and the authoritarian and censorious reactionary left and right, JK Rowling is popular for her writing, her philanthropy and for being principled.

Even people who don't agree with can admire her for being true to herself and not submitting to bullies.

[quote]The PR attempts to make this aging hag seem relevant beyond her back catalogue of teeny bopper magic books and her bigoted perspective are so obvious.

She's writing a detective series for adults now, it sells well. The latest one is Amazon's fourth-ranked in private investigator mysteries and it doesn't come out till September.

725 likes for Boy George’s comment, 52k likes for Rowling’s response.

Up to 68k now with 2 million views.

Why Boy George is such a terrible advocate for trans activism is 3 fold.

1. He was famous for being a man who dressed "like a woman". No one believed he was ever a woman, just a man who dressed "like a woman".

2. Despite being a camp effeminate flamboyant stereotypical homosexual he is still capable of sexual violence and went to prison for it.

3. Never trust anything a junkie has to say.

Boy George 1.1k likes for his comment about Rowling, 104k likes for Rowlings response. A classic case of don’t mess with the bull you’ll get the horns.

While I don't disagree with Rowling's missive against Boy George I'm not sure that high volumes of likes on Twitter gives the best impression, given it's largely been taken over by the right wing.

After all, pro-MAGA and pro-DJT tweets usually get a hell of a lot of likes. Not sure how many would hold that up as a sign of quality, though.

With JK, it feels like most of her Twitter diatribes are composed while she thinking "ooh this is a good one!" It's like she's visualising the adoring replies she'll get as she's writing. Admittedly that's part of what being an author's all about, so it's on brand, but it's not so obvious in other people and makes me wonder how much of it's genuine activism and how much is for the adoration.

Also, it's rare her tweets contain grammatical errors or typos, which shows she likely re-reads and edits them several times. Again, while that's not unusual for an author when they're working, it feels less 'off the cuff' than tweets usually are and also makes me think she sometimes has a hand in composing them.

Pretty sure she is using ChatGPT to edit.

She sounds either like a practicing drunk or a dry drunk, ranting and lecturing on and on and on.

R57, do you *really* think it's right wing to side with a woman who was the victim of sexual and violent assaults (her ex husband has admitted abusing her) and who has used her wealth to fund rape crisis centres, refuges and rescue women from the Taliban over a man who went to prison for assaulting a prostitute he had hired?

Nobody here gives a fuck about anything you're talking about R60. This is a gay site. Gay males.

Yes. We all know you're literally desperate for someone to fight with you or get into a LOOOOONNNNNNGGGGGG winded theoretical conversation with you so you can lecture them for hours and talk at them. But as you can see - clearly evidenced from the 60 posts in this thread - nobody gives a fuck about you or your obsessive mental issues here.

George is that you at R61?

It’s the trans loon r62. His main arguments are “gay men don’t care about this” and “this is a frau cunt issue” to “this never happens”. I think his coloncunt has gone septic.

Boy George said recently in one of his replies that there are two kinds of people, nice people and cunt, of which JK is the latter. This is rich coming from somebody who has been a huge nut to many people throughout the years, before he was famous, after he was famous, and when he was peddling his karma/ Buddhist fake bullshit.

I really hope that one day somebody writes a book about Boy George, because if you thought his original (brilliant) autobiography Take It Like A Man was juicy, you really need to know what he wasn’t spilling.

These days George is broke, his voice is completely shot, and he is desperate for attention, as he always has been.

R60 No I don't think it's right wing to side with JK Rowling. And if you'd read my post properly you'd have realised that.

I said that Twitter has been largely taken over by the right wing, but I didn't say that it's only now populated by those on the right.

It just made me smile that people were crowing over the likes her message had received, as though that meant the post could never be questioned by anyone. Like I said, MAGA loons get many likes on there, so it's not always a yardstick for quality.

r12 Bless your heart

R63 has given up saying TRANS TROLL (when several longtime DLers turned the tables) and has changed it to TRANS LOON.

Projection. She comes here to DL for no other reason.

You are the TRANS LOON r63

R66 - still howling at the R12 poster reading a reference to LAGS (prisoners) as FAGS (homosexuals engaged in sexual activity involving the faecal exit channel) and decided I was MAGA.

R63 you’re both the trans loon and the trans troll, but you’re not a woman.

Now run along your rot pocket needs tending to!

Thanks for letting us know you're just as bigoted and homophobic as MAGA r68.

Go eat your own sausages and paint a picture and be angry and young. But you're old now. Ooops.

Or take it to your FACEBOOK group. The one that didnt work because no one likes you.

R68 That's a bizarre way to describe anal sex on a website mostly populated by gay men. It seems the mask may have slipped slightly.

Makes me laugh, as many who say they agree with JKR on this issue rarely have an issue with same-sex attracted people. But using phrases like "faecal exit channel" makes me think you probably do have an issue with them.

[quote]Cry harder

The mask always slips with these trolls. They forget that they're on a gay, left-leaning website and think they're still on X or Truth Social and default to their smooth-brained MAGA taunts like "Cry harder" when someone challenges them. The same with using "virtue signalling" to describe basic empathy or "woke" as a pejorative term. They eat, sleep and breathe in conservative echo chambers and can't comprehend that normal people don't talk this way.

The thing about conservatives is that they're very dumb and have no analytical or even basic thinking skills, and they believe everyone else is exactly like them. ZERO self awareness with these people. They always out themselves. It's hilarious how stupid they are.

[quote][R68] That's a bizarre way to describe anal sex on a website mostly populated by gay men. It seems the mask may have slipped slightly.

Yes, I am not an experienced Datalounger, I am an undercover MAGA housewife using the term "homosexuals engaged in sexual activity involving the faecal exit channel". I'm so sorry my Eric Stoltz prosthetic mask has slipped.

R73 Well you jest, but phrases like that are used to make gay sex sound as unpleasant as possible and hence isn't generally the way gay men would describe it.

Though browsing through your posts made me realise you were the poster who asked for advice about sleeping in an airport. I gave you advice to get a hotel room and go to bed as early as possible. I hope you had a good break regardless!

R73 is one of the fixated anti-trans loons who makes everything about their obsession, the type actively tanking DL for the past few years. They're working overtime to cast JK Rowling as a sympathetic hero when their posting history is a mess of unnecessary mocking references to trans and non-binary people. Read between the lines. These trolls are relentless.

R73 probably isn't even gay, just another conservative Brit stinking up DL with their regressive views. A gay man wouldn't describe gay males that way, it's derogatory in the same way homophobes automatically and exclusively equate a gay male identity with anal sex. Actual gay males know 1) there is a lot more to the identity than sexual practices and 2) (most revealingly) that not all gay men enjoy anal sex and a fair number are ambivalent to it or turned off by it. "Gay men" = "butt sex" is about as regressive and ignorant as a homophobe can be.

My god you Americans are so sensitive!

Btw do you know that "fagg0t" in Britain is not generally a homosexual but a meat ball in gravy? And that "fags" are generally cigarettes?

Goodness me.

IDGAF what words you use in your country, you're not gay and only come here to ridicule LGBT people and stir up shit. Fuck off.

As I say in Paris, je suis un homosexual.

[quote]I hope you had a good break regardless!

I'm not the poster you were talking to but that was very nice of you.

It's such a nice surprise to find good-natured comments on DL, especially at this point in a thread.

I'm a Brit as well and - while we rarely use f*ggot as slur - we know what it means and some do use it (because Americanisms are so prevalent these days).

R80 Well, there's no sense arguing ad nauseum and, while browsing, I thought "oh I recognise that comment". Haha. It's not as though I dislike people on a personal level, I just disagree with them on some things.

I'm rich, so all you bitches can fuck off!

“Sir” Stephen Fry: JK Rowling has been “radicalised by TERFs”!

She has “started to make these peculiar statements and had very strong, difficult views”!

“She seemed to wake up, or kick, a hornets’ nest of transphobia, which has been entirely destructive. I disagree profoundly with her on this subject”!

“I am angry she does not disavow some of the more revolting and truly horrible, destructive — violently destructive — things that people say. She does not attack those at all”!

“She says things that are inflammatory and contemptuous, mocking and add to a terribly distressing time for trans people”!

“She has been radicalised, I fear, and it may be she has been radicalised by TERFs but also by the vitriol that is thrown at her!”

“It is unhelpful and only hardens her and will only continue to harden her, I am afraid. I am not saying that she not be called out when she says things that are really cruel, wrong and mocking”!

“She seems to be a lost cause for us”!

“She has crowed at the success of legislation in Scotland and elsewhere declaring things about gender”!

“So I am very happy to go on the record to say that I am really angry about that”!

“My view about all things of a sharp and difficult nature is that it is much more important to be effective than to be right”!

“When it comes to the transphobia issue it is right to remind people that trans people are here and that they are hurting and that they are being abominably treated”!

“The recent way the culture has gone against them means there is a great deal of bullying, violence and suicide and genuine pain and agony in the trans community”!

“To scream ‘transphobe’ at anybody who does not buy into every single aspect of that particular person’s trans views is so self harming. It does not get the thing done. You have to let people love you”!

Stephen Fry's interventions has led to the rediscovery of his multiple opinions on adult/child sex, including his claim that people outraged by paedophiles are actually titillated by the scandal. No Stephen, we think child sex is wrong.

His views on trigger warnings aren't controversial but suggesting people damaged by child sex abuse are displaying self pity.

Another win for JK Rowling.

MAGALounge.

In the UK we call people like R85 a nonce.

It's funny when some public figures do nothing more than an air an opinion about JK Rowling and suddenly the knives come out in their droves.

Gender critics will often parrot each other when people criticise them, by saying: "we'll say what we like!" or "we won't be silenced", etc, but presumably Stephen Fry should keep silent about his views.

And it's not like they just stick to criticising his views, they'll besmirch everything about him. They'll call him pompous, out of touch, unintelligent, etc etc. Again, just for speaking out. They've become those they've always criticised.

If I run a quick search on Twitter (and no I'm not going to that cesspool) I'm 99% sure I'll also find gender critics saying homophobic things about him as well. Heaven forbid you go against the JK army.

R87 did you read what Fry said about Rowling?

The idea that JKR - a lifelong financial and supporter of organisations helping the most vulnerable - has been "radicalised" into believing female only spaces are important is misogynistic bullshit and removes her agency for having her own intentions and beliefs.

As someone who spent time in prison I don't imagine Fry would ever want to allow male rapists into women's prisons because they wear pink and call themselves Sue-Ellen but that's what JKR is opposed to and that's what he is ultimately condemning.

As for calling him pompous and out of touch, do you not think it is odd for a very posh wealthy man to tell vulnerable women how they should run their own services?

Would it have been appropriate to tell gay men they should be more inclusive and provide services for straight men with AIDS and HIV in the 1980s?

Fry is so patronising and sexist.

Oh, the silly little woman is radicalised. Why isn’t she soft, and kind, and supportive?

Fry is really turning into General Melchett.

After the ridiculous tax lawyer Jolyon Maughan said he had spoken to many of JK Rowling's friends and they all now despaired of her, JK Rowling tweeted

[quote]It is a great mistake to assume that everyone who claims to have been a friend of mine was ever considered a friend by me.

And she's offered to fund travel for trans personality India "Botox Chucky" Willoughby to go to Iran after Willoughby voiced her support for the Iranian regime. JKR has shown extensive support for for Iranian women fighting for their rights. India would suit a headscarf, it would hide his male pattern baldness and forehead issues.

Never trust a Jolyon.

R91 None of that helps her look normal, though.

The first tweet is another way of saying: "Stephen Fry may have considered me a friend, but I didn't consider him one". She might as well have added: "and he smells!" He read the audiobooks for all of the Harry Potter novels. She's complimented him on his performance several times and said she couldn't imagine anyone else doing them. Plus, let's face it, she likely had a list of many actors who'd have gladly recorded them. I've also seen several interviews where they were chatting together and seemed very friendly and comfortable in each other's company.

Now I'm not saying they were ever the best of friends, but her above tweet is implying she didn't even really like him that much before. Which I just don't believe. It therefore comes across as a bit immature. The way a child might struggle to take criticism from someone they like, so their instinct is to utter a glib response - rather than either ignoring it or at least being honest. Even something like: "I used to get on well with Stephen, but over the years we've drifted apart and I'm disappointed by his recent comments" then go on to say why he's wrong.

As for the India 'war', even some of her fans seem to be getting a bit pissed off with it, because she's often taking screenshots of Willoughby's tweets and sharing them - violating the block many of them have placed. I get Rowling thinks Willougby is an idiot, but the fact she's constantly screenshotting and sharing tweets shows it's become a bit more than just a brief disagreement. Willoughby is the more unhinged of the two, but I do wonder about her.

And I don't even disagree with her basic stance. I just think she could sometimes self-reflect a little. But she won't, because she seems incapable of acknowledging maybe she could sometimes do things differently and many of her supporters are the same. It's like when you criticise Trump to MAGAs - ie a red rag to a bull. The walls come down and the defensive (and often abusive) comments spew forth.

R93, we all have a different view of what normal is. I admit I'm biased because she once liked a reply I tweeted, and replied to me.

When celebrity after celebrity who have previously worked with her is invited to denounce JKR she is more than entitled to respond. She has been lied about repeatedly, misrepresented, called a Holocaust denier, a racist, etc and she is done with all that shit. I admire her for it, you cringe. That's fair.

And India Willoughby is an abusive man who lies and lies about her and uses JKR as clickbait to boost his profile. Again, I think she is entitled to respond and mock her bullies. This is someone who 5 years ago was trying to get a profile as the "trans Katie Hopkins", wearing a MAGA hat and calling for refugees to be drowned. Now he tries to get attention supporting Iran.

One of the repeated slurs against her is that she is unhinged, mentally unwell, radicalised and obsessed. I see a woman who uses humour and ridicule to fight the men attacking her, the men who want to reduce women's rights.

[quote] Now I'm not saying they were ever the best of friends, but her above tweet is implying she didn't even really like him that much before. Which I just don't believe.

You’re underestimating his likability. He seems like a nightmare. Even if I made the sound commercial decision to hire him to narrate my children’s books for his creamy baritone, I would likewise remain professional acquaintances rather than friends.

[quote] It therefore comes across as a bit immature. The way a child might struggle to take criticism from someone they like, so their instinct is to utter a glib response - rather than either ignoring it or at least being honest.

She was responding to Jolyon Maugham, who is the Shaun King of TRAs. She wasn’t nasty to Stephen, but there is no reason to mince words not polite to her.

[quote]Even something like: "I used to get on well with Stephen, but over the years we've drifted apart and I'm disappointed by his recent comments" then go on to say why he's wrong.

Your suggestion as to a kinder, gentler way of responding to Fry, which is incredibly sanctimonious, is exactly why she didn’t consider him a friend.

He wants her to be nice, feminine, non-argumentative, not-mocking, to be a gentle. Nicer to the men. And he is annoyed that she is powerful enough to decenter male anpplause and popularity from her life and is wealthy and brave enough to say and do exactly as she pleases.

Frank Skinner said that Stephen Fry is a stupid person’s idea of a clever person. Frank is a very clever person. And I agree with Frank.

R95 He's definitely a popular figure. A well known actor, prolific author, host of QI for years, etc. I can definitely accept he's not everyone's cup of tea. Also he's not stupid. If people think he's an arsehole, that's fine as it's based on his behaviour, but he's not a stupid person. Though I think the quote you highlight is from Julie Burchill - according to the link below anyway.

Some of the response from her fans I saw was homophobic, too. Pointing out his sexuality in a negative fashion and also highlighting the age between him and his husband. Obviously not to everyone's taste, but the younger of two was 28 when they married - ie well into adulthood and able to make his own choices.

The tweet about friends was a dig at Fry. Maugham implied they were friends, JK was basically saying "no we weren't".

My 'suggestion' wasn't to be kinder or gentler, just more mature. And I'd give the same advice to anyone: male or female. It's lazy to suggest any criticism of a woman is because she's a woman.

[quote]The tweet about friends was a dig at Fry. Maugham implied they were friends, JK was basically saying "no we weren't".

No it wasn't - it was about the "so many of JKR's friends" who Jolene Maugham tweeted about, as below. Firstly I doubt all these "ex friends" are contacting Jolene but she is right to say these anonymous people are not people she considered to be friends.

[quote]Really creditable this, from Stephen Fry. I've spoken to so many of JKR's once friends who now despair at her privately but won't do so publicly, which is very much the British way and why nothing ever changes for the better. So well done Stephen.

As for the homophobic comments, I have seen some, but they were generally related to Fry's multiple comments over many years about children having consensual sex with adults and the idea that victims of child sexual abuse aren't really traumatised. He clearly thinks a lot about child sex, if not the act itself then he considers it from an intellectual and moral perspective.

And there have been comments about the age gap with his husband. As Mrs Merton would have said, what first attracted 27 year old Elliot Spencer to the multi millionaire 57 year old Stephen Fry? But then those comments have been made by many Dataloungers.

[quote]And there have been comments about the age gap with his husband. As Mrs Merton would have said, what first attracted 27 year old Elliot Spencer to the multi millionaire 57 year old Stephen Fry? But then those comments have been made by many Dataloungers.

Yep but it has no relevance. The reason I mentioned it was because it shows how - once someone disagrees with JK - many will attack all aspects of a person. Rather than sticking to what they said. Gay bloke said something bad? Let's slur 'em!

It's part of the weird cult-like status she has among many.

It has relevance in that there is a laundry list of reasons from his public behaviour, his emotional instability, his irresponsibility and his pomposity as to why one would chose not to be friends with Stephen Fry - as opposed to merely civil.

I don't think his sexuality or the age of his husband are reasons not to criticise him, though. I know you're not saying that, but I'm talking about many JK supporters who were raising those specific points as a negative.

If gay men do or says something stupid, it's kinda sad how many people will use their sexuality in a list of negative reasons about that person.

After all, when straight men criticise her, I honestly can't see her fans saying: "Why listen to this guy? He's straight and he's married to a woman that's younger than him!" They'd focus on what he'd said.

And the fact there's a difference is disappointing.

In the first line I meant "reasons to criticise him".

I need to proofread more!