Support NeoGAF

[Laieon]

"Real life quidditch"

At this point I almost wish the virus was more lethal.

The real question is when are we getting Quidditch World Cup 2, because god damn was that game fun.

 

[Tschumi]

i gotta say.

she was a darling of new social movements, a outspoken proponent for opening up society... then she said something borderline definitive about gender and this is where it's got her. i mean, i dunno, she's a single mother who made a literary universe, she's allowed to have her stance about anything, it shouldn't detract from her contribution to helping minorities and the downtrodden.

 

[Woggleman]

I find it funny how people who no doubt would call themselves feminists are okay with kicking a successful woman out of her own creation. It's disgusting and I am a progressive myself in many ways but this is the kind of stuff that makes people hate us.

 

[///PATRIOT]

Shameful.

 

[JusticeForAll]

And all these actors who quite probably would have remained nobodies without her jumping on the bandwagon are even worse then the HBO/WB executives. If this Radcliffe dude had the balls to just say: "no, not doing this without the lady who created HP", she would either be there or there would have been no reunion special.

Anyway, it just makes more normal people see the woke brigade for what they are. Which is in itself a good thing.

 

[Nobody_Important]

And all these actors who quite probably would have remained nobodies without her jumping on the bandwagon are even worse then the HBO/WB executives. If this Radcliffe dude had the balls to just say: "no, not doing this without the lady who created HP", she would either be there or there would have been no reunion special.

Anyway, it just makes more normal people see the woke brigade for what they are. Which is in itself a good thing.

Sorry if I am misinterpreting your post, but are you saying that the people involved with the Harry Potter movies (like Daniel Radcliffe for example) are obligated to defend her and her views just because they took part in successful movies that were based on her books? Even if they do not agree with them?


Because that seems like an example of really bad logic and really bad principles in my opinion.

 

[JusticeForAll]

Sorry if I am misinterpreting your post, but are you saying that the people involved with the Harry Potter movies (like Daniel Radcliffe for example) are obligated to defend her and her views just because they took part in successful movies that were based on her books?


Because that can seems like an example of really bad logic and really bad principles in my opinion.

They could have said: "While I disagree with her on certain issues, I still feel like she should be here because she created the universe we are all talking about here."

How is that bad principles? Are people incapable to be in the same room with someone they disagree with on some issue nowadays? What about: "I disapprove of what you say, but will defend to the death your right to say it."

 

[Nobody_Important]

They could have said: "While I disagree with her on certain issues, I still feel like she should be here because she created the universe we are all talking about here."

How is that bad principles? Are people incapable to be in the same room with someone they disagree with on some issue nowadays? What about: "I disapprove of what you say, but will defend to the death your right to say it."

Yeah I'm not going to get into this too deep. It comes too close to politics and you seem pretty entrenched in your view.

Agree to disagree I guess.

 

[captainraincoat]

Someone needs to sit these wokist fuckwits down and explain to them that if alien archaeologist were to find and examine their remains in 1000, hell 10,000 years time they'd be gendered based on their biology and genetics, not how they choose to "identify".

That's what being on the right side of history really means.

 

[StealthGoblin]

Sorry if I am misinterpreting your post, but are you saying that the people involved with the Harry Potter movies (like Daniel Radcliffe for example) are obligated to defend her and her views just because they took part in successful movies that were based on her books? Even if they do not agree with them?


Because that seems like an example of really bad logic and really bad principles in my opinion.

It isn’t about defending her views, but she is entitled to have them and discuss them. In the U.K. her views aren’t even that controversial. Excluding the creator from retrospectives is poor form regardless.

She can be invited on without anyone defending her views.

 

[Hoya Destroyer]

Crazy actions from crazy people. I do not like PC culture.

 

[BLAUcopter]

She still makin dat paper tho. Dat. Paper.

 

[Tams]

Sorry if I am misinterpreting your post, but are you saying that the people involved with the Harry Potter movies (like Daniel Radcliffe for example) are obligated to defend her and her views just because they took part in successful movies that were based on her books? Even if they do not agree with them?


Because that seems like an example of really bad logic and really bad principles in my opinion.

We can arrange a 'safe space' for you, if that's what you want.

You won't have to listen to our read anything that you don't want to.

 

[IDKFA]

J.K. Rowling had final refusal on all of the film's casting choices. These actors (who played the child roles) owe their success to not just the popularity of her novels, but also because she had a say if they were cast or not.

WB have made billions of the HP franchise and JK's novels.

They don't have to agree with her comments, but to not have her at the 20th anniversary or even mention her name is really disrespectful.

 

[Nobody_Important]

We can arrange a 'safe space' for you, if that's what you want.

You won't have to listen to our read anything that you don't want to.

I own the entire HP collection on audiobook and hardback. I have no issues at all with the books. I'm able to separate the art from the artist when I want to.

It isn’t about defending her views, but she is entitled to have them and discuss them. In the U.K. her views aren’t even that controversial. Excluding the creator from retrospectives is poor form regardless.

She can be invited on without anyone defending her views.

But she wasn't. And the world continues to spin on. Oh well. Maybe the next anniversary get together she will get an invite.

 

[TheDreadBaron]

This is what happens since we didn’t stop the furries… we all are to blame for this display of humanities mediocrity. At least a downward drug and booze filled spiral is enjoyable and entertaining, but this whimper of humanity into the oblivion of mediocrity is sad and the end. The monkeys have won the world already and humanity doesn’t even realize it yet

Humanity forgot that we are monkeys, that’s part of the whole problem to begin with. It’s good to strive for more but you can only expect so much out of some extra clever monkeys. You ever notice how much the reasoning for political division and conflict comes down to tribal lines? If you just switched the tribes’ fortunes people’s reasoning about why their tribe is right will also switch to fill in the gaps.

 

[StealthGoblin]

I own the entire HP collection on audiobook and hardback. I have no issues at all with the books. I'm able to separate the art from the artist when I want to.


But she wasn't. And the world continues to spin on. Oh well. Maybe the next anniversary get together she will get an invite.

If that’s your take, fine, but I still think it is pretty fucking awful to exclude the creator from a living retrospective, one that is still continuing to add to the lore.

 

[FunkMiller]

Rowling is being excluded for stating that women have concerns regarding transwomen using their spaces due to incidents in the past of male sexual predators identifying as female to stalk victims, that self I.D is not a good metric by which to decide upon someone's sex, and that biological sex is a real and immutable thing.

These are the opinions that she has voiced... that have led to her being called a nazi terf cunt, having her life threatened, and being excluded from a celebration of her life's work.

If you don't have a problem with this response to a woman voicing her rationally stated opinions (regardless of whether you agree with them or not), then I really don't know what to tell you.

 

[Nobody_Important]

If that’s your take, fine, but I still think it is pretty fucking awful to exclude the creator from a living retrospective, one that is still continuing to add to the lore.

And I disagree. Different people different opinions.

 

[Cockles & Whelks]

HBO is pretty scummy after they decided to put a disclaimer before Gone with the Wind, because you know, we all need big companies to teach us morality. The fact they are planning to make an Harry Potter TV show is embarrassing.

It's sad basically no one of the cast has taken the side of JK Rowling, because maybe she have controversial ideas on trans, but any people is a sum of lot of things, even if some of those are bad. The only smart person who did it was Evanna Lynch which said JK may be wrong but she's also a good woman, and even good person can have shitty ideas. No word from the main cast, I'm disappointed by Emma Watson, she claims she's a feminist but in this case she proves she's just a puppet.

Another part of this problem are the media. Every time you read something about this controversy, you always read "LGBT rights activists" or "people on the internet" which is beyond stupidity. Internet is the place of offended people nowadays, it's just a nonsense. And any time they talk about these militants, they don't refer to a specific organization, but just people who talk about human rights behind a keyboard and only when the router/modem is on. They are so lazy they do copy and paste from other sites without verify any source and these lies are repeated over and over.

Voldemort was the hero all along. https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-56444655

 

[StealthGoblin]

And I disagree. Different people different opinions.

What exactly do you disagree with?

Would you exclude G.R.R Martin from a retrospective on ASOIAF? Kojima on a retrospective on Metal Gear?

 

[Nobody_Important]

What exactly do you disagree with?

Would you exclude G.R.R Martin from a retrospective on ASOIAF? Kojima on a retrospective on Metal Gear?

Yes I would if they had made some statements that other people involved in their works did not want to be associated with. Rowling is of course entitled to speak her mind and have her opinions, but at the same time everyone else involved is entitled to stonewall her based on those statements and opinions. They are not obligated to associate with her just because they played in a movie that was based on her books despite what people have said here.



Freedom of speech goes both ways. You can say whatever the hell you want, but other people are allowed to judge you by those words and act accordingly.

 

[Drew1440]

Freedom of speech goes both ways. You can say whatever the hell you want, but other people are allowed to judge you by those words and act accordingly.

Sadly its gone beyond that, with people being dismissed from their jobs and having their careers lost simply because they don't believe in gender self identity. In some cases they have been threatened or attacked due to their views.

There is an ongoing debate if freedom of speech means freedom from consequences,
Like this bill that was recently passed in Scotland, anyone can define regular speech as hate speech, regardless of context.

 

[Nobody_Important]

There is an ongoing debate if freedom of speech means freedom from consequences,

Its not a debate. There is no freedom from consequences in todays society. You can say whatever you want about whatever you want to whoever you want without exception. You just have to be willing to deal with the consequences. That is just the way it works. This also applies to media personalities and celebrities. They can be called out and distanced from at a moments notice by sponsors and their peers if they make an offensive statement that goes against the grain. That is just a fact of life at this point. I am NOT saying it is fair 100% of the time or anything. I am just saying that is the way things go now.

 

[Tams]

Sadly its gone beyond that, with people being dismissed from their jobs and having their careers lost simply because they don't believe in gender self identity. In some cases they have been threatened or attacked due to their views.

There is an ongoing debate if freedom of speech means freedom from consequences,
Like this bill that was recently passed in Scotland, anyone can define regular speech as hate speech, regardless of context.

I met my first person who identified as 'non-binary' yesterday. Used 'she' and 'her' when talking to my friend about her as she was clearly a woman. Fucking bonkers.

My friend was complaining about how it's difficult to remember the correct way to call her. Thankfully this individual isn't my friend.

And Scotland has gone bonkers over wokeness. Won't step into politics anymore over it, but you get what you vote for.

Back on topic: shame on the cast for participating in this reunion.