lapsariangiraff

@efesell: LOL you stole the words out of my mouth. Bravo.

@shtinky: Very helpful, clearly in the spirit of the thread. 10/10.

For everyone else, RF Kuang's Poppy War series and Babel (novel) are fantastic.

If you want to hear great music you might not find otherwise, hyperpop is just loaded with trans creators (100 Gecs and Sophie come to mind,) more accessibly the album Preacher's Daughter by Ethel Cain is fantastic, and if you still have a place in your heart for ska like I do, We Are The Union is led by a trans woman. (Ordinary Life is a sort of coming-out album and it's great.) The bassist from the same band, Jer, is nonbinary and they put out a great solo album BOTHERED/UNBOTHERED.

I believe the developer of Citizen Sleeper, Gareth Damien Martin, is nonbinary. That game really resonates with a lot of trans and queer themes, while also just being a great story and visual novel built on TTRPG mechanics. One of my favorites from last year.

For movies and shows, Desiree Akhavan, a bisexual Iranian-American woman, made The Bisexual (on Hulu,) and Appropriate Behavior (a short indie film you can rent on Amazon,) and both are great explorations of messy queerness. A lot of inclusive Netflix shows tend to fall into the trap of portraying trans or gay people as Perfect Snowflakes who are just so wholesome and innocent and can never do wrong and are therefore boring.

@thepanzini: "Isn't Harry Potter bigger than JKR at this point" is like saying "Isn't Tesla bigger than Elon Musk at this point." Harry Potter is entirely her property. She takes a healthy chunk out of every bit of that business.

To repeat a couple of things that have had to be said multiple times in this thread:

-No one is saying the game is transphobic, or the franchise, just that its profits go to fund transphobic groups in the real world. Which is worse.
-You can boycott one bad thing without boycotting literally every other bad thing, this is an unfair purity test applied only to progressive causes. (Though I'd say, I don't follow your logic in this specific case either. Warner Brothers isn't who to boycott, just anything from The Wizarding World franchise. Boycotting Mortal Kombat doesn't send a statement on JK Rowling, that makes no sense. WB is only following profit incentives like any other company, so the point is to make HP less profitable or too much of a PR mess to touch, like the recent third Fantastic Beasts movie.)
-Finally, no one involved is expecting to literally tank the sales of Hogwarts Legacy, or change the entire conversation around JK Rowling or trans rights with one game. (At least, I hope not, they'd be delusional.) People are chipping away at this one moment at a time, whenever attention is already on a new Harry Potter release. It will be consistent, and ongoing, and loud. It has been for the past few years. I remember just a couple years ago people were much more ambivalent and apathetic about this topic, but we have a lot more support. For example, you're saying now, "I understand JK Rowling is transphobic," but most people wouldn't even admit that then. It's not glamorous, but constantly reinforcing this point is having an effect. I don't begrudge bystanders for not seeing that as much, but it's working. Like I mentioned in another post, we're pushing the boulder up the hill a little at a time.

@grayfox666: This is probably the one you're thinking about. It was only on the main page for a day or so. It's an understandable mistake to make, because Jessie Earl has been pretty active on Twitter (plus, if you follow any streamers like Hasanabi, Vaush, or Keffals, it's easy to see her and the most ardent Twitter users as synonymous,) but in this article she specifically says that folks aren't bigots if they play the game. If the entire article is too long for you (though I do recommend it,) she says this at the end, in the second to last or last paragraph.

Given your post, I'm sure there's a lot about her article you disagree with, but she's not calling people transphobic for playing it -- just that they aren't effective trans allies and unlikely to make any other real sacrifice.

@ares42:It is a long, slow process. And from a certain vantage point, I can see that as a passive stance. But the unfortunate reality is that the only way progress is made is through minorities being more vocal pushing the boulder up the hill. These same arguments against confrontation, in favor of civility have come up again and again, from the suffragettes to gay marriage.

Some of y'all are arguing against a strawman.

-@grayfox666 No one here has called anyone else in the thread a bigot. I understand there are obnoxious Twitter lefties, but it feels weird to revert to the worst version of this argument from Twitter when there are people here talking much more reasonably. You're also implicitly tying Jessie Earl's article, which made a huge point of not calling people bigots, to the most unhinged Twitter users.

-@tradee9691 Everything has always been political, some of us just have the luxury to ignore it.

@brian_ People will bring up anything they can think of to deflect from the main point and source of discomfort. I don't think it's malicious, just reflexive.

@retris A-men.

@tradee9691:Everyone thinks they're a good person, it's worthless for me to tell you if I am :P

There are plenty of people that support the trans community but also loved (or continue to love) Harry Potter. In fact, a lot of those people are trans themselves. That's partially what is very irritating about this discourse -- the presumption that trans people are being online slacktivists having fun feeling superior to the punching bag of the day because they have nothing better to do, when really, a lot would like nothing better than to not have to think about this. A lot of trans people growing up loved Harry Potter, and only stopped because they literally couldn't interact with any of it without thinking about the woman who wants them dead.

As far as what anyone in this camp can do, there are lots of options, and I don't fully agree with a lot of them, but for personal, not ideological reasons. In short, I have my own problems with a few of these but they're better than nothing, and some of these are a disagreement of tactics, nothing more. I'm stacking these from least to most effort.

• Buy the game and enjoy it without talking about it nonstop. Everyone can enjoy the stuff they enjoy, but talking about it in super public places can just make any trans people overhearing you or seeing your posts uncomfortable. This option is not the best thing in the world to do, but it's a lot better than how a lot of people are acting, from otherwise well-meaning allies getting defensive and publicly trying to absolve themselves of any guilt or judgment, "I'm a good person, you see!" Or the exact opposite, trolls buying the game and gloating about it, replying to every person on the internet they can find that they're "buying the deluxe edition to support free speech." Those are both tasteless, for wildly different reasons.
• Buy the game later, on sale. If you must play the game, you can get it for cheaper and give less money to a harmful cause.
• Buy the game used. This will be harder/near impossible on PC, and physical copies are rarer, but if you buy this used in the future, no additional royalty checks will go to Rowling at all. There are also less... legal ways you can get at this concept, which I will not advocate for publicly.
• Do any of the top three and donate to trans charities, or raise for them.This is an interesting one which people disagree with even within trans circles. Now, this one gives me a bit of a weird feeling in my gut, because it feels a bit like a game of Tug of War, and you just voluntarily walk forward for a second only to go "no no no guys, I'm going to tug back extra hard later," but it's also not the worst. This is more effective for public figures who can raise a lot more than what they paid for the game with their platform.

Now, all of these involve playing the game, since you asked what compromise involves still playing the game for people who want to, but there are other things you can do. For instance, there is no shortage of fantasy RPGs about wizards at school.

As to your last question, that's a lot stickier. I think anyone who says they love all people, who wants to be supportive of the trans community, should feel at least a little guilt about playing the game. Someone who does that shows they care more about this specific game, whether that's due to their attachment to Harry Potter, or just because they think it looks like a fun game, than the wellbeing of trans people. This is the point a lot of people get hung up on, because they hear that and think, "you're calling me a bad person." But that's not what I mean. I literally mean exactly what I'm saying -- that people who do this care more about their personal entertainment than trans people. It's okay -- most people do, even our allies. It's easy to say "trans women are women," "I support trans rights," and a lot harder to make personal sacrifices, even just a simple videogame.

But this reality makes a lot of people uncomfortable. So they turn to their friends, to people on the internet, maybe even some trans people: "can't I be a good person and play this game?" Or they lash out and say, "you're being unreasonable, you're being picky, you're trying to tell everyone what to do, this is why no one likes you, no one will want trans rights if you act like this." Either way trans people are seen as inflicting themselves on everyone else's conscience. If we didn't exist, if we didn't speak up, everyone could play Hogwarts Legacy and be comfortable. But we do exist, and we're very loud about our problems with buying this game, so we're seen as the aggressors, even if we have no actual power.

Anyone can play the game. They just shouldn't expect trans people who know to be happy about it. And honestly? That's a minor inconvenience compared to what's coming down the road for transgender people in the United States.

@tradee9691: If you genuinely want me to tell you why a dead guy is doing less harm here and now than a currently living, fabulously wealthy anti-trans activist working in coordination with conversion therapists, lobbyists, and outright fascists, then I'm happy to explain it. Note how I said, "can no longer harm anyone." I never said he was fine, just that money to his estate doesn't have a direct line to harming people today the way money to JK Rowling does.

@tradee9691: I understand that post was pretty harsh. I actually don't take any issue with calling it "the movement" or anything like that. I took no issue with your grammar or the exact word you used -- I think this is a common and popular misconception about trans people, that we're unreasonably picky. In fact, I agree that everyone who wants to play the game should do so. (The difference is that I think trans people have the right to judge anyone who buys this knowing the context. We're 1% of the population, and it'll never go further than a stink-eye interpersonally. Some people buying the game, however, treat this incredibly minor inconvenience as a cross to die upon, and complain that they're still a good person and a good ally, and that it's unfair to be thought less of. That, I have a big problem with, but that's not what you're doing.)

What I was upset about was the idea behind what you said, regardless of the words employed -- namely, that everyone involved had no intentions of following through. At the end of the day, we can only speak for ourselves with certainty (I can certainly work on this in some ways) and saying that came off as very dismissive. Now that you've clarified that you don't think we're all terminally online, doing it for social clout, not loving our life in the real world, posturing, deep down wanting to play it, I have no qualm with you.

@tradee9691: Wow, you're accepting of the movement. How gracious. Almost covers the fact you just called everyone involved a clout shark. How rude, dude. I know you won't believe me when I say this -- because you've already decided that, no matter what people say here, they're "posturing" -- but I won't buy it. I gave away my books years ago, not because of any material harm (there is none,) but because of how much it hurt to even look at them. Haven't seen the movies in ages. It's not clout. It's principle.

I'm glad it's a choice for you, genuinely. Enjoy the game. But don't project your personal feelings on the matter onto everyone else.

(If it was any other boycott, like that ridiculous Modern Warfare 2 PC boycott back in 2009, I'd agree with you. Gamers tend to boycott over the silliest shit and never back it up. Also, you can't honestly be still making the same tired Michael Jackson comparison we've heard for years, can you? He's dead and can no longer harm anyone, JK Rowling isn't. It's not difficult.)

@apewins: It's not an issue of "leads" to another holocaust. We're already in it. Just today, South Dakota passed a bill banning gender affirming care for transgender youth, and it's the second state to do so in the US. Genspect, an anti-trans lobbyist group, openly advocates for hormones and all gender affirming care to be banned up to the age of 25. Donald Trump has started his presidential campaign on the promise to ban ALL transitioning and even "gender ideology" as a subject. (Edit: Even more context -- the UK has risked Scotland getting even more antsy for independence just to strike down a Gender Recognition Certificate bill passed in Scotland. In 2023 alone, AKA for about a month, 287 anti-LGBTQ bills have been introduced in the US. 287! Most of which apply to trans people or draconian anti-drag laws [which by the by would take us back to the era of women's fashion being policed for gender nonconformity. you know -- the early 20th century.] Many of the sponsors of these bills are citing JK Rowling as someone who brought this to their attention. Anti-trans activism isn't a large swath of people, it's more a small travelling circus that goes from state to state with the same pseudo-scientific witnesses over and over. And guess who is publicly buddy-buddy with most of them! And donates to them! Do I even need to say?)

The difference between this and conservative culture wars, in your insulting comparison, is that the M & M isn't actually more woke. There is no tether to reality. Ben Shapiro gets mad that people don't like AI chatbots using slurs. Every conservative headline makes a mountain out of a molehill. Whereas here, trans people are calling a spade a spade (ramp up to trans genocide, JK Rowling is the literal figurehead of that movement for many transphobes, she donates her considerable money and platform to ramp up this genocide even faster) and people like yourself are uncomfortable with that. I don't dedicate more time to JKR than I have to, but it's kind of hard not to when I work in games and the biggest game this month is a Harry Potter game, or the series itself is still incredibly popular. Every time I see someone with Harry Potter merch, I have to wonder, "is this person negligent? or do they actively want me dead?" Somehow I doubt you'd be so callous if you were to encounter this feeling yourself.

(And before you call that hyperbolic, let me note that several anti-trans activist groups have literally paid for "I LOVE JK ROWLING" billboards to be put up just to dogwhistle this bigotry and make trans people in those neighborhoods feel unsafe.)