Nice hot-take. Meanwhile, in the world of "things J.K. Rowling is actually saying," she's sliding along the pipeline from trans-denial to some light Holocaust

Nice hot-take. Meanwhile, in the world of "things J.K. Rowling is actually saying," she's sliding along the pipeline from trans-denial to some light Holocaust denial, by responding to the statement that "The Nazis burnt books on trans healthcare and research" with a suggestion the person making the statement might have had a "fever-dream." (Do I personally think she denies the Holocaust? No. Do I personally think she is parroting Holocaust denial talking points because they tend to echo in the same chambers as trans-denial? I think it is plausible.) Dissent, done in good-faith with an honest desire to learn and respect for the lived experience of those one hopes to gain new insight from, is not hatred. Speaking loudly on topics one knows very little about from a high podium can do far more harm than good, however, and sometimes the difference between hatred and negligence is irrelevant (particularly when one is on the receiving end of the consequences). For those more interested in where Rowling is coming from and what actual dissent looks like, there's a pretty good video essay on the path from early feminism to the modern TERF way of thinking and the complexities of how one gets there [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bpSTMfn-YaU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bpSTMfn-YaU]. It's pretty good, and it's interesting to compare and contrast the discussion on hypotheticals and lived experience in feminist philosophy and how that entire process differs from the kind of fight-picking Rowling does with her podium.