Jump to content
IGNORED

Hogwarts Legacy - TERF war


Captain Kelsten
 Share

Recommended Posts

We should probably move this part of the conversation to off topic although my response

 

-I don't know that there's many cases where transwomen have started using women's bathrooms until they're able to pass somewhat. Trans women are usually pretty worried about being challenged and attacked (and with good reason.)

 

-Men acting in bad faith will enter women's bathrooms regardless. We had a case recently in Australia where a guy entered a women's room with the express intent of attacking someone and he just hid in a stall and overpowered the first person who entered. (Pretty horrific case.)

 

-I can't speak as a woman but if someone of the opposite sex is in the men's room (it's happened once or twice) I make my apologies and leave and wait for them to finish. If someone dodgy is in the restroom (and we used to have a work restroom that would be used by junkies until we fitted a lock then politeness be damned I'm out of there.

 

I'm not sure there is an actual law in Australia that prevents men from entering women's restrooms apart from trespass and loiter with intent and if you're a guy trying it on (especially if you have a conviction) then stating "but I'm a lady!" is not going to stop you from being arrested. The only checks I ever see being enforced with bathrooms is that you're generally blocked from access from certain bathrooms if you aren't a customer/client/patron/employee etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Graham S said:

 

Just put yourself in the shoes of a teenager who is transitioning. (Or maybe even somebody who a random mumsnetter can't quite place their gender and might challenge). You've started to wear the clothes in public that correspond to your gender. Maybe you've come out to your parents. Maybe your parents have disowned you, which is quite common. You've seen your GP. You're on a waiting list for GIDS, which might be able to see you for a first appointment in 2026. In the meantime you'll have to manage your dysphoria alone. Maybe you'll try and buy hormones off the internet. You feel under threat of violence. Lots of privileged people in the internet, including what was once your favourite author as a child, regularly stir up hate against you on social media, and you feel the effects of that abuse every day. Your favourite games forum has a lot of sensible people who come on to say, you know, those people might have a point about you.

 

This might help some understand. (Thanks to @jonny_rat who posted this in OT.)

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Graham S said:

You're out in public, you need the toilet. Should you go and use a cubicle in the toilets of your gender, which is how you are presenting now? I think you're saying you should go in the toilet that doesn't match the clothes you're wearing, but does match your genitals. Maybe if you opt for bottom surgery (and many trans people will not), in 2030, you might be allowed in the right toilets (*edit* AND get a GRC, which only 5k people have, and there are many more trans people than that), all so you don't upset that middle aged woman who might see you when you're washing your hands. She still won't accept you in 2030, as you might be a paedophile, in her imagination. But hold it in until then, just in case.

 

No, I think that everyone should be allowed to use the toilet that fits with their gender identity (whether that's self-ID or having transitioned). I understand the arguments being put forward by women who are uncomfortable with changes to the law regarding self-ID, though, and don't think it's automatically transphobic to have worries about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Eighthours said:

I get the point that any man can go into a women's bathroom now and assault someone, but crucially there is legal recourse for that. This, for me, is the absolute key to all this. The fear is that if the law changes there will then be no legal recourse to women for a man walking in and experiencing their private moments in a bathroom, no way to challenge them - this will empower such men as there will be no consequences. They would literally have to assault someone to be in trouble. They could watch, experience, stay... and throughout, they would have the law on their side. That's what many women fear. And this is considered by them to be a violation of their rights. The prospect is emasculating for them.

 

 

It's not illegal for a man to go into a women's rest room currently is it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@EighthoursWhat, as you understand it, is the issue women have? How can men perve on women in toilets without doing something illegal (like busting a cubicle door open)? Isn't the only interaction going to be around a sink? Unless somebody has a real hand fetish, what, exactly, do women think these hypothetical perving men would witness?

 

I need to educate myself more on this issue, but the 'perving men' angle just seems to be a stretch and just cover for "I am comfortable with trans people" as a belief. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Eighthours said:

 

No, I think that everyone should be allowed to use the toilet that fits with their gender identity (whether that's self-ID or having transitioned). I understand the arguments being put forward by women who are uncomfortable with changes to the law regarding self-ID, though, and don't think it's automatically transphobic to have worries about it.

Either you don't understand or I don't understand, but your post is literally saying that self ID would lead to several paragraphs of an imagined bogeyman using this somehow to do nefarious bathroom stuff.

 

I'm saying that right now people are legally allowed to use the toilet of their choice without needing a GRC or surgery, and that is right and correct and they should be allowed to do so without reading screeds of sex crime fan fiction or be abused or hassled.

 

I don't know in detail the proposed changes to the bureaucracy of obtaining a GRC. I can believe there are some genuine edge cases that need careful thought and I hope they get that from legal minds who are keeping the well being of trans people to the forefront. The system is clearly not fit for purpose right now. If the edge cases are all hypothetical scare stories designed to get people riled up on social media like this toilet rubbish, then they're not worth our time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also "the law" isn't going to change in any sort of way that would result in a man being legally allowed to wander into a women's public bathroom (edit: and assault someone) as long as they decided two minutes before they self id as a woman. 

 

If anyone fears that, they've been misled or are worried about something else that isn't trans people need the toilet too. 

 

Again, what about women that transition into men? In this imagined new law there would be women that present and pass as men going into women's bathrooms and looking even more out of place. This has happened and is one of contrapoints' videos (edit: I think it's one of shaun's actually) and that looks "worse" in regards to it's someone presenting as a man but if a man presenting as a woman and 'passes' none of the other women in the bathroom would blink. 

 

The concern about this resulting in being used by other men for assault and rape is nonsense and iirc has only ever happened once in the entire world and again, I might be misremembering but I think it was much more a man that wasn't all there that put a dress on, rather than a genuine trans person.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Gabe said:

@EighthoursWhat, as you understand it, is the issue women have? How can men perve on women in toilets without doing something illegal (like busting a cubicle door open)? Isn't the only interaction going to be around a sink? Unless somebody has a real hand fetish, what, exactly, do women think these hypothetical perving men would witness?

 

I need to educate myself more on this issue, but the 'perving men' angle just seems to be a stretch and just cover for "I am comfortable with trans people" as a belief. 

 

I do feel like a lot of this debate around women's toilets is being framed by men who don't know/have never asked what women's bathrooms look like.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Graham S said:

Either you don't understand or I don't understand, but your post is literally saying that self ID would lead to several paragraphs of an imagined bogeyman using this somehow to do nefarious bathroom stuff.

 

I was presenting the arguments I've read, interpreting them and attempting to understand them, not promoting them as the truth. Sorry if that's how it read, that wasn't my intention.

 

When I said: 

 

Quote

This, for me, is the absolute key to all this.

I should have added, 'In terms of understanding these women's arguments.'

 

I did think after writing the initial post that I didn't emphasise how I thought trans women who self-ID'd should go to the toilet wherever they want to. My bad.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This reminds me a bit of when the age of consent for homosexuality was being lowered from 18 to 16 in the early 00s and a lot of 'concerned' people argued against it by saying that it could lead to young men being preyed upon by older guys. Of course no-one making this argument actually cared about that, it was just a convenient smokescreen to carry on propagating homophobic scare-stories and perpetuating inequality. They didn't care about the actual law itself, they cared about what the law represented. Progress. Tolerance. Equality.

 

It feels like we're on very similar ground with this bathroom stuff. Inventing a more socially-acceptable boogie-man 'concern' to push back against inclusivity. You don't hold back progress and continue to make a marginalised minority group feel inferior because of an absolutely miniscule amount of people out there who may seek to abuse the system. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As if to reinforce my earlier comment about the Star Wars-esque pervasiveness of Potter in culture now, our Monday morning corporate newsletter email had a section called "Fantastic {project name} & Where to Find Them". No other reference to Potter in the section, it was just a nerdy title. 

 

So yeah, this is it now. Maybe when she's due for retirement she'll flog the whole thing to Disney, but otherwise it's a license to print money still, and thus her relevance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Eighthours said:

 

I was presenting the arguments I've read, interpreting them and attempting to understand them, not promoting them as the truth. Sorry if that's how it read, that wasn't my intention.

 

When I said: 

 

I should have added, 'In terms of understanding these women's arguments.'

 

I did think after writing the initial post that I didn't emphasise how I thought trans women who self-ID'd should go to the toilet wherever they want to. My bad.

 

 

Why does the devil need an advocate?

 

Especially if the arguments he’s advancing are so weak, and associate trans people with rapists. There’s plenty of transphobia around without adding a page of it into the Hogwarts game thread on rllmuk for some kind of balance. I don’t know what you’re trying to achieve if you don’t hold this point of view yourself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guys, I was thinking, what if centrist Kier Starmer voters used Rllmuk to commit violent crimes? I know there’s no evidence of it ever happening, but you can’t really say that it couldn’t happen and as a human I am scared of having violent crimes committed against me. I think that unless we want to show real disrespect to the human community we should ban all centrist Kier Starmer voters from Rllmuk just to be safe. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Graham S said:

Why does the devil need an advocate?

 

Especially if the arguments he’s advancing are so weak, and associate trans people with rapists. There’s plenty of transphobia around without adding a page of it into the Hogwarts game thread on rllmuk for some kind of balance. I don’t know what you’re trying to achieve if you don’t hold this point of view yourself.

 

As I said, I don't think that women having worries about self-ID is automatically transphobic, even though I also think that people should be able to use the bathroom that corresponds to their gender identity. Happy to move to the OT thread rather than the Hogwarts thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Eighthours said:

 

As I said, I don't think that women having worries about self-ID is automatically transphobic, even though I also think that people should be able to use the bathroom that corresponds to their gender identity. Happy to move to the OT thread rather than the Hogwarts thread.

 

Well, I do feel this is becoming a politics thing. Not to say that Rowling’s behavior hasn’t been absolutely terrible, but the thread is now a completely different beast.

 

I fully understand people not accepting this game and its associated IP while Rowling is still involved (by proxy), but in that case we could as well close the entire forum with ABK, Ubisoft, SNK, Sony, several indies, and god knows what else displaying terrible behavior.

 

I know more than a handful of people for whom the setting is about as important as Transformers is to me and yes, that doesn’t excuse the author, but it also doesn’t tarnish those people with the same brush. 
 

Death of the author is impossible, but it’s not as if engaging with the work is making you Rowling’s equivalent, nor should it make the work taboo. Same issue I have with some of the more dubious elements of D&D. Its fanbase will morph this into whatever it needs to be. Just like Lovecraft provided a base and people of all walks of life are modifying it beyond its roots. That might not take Rowling out of the loop, but at least allow people to accept a part of their upbringing that is now seen as utterly evil through no fault of their own. 
 

Next to that, I thought the game looked marvelous and had this been a Transformers game with the same level of detail and references, I’d  probably have been crying at its reveal, basic gameplay mechanics be damned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Possibly the fanbase/fandom will evolve without Rowling, but for the time being there's one person and one person alone who is responsible for all the discourse surrounding this game reverting to trans issues. And I don't think she posts here.

 

The level to which she's currently poisoning her own legacy means that it is impossible to talk about it without it coming up. I can see how this might annoy some people but there is no other way it's going to go without significant moderation, whether that's guiding the discussion or constantly having to shift posts around and split threads. I don't see the point burdening them with it but that's just me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't see how it looks marvelous, regardless of jk to be honest. 

 

 

I still think a new bully or even skool daze could have great potential but this looks like it could be a mod for bully rather than all it could be but then again, all the other Harry Potter games are complete shit cash ins, so it looks better than those. Seems a very low bar though but as said already, it was never going to be a groundbreaker realistically. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I love Harry Potter and when this all started I thought yeah, she's making a fair point here, although it's unlikely etc etc etc. 

 

But no, she's just a horrible transphobe. I was wrong. I've since learned more and she's absolutely beating that drum as hard as possible. 

 

It's sad. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 28/03/2022 at 18:54, b00dles said:

I can't see how it looks marvelous, regardless of jk to be honest. 

 

 

I still think a new bully or even skool daze could have great potential but this looks like it could be a mod for bully rather than all it could be but then again, all the other Harry Potter games are complete shit cash ins, so it looks better than those. Seems a very low bar though but as said already, it was never going to be a groundbreaker realistically. 

 

Being honest, the main reason Im interested in this is because I hope it'll be like Bully.  I fucking loved Bully, and there were a bunch of things that I liked about that which seem to be present here - the going to classes, the seasons changing depending on how far through the school year you are, the exploration of outside the school itself.  I understand that theres also going to be bits that arent in here, like how the humour and tone will be different, and it'll be a lot more straight laced, but we'll see.  They also havent said anything regarding it modelling an actual day like Bully did, which I liked as you had to plan where you were going around if you were going to go to class, or be in areas that had restrictions at certain times.

 

The main difference though will be that in Bully at least, the homophobia, transphobia, and racial stereotypes are supposed to be satirical!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

There was some discussion on this thread about whether JK's TERFiness was actually having any effect on the Potter franchise.

 

https://variety.com/2022/film/news/fantastic-beasts-franchise-controversies-harry-potter-jk-rowling-johnny-depp-1235226541/

 

Quote

Warner Bros. has clearly bet big on Rowling, allowing her to stretch the flimsy source material for “Fantastic Beasts” into five films. But Rowling’s repeated comments against transgender women have put the studio in a precarious situation: Condemn the literary doyenne and jeopardize a billion-dollar relationship; defend her and risk alienating fans who were already on the fence. Internally at Warners, there’s a growing sense the prequel series is no longer worth the time and treasure given the embarrassment of needing to replace Depp, the landmines of Rowling and Miller, and the high costs associated with all things Hogwarts.

 

Quote

Rowling is active on Twitter but mostly avoids press these days because she believes her comments have been repeatedly taken out of context by the media, according to knowledgeable individuals. After sitting out HBO Max’s “Harry Potter” 20th anniversary special, Rowling made a rare appearance at the London premiere of “Fantastic Beasts 3.” However, she stopped short of talking to journalists and did not take red carpet photos with the cast. Those actions, as well as her near-silence on social media regarding the release of “The Secrets of Dumbledore,” come as a stark contrast to her involvement in promoting the first two “Fantastic Beasts” films.

 

Quote

As for Law, Eddie Redmayne, who plays magizoologist Newt Scamander, and the other faces of the prequel franchise, they’ve grown increasingly press shy over fears of getting caught in the crosshairs. Reporters will inevitably ask about Rowling’s contentious beliefs, and though the stars may disagree, they don’t want to offend Rowling, a source says. Contractually, actors must engage in “good faith publicity efforts,” but there’s not much the studio can do to force their hands. Much of the movie’s publicity was limited to an Imax fan event in New York City and a three-day international press junket in London, in which reporters are granted roughly five to 10 minutes to speak to actors — hardly enough time to get to probing questions. And, let’s be honest, junkets aren’t really known for producing many Mike Wallace moments.

 

Quote

As for what’s next? There’s speculation about whether or not “Fantastic Beasts” will complete its ambitions as a five-film franchise. At the moment, there’s no screenplay for a fourth installment, sources have confirmed. Executives at Warner Bros. are waiting to see how “The Secrets of Dumbledore” is received before giving films four and five the greenlight.


There's other factors at play, but it would be hard to argue that she isn't having an effect. The new film has opened internationally to about half of what the last one did (which was already considered a mild disappointment). As the article says WB aren’t likely to give up on the brand as they've invested so much into it and will probably throw bags of cash at the the original cast or something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Harsin said:

There was some discussion on this thread about whether JK's TERFiness was actually having any effect on the Potter franchise.

 

https://variety.com/2022/film/news/fantastic-beasts-franchise-controversies-harry-potter-jk-rowling-johnny-depp-1235226541/

 

 

 

 


There's other factors at play, but it would be hard to argue that she isn't having an effect. The new film has opened internationally to about half of what the last one did (which was already considered a mild disappointment). As the article says WB aren’t likely to give up on the brand as they've invested so much into it and will probably throw bags of cash at the the original cast or something.

How much of it is to do with the above versus the fact that the previous film was absolute trash though? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Gabe said:

How much of it is to do with the above versus the fact that the previous film was absolute trash though? 

 

Surely this.

 

I thought the Potter films were all pretty shite, but it wasn't my thing and I could nevertheless see why kids would love them.

 

The fantastic beasts films, on the other hand, just seem to be plain awful.

 

In the history of prequel trilogies, this must now surely rank as the worst?  (and yet it will continue with further films).  Star Wars, for all the stick it got at the time from adult viewers, nevertheless hit a chord with the younger generations who now show fanattical love for those films.  The Hobbit was a bit tortuous and unnecessarily long, but clearly not trash and gave Tolkien fans plenty to enjoy.  Fantastic Beasts does what for whom?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, fat flatulent git said:

Indeed.  I enjoyed the original films but have no interest in this series.

 

I'll get the game for the location, but I'd prefer it to have the original Harry Potter characters.

 

I'm sure if it allows you avatar customisation there's going to be dozens of Harrys, Rons and Hermiones running through the halls.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I know it's not relevant to Hogwarts Legacy specifically but it does tie in to the discussion surrounding how the Harry Potter franchise beyond the books themselves fares and, well...

 

 

It's just shy of $208m worldwide which is fairly catastrophic ten days into release 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Use of this website is subject to our Privacy Policy, Terms of Use, and Guidelines.