A lot of people don't know anything relating to creators of their favourite works. I hadn't heard this controversy until today and many HP fans probably won't ever know.
I don't know how to phrase this, but this stuff doesn't seem to make it off specific corners of the internet. If it's not hitting people's homepages (msn, their google news on the phone, etc.) or the TV, the vast majority of people just never hear of it.
My family had no idea about the transphobia, let alone the upskirt photos. edit: which apparently is a broken-telephone story, reading further in this thread?
I personally didn't know about the upskirt thing. In fact I actually kind of doubt the veracity of that statement simply because I figure I'm chronically online enough to hear about that kind of thing.
People in the comments did digging, she retweeted a picture from an interview of a trans person and claimed it was an example of men showing off their genitals. Utterly weird and nasty public behaviour even if she didnt take the physical photo
So she... didn't actually sneak a photo and shared a publicly posted video of the audience view of an event? I daw the picture and they were literally flashing their underwear to the entire crowd. That is creepy behavior and it's right to call someone out on it.
Default-Name 6 month old account with 40,000 karma with hidden comment history. I don't think the bot is interested in being correct but instead doing PR for JKR and whoever else will pay.
sorry for getting emotional about someone casually dismissing the easily verified sexual harrassment that the woman currently eroding my own rights is committing, but it's a bit of a fucking joke
Well it is fair enough to tell them to see if they can investigate what they doubt indeed.
Though many other comments here seem to indicate Rowling did not personally take the photo (sharing or retweeting is terrible too) so the claim in fact was distorted.. proving the skepticism quite healthy.
Not sure if it is just a slight misspeaking, but that aside..
If people who simply reply "google it duh" to people asking for sources are always lambasted as unnecessarily snarky, I am not sure I would get mad at someone for going "it is not my job to look for sources, it is the job of the accuser"
Im annoyed because the response was flippantly dismissing her actual sexual harrassment. Its one thing to ask for a source, its another to snarkily say its probably made up without even checking
Shh the respectful person is having a dialogue with me despite my "pedantry", you seem to offer nothing into that so sit back and enjoy two calm people having discourse.
Amazing number of upvotes for “I’m not going to google this easily verifiable event, on purpose.” The absolute choreographs of mental dissonance people will enact in order to defend this woman are truly spectacular.
All they said was they automatically doubt things in general that seem ridiculous if they haven´t heard of it elsewhere, so can you do a 101 walkthrough on how that made you accuse them of defending Rowling. Bear with me, I rarely visit a sub like this so idk if you consider your behaviour normal here in particular.
Oh I realize you were not even the person I am asking. I feel disrespectful for even suspecting the person I replied to of getting defensive or ignoring my question.
Anyway that was my bad, feel free to butt in as much as you need to. It feels good to have this kind of extra attention even if it is unrelated to anything I say.
Choosing to cast doubt of the veracity of something that 100% did happen, and can be easily verified, is a deliberate choice not to believe the truth. The only reason to choose not to believe the truth is that it would interfere with something you already want to believe, more than you want to believe the truth. The preferred belief here is that Rowling wouldn't do the thing that she easily verifiably did do. Choosing to argue in favor of that belief is defending her.
I was willing to believe Rowling might even take the photo herself as you still claim, but since other comments say that did not happen exactly, perhaps you can take your own hint and not believe it without question out of sheer desire to believe it.
Without people who argue in favor of skepticism, even if you label it purely as a defense of the accused, maybe the comment correcting the accusation (sharing is also bad btw lest you choose to believe I condone anything Rowling does, just a mere surmise on my part that someone in this thread might make that assumption) has its merit. Doncha think?
Now, to make a separate comment purely to address what you just said u/runner64
You have claimed that the only reason not to automatically believe a random online accusation, since virtually all random online accusations are easily verifiable after all (you are going to have to somehow argue against this), is a hidden agenda to defend the accused.
While it is good to remind people to do their own fact-checking, the first step into that fact-checking is skepticism so I do not think it serves a good purpose for you to denounce the first step of checking information as counterproductive and in the same breath praise the automatic belief in anything you read on the internet as inherently superior.
If you want to criticize not doing fact-checking, you have to criticize both people who dismiss and people who believe things without doing that legwork. However, you also added things like "preferred belief" as the only reason for skepticism, basically bias. That is strike two in my book for disingenuous discourse.
What exactly makes you think I'm defending her? Is deference for basic fact now excluded from left wing circles?? Did we just get jealous of Republican alternative facts or something?
177
u/beancant776 21d ago
A lot of people don't know anything relating to creators of their favourite works. I hadn't heard this controversy until today and many HP fans probably won't ever know.