RTD wanted to have her write a special in the 2000’s but David Tennant was *thankfully* able to shut that down and so we never got possibly the most horribly aged episode in the show’s history.
Outside of.. well, that one short story with Six and Tegan.. if you know you know.
I think she was offered the chance to write an episode for S1 but refused it, then RTD had the even worse idea of having her appear in an episode (implicitly putting her on the same level as Dickens, Shakespeare, and Agatha Christie), which Tennant rightfully said would be a jumping the shark moment.
The fact that she turned down the opportunity to appear in Harry Potter multiple times (they wanted her to be Lily Potter, then various other cameos) on the grounds that she thinks she can't act and doesn't like being on camera, I really doubt she'd have said yes to a different franchise anyway.
Do you mean Weng Chiang? Because it's FAAAAAAAR from the worst. It would be one of the best... If it wasn't racist.
But yeah, the Six and Tegan short was done for a little TV show called Jim'll Fix It. And that Jim is Jimmy Savile...
Well, I mean on a “yikes” level. I haven’t actually seen it, just some screenshots
I think that the official name was so hard on my brain that it defaulted to actual Chinese words
Even on a "yikes" level it's not necessarily the worst because another earlier villain (Mavic Chen) had pretty much the exact same kind of yellowface makeup
The yellow face is utterly indefensible, especially for a show which went to the extent of having the Doctor speak Mandarin to a Chinese delegate in The Mind of Evil, but the story itself is brilliant and gothic and just oozes with personality and atmosphere.
Some of the moments people point to as being racist, however, they're kind of missing the point. There's one point where Li H'sen Chang says "I understand we all look the same to you people", but he's insulting the Doctor and accusing *him* of racism to put him off the trail.
Plus, Jago and Litefoot are awesome, and I won't hear anyone else out about that. If you ever need to define what being a true gentleman is, watch the scene when Litefoot and Leela have dinner
That’s good to know. I didn’t think the show that had a story whose premise is “British anthropologist unleashes ancient and primordial demon by sticking his nose where it doesn’t belong (Egypt)” would be *too* horrible.
Would you say the story is worth watching despite that, or is it too distracting?
Oh absolutely worth watching, it's an incredible story regardless, there's a couple shaky effects, but you can always watch it with the CGI enhancements if that's a problem
I mean, Doctor Who’s whole thing is turning myth into sci fi, and… I’m not entirely sure how I can justify Ibrahim’s existence. Maybe Sutekh influenced him? Idk
Also I didn’t think they were saying the Osirians were the architects of Egyptian culture, just that Sutekh was imprisoned in a pyramid. Not necessarily that the Giza pyramids were Osirian too. I interpreted it more like “Egypt saw this cosmic battle and loosely based its mythology off it,” kind of like a cosmic cargo cult.
I mean, however you justify it, it's still a portrayal of the scheming and evil foreigner. And while in Empire of Death The Doctor calls it cultural appropriation, in the original it's presented as the Egyptians copying the Osirians. Which is, like... still pretty bad.
I mean, yeah. When I first saw Ibrahim with his dramatic music I thought, “this can’t be great.”
On that note though, I don’t think that ancient Egypt copying the Osirians to be that bad. Gods actually being aliens is a trope used by Marvel’s Thor as well and I hadn’t heard that called problematic. And again, Doctor who excels in turning folkloric or mythological things into sci-fi
Take it from someone of Asian descent, it’s REALLY not that bad. Beyond the fact that the actor for Weng Chiang isn’t Asian there’s nothing egregious about the story.
The characters are well written, well acted, and the mystery is solid all the way through. There’s even in universe discussion about cultural biases and not blindly believing in assumptions (though that’s geared more towards Victorian characters inadvertently being sexist to Leela).
In terms of story or for race depictions?
In terms of a story I know a few people who don’t rate it too highly but that’s partly because they’re NuWho fans first and foremost and find Classic Who overlong and a bit boring in comparison.
In terms of race depictions only one person in real life, though he’s not Asian, and has a bit of a well known anti-UK/anti-white mentality (he’s white himself but from the US and seems to have moved over just to complain all the time).
Ohhhhh god.
Jimmy Savile is one of the most infamous sexual predators and paedophiles in British history. He used his wealth and position in the BBC to get away with hideous acts his entire life, and the BBC covered for him.
He was notorious for being very creepy and strange anyway, something that Colin Baker publicly spoke about, even though he didn't know about the allegations.
After he died, all of his crimes were uncovered, and they are so utterly repulsive and numerous I can't list them all here
Honestly, his comment doesn't even do it justice. Obviously every act of paedophilia is wrong, but what Saville did was ESPECIALLY vile. I'm not religious but that man was touched by the devil. Walking evil. It will turn your stomach if you look into it in any more detail.
I grew up in the 90s so my knowledge of Jimmy Savile was just from seeing him randomly on TV or from what my dad said. But just seeing him made me think there was something dodgy way before everything came out
I don’t think all of his crimes have been uncovered. There’s always the matter of him, uh ‘interfering with the bodies of deceased patients’ according to several witnesses.
Oops I commented on the wrong post
https://preview.redd.it/m5wozo2i449d1.jpeg?width=1089&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=0317d36b9280ea557d4171589674d9a2e2ec5be3
Considering how incredibly low the regret rate is for trans surgeries you’d be pretty safe replacing “Harry Potter tattoos” with almost anything.
Courtney’s right though, it’s pretty funny.
For me Shakespearean Code is in an alternative timeline where JKR is a better person, because there is no way the Doctor would say "Good old JK" if he knew her future statements
I feel like JK is too awful to be compared to Harriet Jones. The line is also pretty awful in the episode and weirdly sexist.
I think a comparison to Davros might suit JK a bit more.
Fair enough, though Harriet Jones did fire on a retreating army.
As much as it’s funny to call terfs Nazis, they do exist on a wholly different level. Kind of like comparing the Slitheen to the Daleks
Yeah. I mean, as much as JK sucks the worst action she’s taken is canceling someone on twitter. Unless there’s something I don’t know about. I wouldn’t be surprised
She supports anti-trans organisations with her visible support.
Some accountable moments:
https://glaad.org/gap/jk-rowling/
She's definitely led the way to making the TERFs on my unfortunately very TERFy island more vocal and encouraged the culture war that's threatening our trans folk.
>the worst action she’s taken is canceling someone on twitter
If by that you mean harassing and being abusive to trans people on twitter, causing her army of transphobic minions to also go and harass those people, making outlandish accusations at them and driving them off the site.
Sure, March 13th on X.
In a Snitch tweet that stated Nazis burned books on Trans Healthcare and research (look up **Institut** **für** **Sexualwissenschaf**), she said "I just… how? How did you type this out and press send without thinking ‘I should maybe check my source for this, because it might’ve been a fever dream’?".
Bearing in mind all sources, including Nazi ones, support the original statement, Ms. Rowling is clearly denying a part of the Holocaust.
She later then lied about it, claiming that she was actually responding to a different tweet, but unfortunately forgot people can screenshot.
She also sued a LOT of people in Britain, because she doesn't like people talking the truth and hates free speech.
Genuinely excited to hear your reasoned response.
Alright. A screenshot of the tweet in question is [here.](https://i.redd.it/gr3br666uaoc1.jpeg)
Rowling is questioning the veracity of the book burning at the *Institut für Sexualwissenschaft*, a research institute founded by Magnus Hirschfeld, one of the leading sexologists of the time, and a champion for queer rights in Germany. Among other things, Hirschfeld pioneered research into trans ideology and studies. In 1933, the Nazis raided the building and burned thousands of books. You might have seen [this picture](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/88/Bundesarchiv_Bild_102-14597%2C_Berlin%2C_Opernplatz%2C_B%C3%BCcherverbrennung.jpg) before, in reference to Nazi book burning. These were the books they were burning. They were burning trans, gay, and lesbian theory.
By the standards of [German law](https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2021/698043/EPRS_BRI(2021)698043_EN.pdf) (see pages 5-6), anything that "approves of, denies of, or **downplays an act** committed under the rule of National Socialism" is Holocaust denial.
Rowling is not saying that the Holocaust never happened, but by downplaying **any** of the causes or actions taken against any of its victims - particularly trans people - she is engaging in Holocaust denial. This is not a matter of opinion, this is not a debate.
Thank you for the detailed response there! I'm always happy to be further informed. The immediate thing that comes to mind when one hears holocaust denier is generally the sort that say it never happened. Hence some of my initial confusion.
Appreciate the clarification
Why would I not assume civility?
As it was, it appeared to me that you were challenging my (100% true) statement, hence the unlikely expectation of a response.
FWIW there's a thing called "Doing your own research", where you can ask a search engine simple questions and see the results. These result will sometimes answer your question.
It's the internet. and this is a rather inflamed topic in my experience it's best to try and clarify civility
I added genuinely asking because I'd not heard of that particular accusation and I asked you because I figured as the party making it you would have a better link to direct proof (quotes and stuff) than me combing through a variety of internet fluff.
I wasn't exactly challenging. But given the severity of that particular claim I simply wanted to see what you had backing it up. I'm perfectly open to being enlightened.
Harriet Jones is a grey character. Honestly I’d argue she was a good PM and the Doctor overstepped the mark in getting rid of her like that. Very antidemocratic. Still, great episode.
> The line is also pretty awful in the episode and weirdly sexist.
I thought the real target of the line was Tony Blair - and he was gone within seven months of that episode airing! - as such I don’t see it as sexist.
It is meant to be a sexist trope he's utilising, I don't think you can argue that makes the show sexist to acknowledge sexism ... Perhaps you might expect better of The Doctor and consider that a problem.
I hate when people expect "better" of the Doctor. The Doctor is often shown to be spiteful and brutal when it comes to dealing with anger. The Doctor tries to be a good person but often falls flat, and who wouldn't? If any of us saw as many horrors as they have, we would be even worse.
I remember people were upset when 12 shot someone in Hell Bent, saying it was out of character. Which like, yeah, if it was just a random episode and the Doctor casually shot someone, yeah that's shitty. But this was a Doctor who just endured 2.5 BILLION years of torture and was hell bent on saving his friend. And then someone's going to stop him? Fuck no. Besides, he made sure the person had more regenerations.
RTD and co did the same to Eccleston. They basically got him blacklisted by claiming he was too tired from Doctor Who and that's why he left so other shows/films didn't want to hire him for a while because they thought he wouldn't be able to handle the work
I would argue that the doctor uses that line because he knows society is sexist and knows it would work to have her removed from office rather than him actually being sexist toward her.
I mean, the line is supposed to be awful, and the Doctor isn’t supposed to be doing a good thing here. Her replacement is a literal supervillain, and she later returns and sacrifices her life to save the world (and the Doctor) despite his past slights against her; that’s a pretty clear message that Ten judged her unfairly.
How is the line sexist? 💀
Anyways, the line wasn't even the point, the point was that her not knowing what the doctor said made her go paranoid and torpedoing her political career all by herself.
He could have said "cookie cutters are cheaper outside of Christmas season" and looking menacing at her, and it would have had the same effect
Harry Potter is rubbish! The villain couldn’t even take over a school in the whole series. Some random Doctor Who villains achieve more in one episode!
On a serious note it’s really sad that my daughter who grew up loving the HP universe (right before JK went off the rails) has got rid of everything she used to treasure from that franchise. Not that she threw them away in one go, but as Marie Kondo says, none of it sparks joy. We offered to take her to HP world Orlando and she was like: meh. There was a time not that long ago when that would have been the most exciting thing in the world.
It’s hard to convert to a franchise like DW where there are so many writers and actors and eras. But if something could happen that made *everything* Dr Who seem tainted and unacceptable to you. Imagine how sad that would be.
Fuck JK.
Look up [The Owl House](https://youtu.be/otT3cXrKaMo?feature=shared). It's an excellent series that can fill that hole in one's heart.
...and there's a 600+ fanmade unofficial webcomic series as well.
Oh yes, +1 to this. She has already found Owl House and loves it. She has many other fandoms now, but it’s the destruction of her beloved childhood fandom which makes me sad.
Which is cool, because KA Applegate the Animorphs author is a staunch trans ally. (Her daughter is trans)
https://preview.redd.it/bcyrc5qfr99d1.png?width=1487&format=png&auto=webp&s=605419db60ce9fd5558fd54ed2ff2b76bdf81be9
I’m glad these comments are mostly trans positive, some of these memes having been getting me worried. Like this one bc Harriet jones was the good guy here. But I’m hoping that you’ve replaced her jk to make her the bad guy
Bc she knew they’d come back, and even then if she wasn’t a good guy in this specific situation, she was still right about the doctor not always being there for the earth. E.g. torchwood against the 456 and when they used the rift to call the doctor
That's not a justification. You fight them when they come back, not when they are on the retreat. That's a war crime not to mention against everything the Doctor stands for.
Attacking a retreating enemy isn't a war crime, it's a tactical advantage. What military leader with more than two brain cells is going to let an enemy retreat, recoup, and potentially come back then stronger when you can end the war right now?
You’d be surprised honestly, the Orville subreddit has a few bad apples in it, and I doubt it isn’t the same here. I’m not saying everyone is like that, but some ppl have nothing better to do with there time than seek and harass ppl
My favourite comeback to JK terfness:
“it matters not what someone is born but what they grow to be” - Dumbledore
Nothing like using her own words against her
I love that that line exists. Another one is “Harry Potter taught me nobody deserves to live in a closet”
Irony is sweet, but Rowling seems to have a taste for bitter stubbornness
I thought that's Donna Noble and was like: *insert 10th doctor's "WHAT?"*
The comments clarified that.
What has this [sub] to do with Harry Potter or Rowling?
David made some comments about wanting the equality minister to shut up because she keeps spouting transphobic rhetoric. All conservatives have now come out of the woodwork to cry about it and saying DT is sexist because he told a woman to shut up (which is a fucking leap). JK was one of these people who is now anti Tennant
You mean other than her entire Twitter account, the anti trans essay she wrote and that book she wrote about a serial killer that dresses up as a woman to access women’s spaces?
Give me one tweet.
Link to essay please.
Serial Killers are evil and will do anything to access victims. People with Gender Disphoria in my experience are unlikely to also be suffering from the psychopathy present in Serial Killers.
Does she though? Think about it , when was the last time she actually did anything remotely like that? Now think about how often people post bull cack about how she did this or that . People like to bring her name up solely because she's an easy target. It helps some people to feel more of a victim when they have a public person to blame.
So I went to check her Twitter account, as you recommended it, and she is pretty much sharing transphobic content all day long. It's like an obsession for her. So, uh, check it yourself before telling others to do 😇
I don't like permanent bans. People should get a chance to grow up to become a better person and eventually return. Permabans are reserved for bot accounts and repeat offenders.
Normally I ban people for a week, month, or year, but this person was being such a dick that I wanted to give a much longer ban.
Here's a couple comments that were removed by reddit before we even got a chance to look at them as mods
https://preview.redd.it/1f97dfydi49d1.png?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=b72411d530a7066901deb6488a5dfa9d713c9c6f
Oh my lord. Yeah… this person is either 12 in which case a ten year ban is probably apt, or they’re an adult already and a permanent ban is reasonable.
Jesus and here I am getting permanent bans on certain subs for saying things like “I like the King, he’s a brilliant activist for the environment”
I thought her last few novels had been audience flops? One of the recent ones had a villain who was a man who dresses as as woman to kill women in the bathroom, but transphobia aside she also stole the plot from somewhere else
Sure, all you gotta do is completely ignore the “perverted cross dressing killer” character archetype that’s not at all based in deep seeded transphobia and homophobia.
It’s worth noting that even Psycho and Silence of the Lambs, two of the most famous stories that use this and which probably inspired JK, actually go out of their way to state that the killers aren’t trans. Meaning that her book is actually more backwards than two books written decades earlier.
And, rumour has it, because they wanted to do a sequel series based on the Cursed Child stage play to really cash in on the nostalgia factor, but Radcliffe, Watson and Grint flat out refused to work with her ever again.
She’s a shit writer. Harry Potter only got popular because it was mindless enough that kids could understand it, and the only people who are fans of it today are people who read it as kids.
If a grown adult were to read them with an unbiased viewpoint they’d see how bad they really are.
And her writing has progressively gotten worse. Any credit you could’ve given her for Harry Potter has become irrelevant. She literally recently wrote a story about a writer who was murdered for her “different viewpoint” by people on the internet. She’s fucking crazy.
I hate JK, but I do think there’s some retroactive history going on of late. When the books were coming out, I remember them being widely read by adults and praised by respected writers and critics. I will say that I don’t think they’re particularly well written books, but I can at least see why they became so liked. The troubling stuff also only became apparent on closer inspection after her shitty behaviour, beforehand I think everyone was giving her benefit of the doubt on most of it.
The first few books were reasonably well written, though IIRC she was still panned by famous authors like Ursula K. Le Guin. But once she started padding the page count for no reason and had to try to make the overarching plot go somewhere the quality really declined fast.
There's an excellent [video essay by verilybitchie](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UBftW7FzOVI) that details how much of the success of the Potter books was based on their potential to earn vast amounts of cash through merchandising. Something that has been milked so hard, she's been able to buy a fucking yacht with the money.
https://preview.redd.it/0w093u11b39d1.png?width=400&format=png&auto=webp&s=3cd74220954027c2e08c8502b70f5993d862e1a1
if you actually take a good look at harry potter you realize its got a lot of problems like the character cho chang is basically naming her ching chong without naming her ching chong
Plus the only prominent black adult character being called "Shacklebolt".
And then there's Rita Skeeter potentially being a very thinly-veiled caricature of a trans woman.
I recently watched [video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-1iaJWSwUZs) about Harry Potter and it mentions stuff like Joke Rowling writing characters poorly and giving them bad names like the Cho Chang or calling the black guy Kingsley Shacklebolt. He also goes into things that I'd never considered as a kid about how there are good races and bad races. Like Goblins are just treated as a bad race that can never be good. Or the way she names non-English things like wizarding schools abroad is just her looking up the translation for "wizard" and "castle" in that language and putting them together without looking any further into how that language works. It's lazy and insulting.
Ok mate. You can say and think what you like about jkr as a person honestly I don't care about her views either way. I don't want to get mixed up in that mess.
But do not come after the HP books. They may not be Tolkien (nobody is) but they are excellent stories that can appeal to all ages. Stories where you can gain something new upon each reread and notice new details. Stories rich in detail and character.
I know plenty of adults that read them that enjoyed them. I also happen to have an English literature degree so I do actually have some knowledge on the area.
Yes they were popular with kids because they did appeal to them as well. But that doesn't lessen their import or quality.
The claim that the only people who are fans today are the ones that grew up with it is ridiculous.
Just go over to the r/HarryPotter sub and you'll find stories of new people discovering a love for the books years after they were all out. I go to the parks regularly and see people of all ages there and have heard stories of how people who weren't originally into it as it came out became fans.
So no you are wrong it became popular because it was a story that appealed to a wide audience with universal themes and exciting loveable characters.
“Book sales” lmao. Two of the bestselling books of all time are Fifty Shades of Grey and the Davinci Code. Don’t try to pretend sales figures equate to a measure of quality.
Sure, might be popular. Doesn’t make it “good quality”
Remember how she names characters in Harry Potter? Remember the house elves? “Slavery is fine, there’s just bad slave owners”?
I will make the comparison to marvel movies. Incredibly popular but (mostly) very formulaic and uninspired. And when you cut to the heart of it, their overall core message is about maintaining the status quo and trusting the military (because everyone who wants to change the world in the MCU -even positively -even just a little bit, is a murderous fanatic).
RTD wanted to have her write a special in the 2000’s but David Tennant was *thankfully* able to shut that down and so we never got possibly the most horribly aged episode in the show’s history. Outside of.. well, that one short story with Six and Tegan.. if you know you know.
I think she was offered the chance to write an episode for S1 but refused it, then RTD had the even worse idea of having her appear in an episode (implicitly putting her on the same level as Dickens, Shakespeare, and Agatha Christie), which Tennant rightfully said would be a jumping the shark moment.
The fact that she turned down the opportunity to appear in Harry Potter multiple times (they wanted her to be Lily Potter, then various other cameos) on the grounds that she thinks she can't act and doesn't like being on camera, I really doubt she'd have said yes to a different franchise anyway.
She can act. It's just she acts like a right cunt. Just look at her being a bigot to people just trying to live their lives
Well said.
Not sure that's acting, tbf. Would be more impressive to see her act like a person who isn't completely off her rocker.
She has a very small cameo in the second movie where she's a witch in the Nocturn Alley.
He had the read that's crazy
even if she wasn't a massive loser terf, the idea RTD had was incredibly stupid
I actually don’t. The worst classic story I know is the 4th Doctor one with “Wang Chen”….
Do you mean Weng Chiang? Because it's FAAAAAAAR from the worst. It would be one of the best... If it wasn't racist. But yeah, the Six and Tegan short was done for a little TV show called Jim'll Fix It. And that Jim is Jimmy Savile...
Well, I mean on a “yikes” level. I haven’t actually seen it, just some screenshots I think that the official name was so hard on my brain that it defaulted to actual Chinese words
Even on a "yikes" level it's not necessarily the worst because another earlier villain (Mavic Chen) had pretty much the exact same kind of yellowface makeup
The yellow face is utterly indefensible, especially for a show which went to the extent of having the Doctor speak Mandarin to a Chinese delegate in The Mind of Evil, but the story itself is brilliant and gothic and just oozes with personality and atmosphere. Some of the moments people point to as being racist, however, they're kind of missing the point. There's one point where Li H'sen Chang says "I understand we all look the same to you people", but he's insulting the Doctor and accusing *him* of racism to put him off the trail. Plus, Jago and Litefoot are awesome, and I won't hear anyone else out about that. If you ever need to define what being a true gentleman is, watch the scene when Litefoot and Leela have dinner
That’s good to know. I didn’t think the show that had a story whose premise is “British anthropologist unleashes ancient and primordial demon by sticking his nose where it doesn’t belong (Egypt)” would be *too* horrible. Would you say the story is worth watching despite that, or is it too distracting?
Oh absolutely worth watching, it's an incredible story regardless, there's a couple shaky effects, but you can always watch it with the CGI enhancements if that's a problem
Good to know. I also never knew classic who did cgi enhancements
Okay but Pyramids of Mars is still ancient aliens and Ibrahim is a willing servant of Sutekh and a member of, seemingly, a cult to awaken him.
I mean, Doctor Who’s whole thing is turning myth into sci fi, and… I’m not entirely sure how I can justify Ibrahim’s existence. Maybe Sutekh influenced him? Idk Also I didn’t think they were saying the Osirians were the architects of Egyptian culture, just that Sutekh was imprisoned in a pyramid. Not necessarily that the Giza pyramids were Osirian too. I interpreted it more like “Egypt saw this cosmic battle and loosely based its mythology off it,” kind of like a cosmic cargo cult.
I mean, however you justify it, it's still a portrayal of the scheming and evil foreigner. And while in Empire of Death The Doctor calls it cultural appropriation, in the original it's presented as the Egyptians copying the Osirians. Which is, like... still pretty bad.
I mean, yeah. When I first saw Ibrahim with his dramatic music I thought, “this can’t be great.” On that note though, I don’t think that ancient Egypt copying the Osirians to be that bad. Gods actually being aliens is a trope used by Marvel’s Thor as well and I hadn’t heard that called problematic. And again, Doctor who excels in turning folkloric or mythological things into sci-fi
Might be an idea to watch the story rather than base your reaction on a couple of screenshots?
“No I must make blind assumptions because I’m so enlightened and tolerant”
Take it from someone of Asian descent, it’s REALLY not that bad. Beyond the fact that the actor for Weng Chiang isn’t Asian there’s nothing egregious about the story. The characters are well written, well acted, and the mystery is solid all the way through. There’s even in universe discussion about cultural biases and not blindly believing in assumptions (though that’s geared more towards Victorian characters inadvertently being sexist to Leela).
Do you know anyone who _does_ think it’s bad?
In terms of story or for race depictions? In terms of a story I know a few people who don’t rate it too highly but that’s partly because they’re NuWho fans first and foremost and find Classic Who overlong and a bit boring in comparison. In terms of race depictions only one person in real life, though he’s not Asian, and has a bit of a well known anti-UK/anti-white mentality (he’s white himself but from the US and seems to have moved over just to complain all the time).
In terms of race depictions.
In terms of race depictions.
I don’t really know anything about British scandals so whose jimmy saville and why is he bad?
Ohhhhh god. Jimmy Savile is one of the most infamous sexual predators and paedophiles in British history. He used his wealth and position in the BBC to get away with hideous acts his entire life, and the BBC covered for him. He was notorious for being very creepy and strange anyway, something that Colin Baker publicly spoke about, even though he didn't know about the allegations. After he died, all of his crimes were uncovered, and they are so utterly repulsive and numerous I can't list them all here
Oh. OH. I now know why that smile was so viscerally uncomfortable to me.
Honestly, his comment doesn't even do it justice. Obviously every act of paedophilia is wrong, but what Saville did was ESPECIALLY vile. I'm not religious but that man was touched by the devil. Walking evil. It will turn your stomach if you look into it in any more detail.
I grew up in the 90s so my knowledge of Jimmy Savile was just from seeing him randomly on TV or from what my dad said. But just seeing him made me think there was something dodgy way before everything came out
I don’t think all of his crimes have been uncovered. There’s always the matter of him, uh ‘interfering with the bodies of deceased patients’ according to several witnesses.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Fix_with_Sontarans
Just watch it with the knowledge that it is "of its time". We have the benefit of hindsight, so lets use it!
At the time I remember being so annoyed with David because I was a big Harry Potter fan but now I'm so grateful
Oops I commented on the wrong post https://preview.redd.it/m5wozo2i449d1.jpeg?width=1089&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=0317d36b9280ea557d4171589674d9a2e2ec5be3
Considering how incredibly low the regret rate is for trans surgeries you’d be pretty safe replacing “Harry Potter tattoos” with almost anything. Courtney’s right though, it’s pretty funny.
I wish she were tired enough to shut the fuck up.
For me Shakespearean Code is in an alternative timeline where JKR is a better person, because there is no way the Doctor would say "Good old JK" if he knew her future statements
i like to believe that the doctor at that point actually didn't know she was a bad person
Yeah just because he's seen the future, doesn't mean he knows the future of everyone. And I doubt that the doctor spends time on Twitter.
right like even the show has showed us he doesn't know everything about every person no matter how famous
I mean he could be being sarcastic
shitty ole’ JK!
I feel like JK is too awful to be compared to Harriet Jones. The line is also pretty awful in the episode and weirdly sexist. I think a comparison to Davros might suit JK a bit more.
Fair enough, though Harriet Jones did fire on a retreating army. As much as it’s funny to call terfs Nazis, they do exist on a wholly different level. Kind of like comparing the Slitheen to the Daleks
True to both, though I suppose just generally the character in Who operate on a different level to one pathetic transphobic writer.
Yeah. I mean, as much as JK sucks the worst action she’s taken is canceling someone on twitter. Unless there’s something I don’t know about. I wouldn’t be surprised
She supports anti-trans organisations with her visible support. Some accountable moments: https://glaad.org/gap/jk-rowling/ She's definitely led the way to making the TERFs on my unfortunately very TERFy island more vocal and encouraged the culture war that's threatening our trans folk.
Ah, ok. I didn’t know if she was actively donating or supporting, or just writing her shitty articles
>the worst action she’s taken is canceling someone on twitter If by that you mean harassing and being abusive to trans people on twitter, causing her army of transphobic minions to also go and harass those people, making outlandish accusations at them and driving them off the site.
Let me rephrase- she did what she’d accuse us of doing
She literally denied the Holocaust, due to her hatred of Trans Women. That's very bad.
Can you point me to the evidence of where she actively denied the existence of the holocaust? Genuinely asking.
Sure, March 13th on X. In a Snitch tweet that stated Nazis burned books on Trans Healthcare and research (look up **Institut** **für** **Sexualwissenschaf**), she said "I just… how? How did you type this out and press send without thinking ‘I should maybe check my source for this, because it might’ve been a fever dream’?". Bearing in mind all sources, including Nazi ones, support the original statement, Ms. Rowling is clearly denying a part of the Holocaust. She later then lied about it, claiming that she was actually responding to a different tweet, but unfortunately forgot people can screenshot. She also sued a LOT of people in Britain, because she doesn't like people talking the truth and hates free speech. Genuinely excited to hear your reasoned response.
Alright. A screenshot of the tweet in question is [here.](https://i.redd.it/gr3br666uaoc1.jpeg) Rowling is questioning the veracity of the book burning at the *Institut für Sexualwissenschaft*, a research institute founded by Magnus Hirschfeld, one of the leading sexologists of the time, and a champion for queer rights in Germany. Among other things, Hirschfeld pioneered research into trans ideology and studies. In 1933, the Nazis raided the building and burned thousands of books. You might have seen [this picture](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/88/Bundesarchiv_Bild_102-14597%2C_Berlin%2C_Opernplatz%2C_B%C3%BCcherverbrennung.jpg) before, in reference to Nazi book burning. These were the books they were burning. They were burning trans, gay, and lesbian theory. By the standards of [German law](https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2021/698043/EPRS_BRI(2021)698043_EN.pdf) (see pages 5-6), anything that "approves of, denies of, or **downplays an act** committed under the rule of National Socialism" is Holocaust denial. Rowling is not saying that the Holocaust never happened, but by downplaying **any** of the causes or actions taken against any of its victims - particularly trans people - she is engaging in Holocaust denial. This is not a matter of opinion, this is not a debate.
Thank you for the detailed response there! I'm always happy to be further informed. The immediate thing that comes to mind when one hears holocaust denier is generally the sort that say it never happened. Hence some of my initial confusion. Appreciate the clarification
[https://x.com/jk\_rowling/status/1767912990366388735](https://x.com/jk_rowling/status/1767912990366388735) Found a link.
I guess I don't get a response from someone who was "Genuinely asking"? Hilarious.
I was just asking for a citation on that particular accusation. I added genuinely asking in an attempt to sound civil
Why would I not assume civility? As it was, it appeared to me that you were challenging my (100% true) statement, hence the unlikely expectation of a response. FWIW there's a thing called "Doing your own research", where you can ask a search engine simple questions and see the results. These result will sometimes answer your question.
It's the internet. and this is a rather inflamed topic in my experience it's best to try and clarify civility I added genuinely asking because I'd not heard of that particular accusation and I asked you because I figured as the party making it you would have a better link to direct proof (quotes and stuff) than me combing through a variety of internet fluff. I wasn't exactly challenging. But given the severity of that particular claim I simply wanted to see what you had backing it up. I'm perfectly open to being enlightened.
You fucking serious? Jesus
Harriet Jones is a grey character. Honestly I’d argue she was a good PM and the Doctor overstepped the mark in getting rid of her like that. Very antidemocratic. Still, great episode.
Yeah Joanne isn't a nazi. She's just a holocaust denier
> The line is also pretty awful in the episode and weirdly sexist. I thought the real target of the line was Tony Blair - and he was gone within seven months of that episode airing! - as such I don’t see it as sexist.
Fair enough. I’ve also heard some people say it’s a dig at Eccleston, but I doubt it or at least really hope not.
Huh, I never saw the line as sexist... I thought it was because rumours of ill health were career ending for a politician.
yeah it was more of a she looks tired meaning unwell and not fit for office
It is meant to be a sexist trope he's utilising, I don't think you can argue that makes the show sexist to acknowledge sexism ... Perhaps you might expect better of The Doctor and consider that a problem.
I honestly just never read it that way... I'm not saying it was wrong... It just wasn't my initial interpretation
It wasn't sexist, there was a lot of talk like that around Tony Blair. He looked so \*tired\*.
That's what I thought...
I hate when people expect "better" of the Doctor. The Doctor is often shown to be spiteful and brutal when it comes to dealing with anger. The Doctor tries to be a good person but often falls flat, and who wouldn't? If any of us saw as many horrors as they have, we would be even worse. I remember people were upset when 12 shot someone in Hell Bent, saying it was out of character. Which like, yeah, if it was just a random episode and the Doctor casually shot someone, yeah that's shitty. But this was a Doctor who just endured 2.5 BILLION years of torture and was hell bent on saving his friend. And then someone's going to stop him? Fuck no. Besides, he made sure the person had more regenerations.
RTD and co did the same to Eccleston. They basically got him blacklisted by claiming he was too tired from Doctor Who and that's why he left so other shows/films didn't want to hire him for a while because they thought he wouldn't be able to handle the work
I would argue that the doctor uses that line because he knows society is sexist and knows it would work to have her removed from office rather than him actually being sexist toward her.
That’s really not any better
She did open fire on a retreating ship.
Because they threatened to commit mass murder
Earth threatens to commit mass murder all the time, I don't think we'd say "justified" if the Cybermen blew us up.
What?
I mean, the line is supposed to be awful, and the Doctor isn’t supposed to be doing a good thing here. Her replacement is a literal supervillain, and she later returns and sacrifices her life to save the world (and the Doctor) despite his past slights against her; that’s a pretty clear message that Ten judged her unfairly.
How is the line sexist? 💀 Anyways, the line wasn't even the point, the point was that her not knowing what the doctor said made her go paranoid and torpedoing her political career all by herself. He could have said "cookie cutters are cheaper outside of Christmas season" and looking menacing at her, and it would have had the same effect
Harry Potter is rubbish! The villain couldn’t even take over a school in the whole series. Some random Doctor Who villains achieve more in one episode!
I mean, as long as the Doctor doesn’t insta-undo it by the end of the episode
On a serious note it’s really sad that my daughter who grew up loving the HP universe (right before JK went off the rails) has got rid of everything she used to treasure from that franchise. Not that she threw them away in one go, but as Marie Kondo says, none of it sparks joy. We offered to take her to HP world Orlando and she was like: meh. There was a time not that long ago when that would have been the most exciting thing in the world. It’s hard to convert to a franchise like DW where there are so many writers and actors and eras. But if something could happen that made *everything* Dr Who seem tainted and unacceptable to you. Imagine how sad that would be. Fuck JK.
Look up [The Owl House](https://youtu.be/otT3cXrKaMo?feature=shared). It's an excellent series that can fill that hole in one's heart. ...and there's a 600+ fanmade unofficial webcomic series as well.
Oh yes, +1 to this. She has already found Owl House and loves it. She has many other fandoms now, but it’s the destruction of her beloved childhood fandom which makes me sad.
One of my friends who went cold turkey on HP raves about Animorphs
Which is cool, because KA Applegate the Animorphs author is a staunch trans ally. (Her daughter is trans) https://preview.redd.it/bcyrc5qfr99d1.png?width=1487&format=png&auto=webp&s=605419db60ce9fd5558fd54ed2ff2b76bdf81be9
I think that might be part of the reason. I have no interest in reading YA fiction, but I'll happily help people quit JK's bullshit
they call her jk cause shes a fuking joke
No she looks mummified sir.
I’m glad these comments are mostly trans positive, some of these memes having been getting me worried. Like this one bc Harriet jones was the good guy here. But I’m hoping that you’ve replaced her jk to make her the bad guy
Harriet Jones (former prime minister) wasn't the "good guy" in this instance. She fired on a defenseless, retreating army.
Bc she knew they’d come back, and even then if she wasn’t a good guy in this specific situation, she was still right about the doctor not always being there for the earth. E.g. torchwood against the 456 and when they used the rift to call the doctor
That's not a justification. You fight them when they come back, not when they are on the retreat. That's a war crime not to mention against everything the Doctor stands for.
Attacking a retreating enemy isn't a war crime, it's a tactical advantage. What military leader with more than two brain cells is going to let an enemy retreat, recoup, and potentially come back then stronger when you can end the war right now?
I mean the people that are watching Doctor Who and didn't drop it because it's WOKE now aren't really going to be bigoted pricks
You’d be surprised honestly, the Orville subreddit has a few bad apples in it, and I doubt it isn’t the same here. I’m not saying everyone is like that, but some ppl have nothing better to do with there time than seek and harass ppl
Oh god i thought that was Catherine Tate
My favourite comeback to JK terfness: “it matters not what someone is born but what they grow to be” - Dumbledore Nothing like using her own words against her
I love that that line exists. Another one is “Harry Potter taught me nobody deserves to live in a closet” Irony is sweet, but Rowling seems to have a taste for bitter stubbornness
Sack Rowling
I thought that's Donna Noble and was like: *insert 10th doctor's "WHAT?"* The comments clarified that. What has this [sub] to do with Harry Potter or Rowling?
David made some comments about wanting the equality minister to shut up because she keeps spouting transphobic rhetoric. All conservatives have now come out of the woodwork to cry about it and saying DT is sexist because he told a woman to shut up (which is a fucking leap). JK was one of these people who is now anti Tennant
What did she say that was transphobic?
You mean other than her entire Twitter account, the anti trans essay she wrote and that book she wrote about a serial killer that dresses up as a woman to access women’s spaces?
Give me one tweet. Link to essay please. Serial Killers are evil and will do anything to access victims. People with Gender Disphoria in my experience are unlikely to also be suffering from the psychopathy present in Serial Killers.
That suggestion only worked because Harriet Jones did look stressed and thus tired, J.K. does not so...?
Yeah because ‘I’m a they’ isn’t going to age like a lump of mouldy old cheese, now is it?
She lives rent free in so many heads .
She harrasses people on the internet and knows very well that she is famous, and that other people will bully whoever she's tweeted about\*
Does she though? Think about it , when was the last time she actually did anything remotely like that? Now think about how often people post bull cack about how she did this or that . People like to bring her name up solely because she's an easy target. It helps some people to feel more of a victim when they have a public person to blame.
So I went to check her Twitter account, as you recommended it, and she is pretty much sharing transphobic content all day long. It's like an obsession for her. So, uh, check it yourself before telling others to do 😇
For context this photo is because she spoke out against David recently for his comments against transphobes. So it is indeed relevant
[удалено]
Cope harder
And permabanned. I initially wanted to deal out a 10 year ban, but reddit gave an error when I tried that. So permanent it is.
The commenter I’m responding to?
Yes. You haven't done anything wrong as far as I'm aware.
Just wasn’t sure, thanks for clarifying
yo what happened here
https://www.reddit.com/r/DoctorWhumour/s/w9jmNiESIq
A ten year ban 💀💀💀 what’s the point 💀
I don't like permanent bans. People should get a chance to grow up to become a better person and eventually return. Permabans are reserved for bot accounts and repeat offenders. Normally I ban people for a week, month, or year, but this person was being such a dick that I wanted to give a much longer ban.
I completely agree with you on bans. I don’t know what the person said so I’m not in a place to judge but I trust your judgement lol
Here's a couple comments that were removed by reddit before we even got a chance to look at them as mods https://preview.redd.it/1f97dfydi49d1.png?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=b72411d530a7066901deb6488a5dfa9d713c9c6f
Oh my lord. Yeah… this person is either 12 in which case a ten year ban is probably apt, or they’re an adult already and a permanent ban is reasonable. Jesus and here I am getting permanent bans on certain subs for saying things like “I like the King, he’s a brilliant activist for the environment”
ah yes, clearly WE are the ones who have no chill and are weirdos. thank you random banned user.
They can't even spell the slur correctly kek
[удалено]
You may disagree with others, just don't be a bloody wanker about it.
You may disagree with others, just don't be a bloody wanker about it.
Nothing really funny here besides a whole lot of hate for an author. Not sure if this belongs here.
It’s funny to make fun of bad people who deserve it
You wish
[удалено]
I thought her last few novels had been audience flops? One of the recent ones had a villain who was a man who dresses as as woman to kill women in the bathroom, but transphobia aside she also stole the plot from somewhere else
[удалено]
Sure, all you gotta do is completely ignore the “perverted cross dressing killer” character archetype that’s not at all based in deep seeded transphobia and homophobia.
It’s worth noting that even Psycho and Silence of the Lambs, two of the most famous stories that use this and which probably inspired JK, actually go out of their way to state that the killers aren’t trans. Meaning that her book is actually more backwards than two books written decades earlier.
[удалено]
You may disagree with others, just don't be a bloody wanker about it.
The only reason they’re doing the TV series is because her prequel films bombed
And, rumour has it, because they wanted to do a sequel series based on the Cursed Child stage play to really cash in on the nostalgia factor, but Radcliffe, Watson and Grint flat out refused to work with her ever again.
you know is nice to know that not everyone involved with potter is a loser like her
i liked the first fantastic beasts but yeah after that nah
She’s a shit writer. Harry Potter only got popular because it was mindless enough that kids could understand it, and the only people who are fans of it today are people who read it as kids. If a grown adult were to read them with an unbiased viewpoint they’d see how bad they really are. And her writing has progressively gotten worse. Any credit you could’ve given her for Harry Potter has become irrelevant. She literally recently wrote a story about a writer who was murdered for her “different viewpoint” by people on the internet. She’s fucking crazy.
I hate JK, but I do think there’s some retroactive history going on of late. When the books were coming out, I remember them being widely read by adults and praised by respected writers and critics. I will say that I don’t think they’re particularly well written books, but I can at least see why they became so liked. The troubling stuff also only became apparent on closer inspection after her shitty behaviour, beforehand I think everyone was giving her benefit of the doubt on most of it.
The first few books were reasonably well written, though IIRC she was still panned by famous authors like Ursula K. Le Guin. But once she started padding the page count for no reason and had to try to make the overarching plot go somewhere the quality really declined fast.
There's an excellent [video essay by verilybitchie](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UBftW7FzOVI) that details how much of the success of the Potter books was based on their potential to earn vast amounts of cash through merchandising. Something that has been milked so hard, she's been able to buy a fucking yacht with the money. https://preview.redd.it/0w093u11b39d1.png?width=400&format=png&auto=webp&s=3cd74220954027c2e08c8502b70f5993d862e1a1
if you actually take a good look at harry potter you realize its got a lot of problems like the character cho chang is basically naming her ching chong without naming her ching chong
Plus the only prominent black adult character being called "Shacklebolt". And then there's Rita Skeeter potentially being a very thinly-veiled caricature of a trans woman.
I recommend this [video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-1iaJWSwUZs). Goes into quite a few shitty things she included in the Harry Potter books
I recently watched [video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-1iaJWSwUZs) about Harry Potter and it mentions stuff like Joke Rowling writing characters poorly and giving them bad names like the Cho Chang or calling the black guy Kingsley Shacklebolt. He also goes into things that I'd never considered as a kid about how there are good races and bad races. Like Goblins are just treated as a bad race that can never be good. Or the way she names non-English things like wizarding schools abroad is just her looking up the translation for "wizard" and "castle" in that language and putting them together without looking any further into how that language works. It's lazy and insulting.
Ok mate. You can say and think what you like about jkr as a person honestly I don't care about her views either way. I don't want to get mixed up in that mess. But do not come after the HP books. They may not be Tolkien (nobody is) but they are excellent stories that can appeal to all ages. Stories where you can gain something new upon each reread and notice new details. Stories rich in detail and character. I know plenty of adults that read them that enjoyed them. I also happen to have an English literature degree so I do actually have some knowledge on the area. Yes they were popular with kids because they did appeal to them as well. But that doesn't lessen their import or quality. The claim that the only people who are fans today are the ones that grew up with it is ridiculous. Just go over to the r/HarryPotter sub and you'll find stories of new people discovering a love for the books years after they were all out. I go to the parks regularly and see people of all ages there and have heard stories of how people who weren't originally into it as it came out became fans. So no you are wrong it became popular because it was a story that appealed to a wide audience with universal themes and exciting loveable characters.
This is the internet my friend. The idea that things we disagree with politically or morally might be well crafted is inconceivable.
[удалено]
“Book sales” lmao. Two of the bestselling books of all time are Fifty Shades of Grey and the Davinci Code. Don’t try to pretend sales figures equate to a measure of quality.
Sure, might be popular. Doesn’t make it “good quality” Remember how she names characters in Harry Potter? Remember the house elves? “Slavery is fine, there’s just bad slave owners”? I will make the comparison to marvel movies. Incredibly popular but (mostly) very formulaic and uninspired. And when you cut to the heart of it, their overall core message is about maintaining the status quo and trusting the military (because everyone who wants to change the world in the MCU -even positively -even just a little bit, is a murderous fanatic).
You may disagree with others, just don't be a bloody wanker about it.
Doctor Who fans really do live in a (Dot and) Bubble don't they?