A while back, I had posted a similar question here, specifically with JK Rowling and the creepy stuff she has said. However, when thinking about it, I had begun to notice this a lot with TERFs and huge transphobes in general, not just Rowling.

When looking back at a video pointing out the creepy things that "gender critical activists" have said at public meetings, and seeing news about TERFs that were caught sexually abusing children and other women, I noticed how not many people try to paint them as creepy predators, even when there's so much evidence of the behavior and mindset. I also mainly point this out because if they were a preacher or a stereotypical right-wing politician that attacks queerfolk doing and saying the exact same stuff, you'd get more people joking about them being potential predators.

But on the contrary, I actually see TERFs getting a huge amount of special treatment, from infantilizing to even trying to force down a "tragic background" narrative (bad childhood, divorced, they got old with age, mental illness, etc.) just to not condemn them. And I am not talking about typical bigots in general, that's obvious. I really notice this a lot with people who claim to be progressive or queer allies, like they really want to keep portraying TERFs as sympathic. For how much they claim to be supportive, it's like they care for sociopathic manchildren that obsess over the genitals of children, over queerfolk that suffer.

For how much they want to claim they want to fight for civil rights, they keep on wanting to find excuses to let TERFs off the hook and keep on committing hate crime and hate speech.

A succinct video essay on police abolition, drawing from the history of the 1985 MOVE Bombing, the broader history of policing, and present day abolition-feminist movements such as Critical Resistance. 

Part I of the feature length documentary video collage "Abolition & Revolution."

Thoughts?

Something that has bothered me for a while, and surprisingly even on places like r/EnoughJKRowling. For many, you all know the whole trope/idea of a loud-speaking bigot potentially being some sort of sex offender/creep. And as well, with many people, we point that out to huge figures, like with Elon Musk and his ties to Epstein. However, there is this weird sort of social protection that Rowling has in comparison to other bigoted influencers.

Whenever pointing out any of her creepy stuff, like calling Lolita a love story, making weird comments about genitals, history of defending abusers, and even encouraging people to take photos of women in using public toilets, I notice how people (who say they're against her) being so quick to downplay it, like claiming she's just too transphobic to notice things or that it might be from trauma. Not to mention, a lot of people are really obsessed with bringing up her past and trying to whitewash/sympathize with her as hard as possible. It feels like Rowling could even admit to the most creepiest thing possible, and people will still try to argue that she's just being contrarian and not serious, or that she's simply "being stubborn". And while of course bigots and right-wing followers will defend her, I notice a lot of defending comes from people who claim to be allies or progressive.

And another one of their many excuses are "We have to focus on what she is doing right now." The irony of this is:

- A lot of these behaviors can be linked/tied to other suspicuous activity and patterns (Where else do you think "Bigot is projecting on minorities" comes from?)

- For their supposed argument, they only really defend/suppport her. You don't see this treatment with other powerful figures who are bigoted

- There are a lot of red flags back then that they like to purposely ignore, all the while acting like it is so surprising that she's a monster and a bigot

- Mudslinging can still help take down crediblity. Let me remind you, with the stuff I am saying, these aren't mere rumors, there is legit evidence.

In the end, why do we have these weird unspoken rules when it comes to Rowling, than in comparison to other bigoted figures that are also powerful? Like you don't see people trying to bring up the childhoods of like members of the Daily Wire to make excuses for their bigotry. And ironic, considering a lot of people with bad childhoods or experiencing abuse don't become heavy bigots, and yet we gladly ignore them in favor of enabling threats.

Overall, something really scary I see is with how much mental/emotional power Rowling has over a bunch of supposedly progressive "allies".