Rowling Derangement Syndrome - "TERF/Woke Author Bad!!1"

  • 🏰 The Fediverse is up. If you know, you know.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
Mellow Malevolent said:
She didn't have a freakout when they cast a black actress as Hermione in a stage play.

Truly the Community feature is a double edged sword.
Click to expand...
She said her skin color was never mentioned in the books, which is false. And as everyone here keeps mentioning, shes more than a good enough writer to understand what shes implying there by phrasing it that way, and whats shes implying is stupid
 
Maverick Vile said:
What a magnanimous reply to someone who deserves no mercy for acting like an absolute snake. By the way, as an indication that Rowling is indeed a writer:

View attachment 7976318

Most people would use the phrase "change of tact," which means something similar but is not the original phrase nor is it the best fitting. Tacking is a nautical term (a common origin for many turns of phrase) which refers to the ropes used for changing the direction of sails to catch wind. When she says, "change of tack," she means Emma has turned her sails back in Rowling's direction now that the wind has blown her way, which is a subtly different notion to "change of tact," meaning "tactics," which would infer that there was a battle between the two requiring tactics. No, change of tack nicely describes Emma as someone who just goes wherever the wind dictate her, calling her out as a mindless drone and a fair-weather friend without ever uttering either phrase once.

Truly a masterful flourish and a deft demonstration of the British knack for delivering deep cuts without resorting to vulgarity, but I doubt Ms. Watson has the intellect to detect such a barb. She is a Hollywood golem, after all.
Click to expand...
Close,
tack also refers to the direction of your boat in regard to the wind. If you are sailing with the wind hitting your right side, you're on a starboard tack. Changing tack or tacking is the act of changing from one tack to the other, meaning going from starboard tack to port tack or vice versa.

This is important for sailing up wind. As you can imagine, you cannot sail directly into the wind, so you have to sail diagonally in regards to the direction the wind is coming. If you are sailing up wind with the wind coming across your port bow, you are on port tack. If you are sailing as close to into the wind as possible, you are "close hauled on the port tack"

After a while sailing on one tack or the other, you have to tack to the other tack so you don't just sail off in that one direction forever. So tacking is used to zig-zag up wind in a sailing ship.

When you're sailing the same direction as the wind, changing from one tack to the other is called "wearing" instead of tacking.

Last note, if two ships are sailing upwind on opposite tacks, and their courses intersect, the ship on the starboard tack has right-of-way, and the ship on the port tack must yield. This is still practiced in sailing, like yacht racing ie Cup of the Americas and can lead to great tactics where one ship suddenly tacks to starboard tack and cuts the other ship off and forcing them to yield.
 
AltisticRight said:
HP is fake but the scene of a troll in the girl's bathroom certainly mirrors reality in a very wicked way. Many of these shebeasts would intentionally take selfies in the bathrooms of their opposit gender to assert dominance.
Click to expand...
Urgh the malodorant.webp
 
I feel like the people ITT that are shitting on Rowling for having lefty political views would do well to remember what Voltaire once said:

"The perfect is the enemy of the good."

I probably wouldn't agree with Rowling on much, but the fact she's willing to lend her name to fighting against the troon menace ought to be appreciated and encouraged. You don't have to agree with her on anything else to do that.
 
Still not going to read her books, but she really knows how to compose a tweet, at least. Almost felt sorry for Watson. Meow!
 
The Mighty Banth said:
Ruined Beauty and the Beast.
Click to expand...
The live action version was just corporate slop, even without Emma in it. It wasn’t as poorly done as Maleificent, but it still left a lot to be desired. Also, I don’t get why they had to add a whole girl power arc to the movie when Belle as a character was plenty strong on her own (in the original, she wasn’t just some wallflower, and stood up to both Gaston and the Beast at different times). Emma definitely didn’t make the movie better, but the entire creative direction was off. The only casting choices for that movie that I liked were for Gaston and LeFou.
 
Chicha Drinker said:
She said her skin color was never mentioned in the books, which is false. And as everyone here keeps mentioning, shes more than a good enough writer to understand what shes implying there by phrasing it that way, and whats shes implying is stupid
Click to expand...
I am oddly reminded of the casting for the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy movie. Douglas Adams set only a couple specific requirements -- Arthur and Trillian had to be British -- and then everything else was up in the air.

So they cast Mos Def as Ford, which worked a lot better than I expected. So I guess the precedent was there.
 
Chicha Drinker said:
She tried to gaslight people and imply hermione could have been black, right? Shes got the brown skin worship brain tumor every rich nonracist white woman has
Click to expand...
What she said was in relation to a play casting a black girl as hermione (because that was the actress they had), in reply to a bunch of people who only saw "black girl playing white character". She said, essentially, it didn't matter if Hermione black in the play and she people could imagine her as black in the books if they wanted.

MrTroll said:
Because sailors, like the British, are extremely gay?
Click to expand...
Other way around.
 
Shakira Flabbergasted said:
PSA for thread tourists:

If you're here to say "I hate JKR because she hates men/is woke/wrote some stuff I disagreed with once/didn't say something I think she should have said about [insert political topic]" please just type it out in your notes application or word processor of choice, screenshot it, and DM it to one of our regular thread posters like @teriyakiburns so he can make a compilation of KF-sponsored RDS posts instead of shitting up the thread with a dozen identical posts that all purport to be saying something original.
Click to expand...

The Rowling Derangement Syndrome thread is now overrun with people who have a terminal case of said syndrome, all repeating the same retarded "issues" they have with things she has said/has not said.

Too bad Rowling can't admit she's a lurker, her comments would be hilarious otherwise
 
AltisticRight said:
HP's world building was incredibly shallow. Like, really really shallow. It's not really her fault and we can't judge it by today's higher standards. I think in general a diverse cast of characters is better because it's more relatable to people and that transfers into more profit.
Click to expand...
Shallow but (relatively) consistent. It is obviously based on real life systems of government/interpersonal relations. And it's not as extensive as say, Dune, whose author was insanely detail oriented most likely due to peyote. But you can still enjoy both works on their own merit.

Not a professional writter so everything I say is the equivalent of listening to a fry cook (not a fry cook irl) saying the 5 star restaurant chef is great at cooking with simple ingredients. Like, no shit the 5 star chef with years of experience is great at cooking Sherlock, cracked the case.
 
teriyakiburns said:
What she said was in relation to a play casting a black girl as hermione (because that was the actress they had), in reply to a bunch of people who only saw "black girl playing white character". She said, essentially it didn't matter if Hermione black in the play and she people could imagine her as black in the books if they wanted.
Click to expand...
I don't buy this because I don't believe JK Rowling would be alright with the titular Harry Potter being turned black. It's not "niggers can't be wizards", it's "the focal themes of this book involve a kid from Surrey" which are about as far away from being black as possible.
 
Candidate No 7 said:
Batten down the hatches, girlies!

View attachment 7976016View attachment 7976015

Hope they don't lock up this hilarious subreddit.
Click to expand...
LOL! She's not dragging you, she's clarifying that she doesn't wish you dead. Proof trannies are illiterate.
Lifeguard Hermit said:
Something that always struck me and in a way turned me off of the whole Harry Potter thing was when I got to I think it was the fourth movie and Emma Watson was basically a teenager at that point.

I had dated enough girls by that point to take one look at her and go oh she's a piece of shit. I didn't see Hermione Granger I saw Emma Watson as a screen hungry actress already full in the throws of narcissism. The face that she makes in that fourth movie in almost every scene is a direct correlation to every BPD psychotic female I had ever met.
Click to expand...
I started to have problems with Watson's portrayal of Hermione around movie three, but it largely came down to the way Hermione's character deviated so drastically from he books. The kind of Hermione that Watson portrayed reminded me of the 'overachiever girls' I knew in high school. They were the ones on the student council who thought themselves just better than everyone, and all of their actions reeked of it.

There was one year, they decided to help out all of the poor students who weren't as great as they were, so any kid who had a small or nonexistent friend group, didn't attend the sports games, etc. got their own special student council 'friend' who met with them for about an hour on the first day of the week to try and make small talk, or they'd get the janitors to give them access to the kids' lockers so they could hide candy and stuff in there. Everyone, even the most retarded of the kids they babysat for an hour, knew they weren't interested in their lives at all and just wanted to pat themselves on the back for being such righteous snoots.
ManInTheBlarms said:
Why should they cuck their own opinions when she pitches a fit about this topic as loudly as she can every day of her life? Rowling did not kowtow in infinite gratitude to her queer fanbase when they asked her to please maybe talk to someone outside mumsnet, she just made fun of them. I think Watson and Radcliffe could be an awful lot more harsh.
Click to expand...
Rowling isn't asking them to be eternally grateful. She says right at the beginning of her tweet that they don't owe her anything and instead calls them out for their hypocrisy. They were the type to try sneaking her notes of support behind everyone's backs while repeatedly throwing her under the bus as soon as there was a microphone nearby. As Rowling points out, they have no idea how privileged they really are or who stands to lose.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom