Troubled Blood - J.K. Rowling

[Heathcliff]

I've been listening to the audio book of the new Strike detective novel, written by J.K. Rowling (writing as Robert Galbraith.) Just getting to a VERY unexpected ending, as usual.

Is anyone else enjoying this?

[•.*°•☆. Q .☆•°*.•]

jk rowling's cormoran strike novels are even more blatantly and transparently transphobic than any of her other works. i think they're heinous and i can't imagine enjoying them 

[bloom]

yeah, agreed with q. when i learned that her pen name was the real name of a huge proponent of violent conversion therapy for lgbt people, it became even more abundantly clear just how mask-off she is in her hatred of trans women (and lgbt people in general) and can't imagine enjoying anything she's ever put out ever again.

the new book in light of her openly and violently hating trans women is horrendously transmisogynist, it's very very clear what she's up to and she's very much not even trying to hide it anymore. it's stomach-churning.

Edited September 22, 2020 by jejune

[•.*°•☆. Q .☆•°*.•]

29 minutes ago, jejune said:

when i learned that her pen name was the real name of a huge proponent of violent conversion therapy for lgbt people, 

w h a t 

[Owlinatree]

1 hour ago, •.*°•☆. Q .☆•°*.• said:

w h a t 

yeah, she says it's a coincidence, but it seems awfully convenient given that she is also a virulent transphobe and no ally to the lgbt community as a whole. the guy's name is robert galbraith heath, btw.

https://www.newsweek.com/who-robert-galbraith-heath-jk-rowling-1532701

https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/health-news/man-who-fried-gay-people-s-brains-a7119181.html

[•.*°•☆. Q .☆•°*.•]

2 hours ago, Owlinatree said:

yeah, she says it's a coincidence, but it seems awfully convenient given that she is also a virulent transphobe and no ally to the lgbt community as a whole. the guy's name is robert galbraith heath, btw.

https://www.newsweek.com/who-robert-galbraith-heath-jk-rowling-1532701

https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/health-news/man-who-fried-gay-people-s-brains-a7119181.html

holy smokes... 😬

[MeForever]

I hate J.K Rowling with a burning passion and I refuse to read a book with blatently transphobic undertones.

[Frick]

3 hours ago, Jack said:

 

All right, my child, I will come for you. Maybe if Rowling kept her transphobic (and shitty) attitude to herself, rather than using her significant platform to spout off, I wouldn't care about her 'political views'. Unfortunately she hasn't. I care because her views impact so many people. 

Who are you to decide what a 'real' woman is? Is biology destiny? Nope. Otherwise we wouldn't have medicine to change things that are damaging to our bodies. (Like, I take antidepressants/anti-anxiety meds because my body doesn't produce serotonin in the proper balance to keep me from wanting to kill myself. Does this make me a 'fake' happy person? Maybe - but it keeps me alive and generally okay. Sure, a transperson's body is different than a cisperson's... but no two bodies are the same. I agree this shouldn't be a debate - there is no debate over someone's existence and lived reality. A transperson is who they say they are, and it's not up for question.

Edited September 22, 2020 by SneezyHolmes
Removed quoted transphobic comment

[SneezyHolmes]

Just a polite staff remainder to keep conversations civil outside of the 'Snake Pit'. JK Rowling is absolute trash, no argument, but here is not the place for heated arguments and flame wars. Please take it to the pit.

[Esstrosa]

I'm boycotting everything she ever touched or had involvement that includes the new Harry potter game coming and everything else just don't want anything to do with her

[Jack]

18 hours ago, SneezyHolmes said:

Just a polite staff remainder to keep conversations civil outside of the 'Snake Pit'. JK Rowling is absolute trash, no argument, but here is not the place for heated arguments and flame wars. Please take it to the pit.

Im being as civil as I can be. However, you saying that someone is "absolute trash" with "no argument" doesn sound like what a civil person would say.

You are the almighty moderator. You can erase this an silence me and anyone disagreeing. You probably enjoy doing so. But deeply... you know I am right in what I say :) . 

 

[SneezyHolmes]

4 hours ago, Jack said:

Im being as civil as I can be. However, you saying that someone is "absolute trash" with "no argument" doesn sound like what a civil person would say.

You are the almighty moderator. You can erase this an silence me and anyone disagreeing. You probably enjoy doing so. But deeply... you know I am right in what I say . 

 

Actually your comment was removed for being unnecessarily aggressive and instigative as well as transphobic. Tout your hurtful views all you wish but you will NOT do it on this forum, am I understood?

And should that be too difficult for you to adhere to then by all means you are welcome to leave and take your rhetoric with you. Oh and getting to 'silence' such hurtful and awful bigotry does, in fact, make me quite happy.

[Travel]

On 9/21/2020 at 6:13 PM, •.*°•☆. Q .☆•°*.• said:

jk rowling's cormoran strike novels are even more blatantly and transparently transphobic than any of her other works. i think they're heinous and i can't imagine enjoying them 

Granted, it's been a while but what was transphobic about The Cuckoo's Calling and The Silkworm? I've read those books a bunch of times and seen the adaptations, there wasn't anything that jumped out at me as transphobic. I've also read Lethal White but only once, so my memory of it is quite fuzzy. 

[•.*°•☆. Q .☆•°*.•]

17 minutes ago, Travel said:

Granted, it's been a while but what was transphobic about The Cuckoo's Calling and The Silkworm? I've read those books a bunch of times and seen the adaptations, there wasn't anything that jumped out at me as transphobic. I've also read Lethal White but only once, so my memory of it is quite fuzzy. 

idk anything about cuckoos calling, but here's a vice article that discusses the transphobia of the silkworm in depth 

https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/pkeynz/jk-rowlings-transphobia-wasnt-hard-to-find-she-wrote-a-book-about-it

and from what i can tell, the characterization and narrative in her latest book is even more transparently hateful and malicious than this one was 

[Travel]

1 hour ago, •.*°•☆. Q .☆•°*.• said:

idk anything about cuckoos calling, but here's a vice article that discusses the transphobia of the silkworm in depth 

https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/pkeynz/jk-rowlings-transphobia-wasnt-hard-to-find-she-wrote-a-book-about-it

and from what i can tell, the characterization and narrative in her latest book is even more transparently hateful and malicious than this one was 

Thanks for the article, if I read The Silkworm again, I'll re-read it with all this in mind. Seems like jury's out on "Troubled Blood", which I'm not sure if I'll ever read. 

[Nas]

Just a reminder for those who are unclear of where the line is, that hate speech and flaming are not permitted on the main boards. 

Quote

• No flaming or harassment is permitted, be it racist, xenophobic, sexist, inciting of religious hatred, or in any other form, except in "The Snake Pit" which is there for this purpose - do not burden the rest of the forum (including private messages) with flaming or harassment!

Discussing the morality and problematic views of an author are well within the rules of the forum, wheras dehumanizing a marginalized group of people is not. 

 

Thank you for your attention.

[Heathcliff]

Wow, I feel like the boy who kicked the hornets' nest. I didn't mean to start this debate but I suppose it was inevitable.

My personal feeling is that you can boycott Rowling, but it's a bit like locking the stable door after the horse has bolted. She could still go to sleep on her big pile of money and get up in the morning and wash her hair in money.

It may surprise some people, but I do agree with the criticism against her transphobic views. But I don't think buying her books is an endorsement of transphobic views.

I've been there before with Morrissey, who was basically the soundtrack of my college days. It was heartbreaking to me to find out how this man who wrote and sang so beautifully had such vile racist views. People had been there before with Wagner, who was a great composer but a huge anti Semite.

I believe you can enjoy the art without agreeing with the artist. We aren't stupid, we aren't schoolchildren, we can make up our own minds.

I've now listened to Troubled Blood on audiobook twice - there is no real transphobic theme. The serial killer introduced at the start (Dennis Creed) sometimes dressed as a woman in order to lure another woman to be killed - there is no exploration of what it is to be trans, or of "woman only spaces".

Perhaps you would also be wise to remember this is one of the most high-profile books I can think of to feature a strong woman who is a victim of rape as a main character.

Also, the themes of the novel are loss and grief for a parent. I would recommend this wonderful detective novel to anyone prepared to leave other issues at the door.

Edited November 2, 2020 by Heathcliff

[bloom]

10 hours ago, Heathcliff said:

I would recommend this wonderful detective novel to anyone prepared to leave other issues at the door.

perhaps you would be wise to remember that not everybody has that privilege or luxury.

it is not only impossible, but irresponsible, to take the content of a book where a man dresses like a woman to victimize them at face value when its author is a violent transmisogynist. things don't exist in a vacuum and it's utterly foolish to pretend they can or do

Edited November 2, 2020 by jejune

[Heathcliff]

It might be wise to read the book first. The cross-dressing serial killer is in the book for about 1% of it.

The whole plot is Strike proving someone other than Creed killed the main victim. But that is no reason for you to think anything else that it is a trans-hate piece.

 

I've had enough now of this nonsense that pretends to be politics

I was going try to write a haiku

In the sneezing houses

Looking back on this and that

Choice reduced to death

 

 

[•.*°•☆. Q .☆•°*.•]

On 11/2/2020 at 5:52 AM, Heathcliff said:

I don't think buying her books is an endorsement of transphobic views.

the thing is that her books are dripping with her views. it's not some statement about "not ensorsing" whatever or "not buying" whatever, i don't like the books bc i find reading that rhetoric viscerally upsetting and repulsive.

On 11/2/2020 at 5:52 AM, Heathcliff said:

there is no real transphobic theme. The serial killer introduced at the start (Dennis Creed) sometimes dressed as a woman in order to lure another woman to be killed

you say there is no transphobic theme and then list the main way in which the book relies heavily on the "man dressed as a woman" trope and additionally that said man is DANGEROUS in the book, as if one of the largest transphobic talking points against trans women WASN'T "they're just dangerous men dressed as women". in case you did not know this: IT IS.

On 11/2/2020 at 5:52 AM, Heathcliff said:

this is one of the most high-profile books I can think of to feature a strong woman who is a victim of rape as a main character.

as someone who is in fact a strong woman rape survivor i am going to need you to not use my demographic in defense of a book that contains such vile premises, or in fact as a point of argument in any conversation ever again. 

Edited November 4, 2020 by •.*°•☆. Q .☆•°*.•
typo correction

[March Hare]

On 11/2/2020 at 11:52 AM, Heathcliff said:

Perhaps you would also be wise to remember this is one of the most high-profile books I can think of to feature a strong woman who is a victim of rape as a main character.

Non-rhetorical question 1: how many books written by women (of colour) have you read?

Non-rhetorical question 2: what is your definition of "high-profile" when it comes to books?

 

[Sitruuna]

On 11/3/2020 at 1:02 AM, Heathcliff said:

The cross-dressing serial killer is in the book for about 1% of it.

okay I just have to quote and comment. I don't think I've seen anyone claim the whole book is nothing but transphobia or that this specific character would be constantly there. Even if this character appeared on one page only, or in just one sentece, as long as we still had the same info (a man who dresses as a woman to trick women into trusting him for predatory or such reasons) it would still count. As long as it is there, it counts. It doesn't change a thing that this character is not constantly involved in everything or that they don't have a bigger role. 

Also boycotts do make a difference. 

Edited November 6, 2020 by Sitruuna

[Heathcliff]

20 hours ago, Sitruuna said:

okay I just have to quote and comment. I don't think I've seen anyone claim the whole book is nothing but transphobia or that this specific character would be constantly there. Even if this character appeared on one page only, or in just one sentece, as long as we still had the same info (a man who dresses as a woman to trick women into trusting him for predatory or such reasons) it would still count. As long as it is there, it counts. It doesn't change a thing that this character is not constantly involved in everything or that they don't have a bigger role. 

Also boycotts do make a difference. 

That's true, I agree with both your points. Reviewers have commented on the fact that the inclusion of that serial killer is tone-deaf at best, and offensive at worst. I was trying to say the accusation that this (very long) book is mostly an anti-trans document is, honestly, a joke. And I don't believe anyone on this thread has read it.

And yeah, boycotts do make a symbolic difference- sometimes more than symbolic. I'm just trying to say that what makes Rowling change her mind (as honestly I hope she does) is not going to be a bunch of people wh have already bought a lot of Harry Potter books (although maybe later suddenly found transphobic themes in them) and then boycotted detective novels they weren't interested in anyway.

You guys don't want to talk about the book, that's fine. It was a bit daft of me to ask. Sorry.

[Heathcliff]

On 11/6/2020 at 8:07 PM, March Hare said:

Non-rhetorical question 1: how many books written by women (of colour) have you read?

Non-rhetorical question 2: what is your definition of "high-profile" when it comes to books?

 

Question 2: prominent famous author who sells a truckload of books, is one easy definition.

Question 1: I can't think of one, which makes me quite ashamed. But I'm not going to read one book by a woman of colour purely to tick the box. And I don't believe you would expect that, as you're not stupid. I'll read one when I get round to it because it looks good.

I'm a pretty poor reader as an adult- in the sense I got out of the habit of reading, and never really read frequently again. I read sporadically.

One male writer of colour I've enjoyed is Walter Mosley- he has often described evocatively the colour of another black person's skin (e.g. very dark, or honey-coloured) and I was criticised for emulating him by calling a character "caramel-skinned" or something similar in a forum story. So are we both offensive, or just me because I'm white? If you want to criticise people you  should address questions like this.

[Owlinatree]

On 11/7/2020 at 3:45 PM, Heathcliff said:

So are we both offensive, or just me because I'm white?

I'm kind of surprised to see such a black and white take from someone who has been so willing to capitulate and use gray area to make excuses for JK Rowling's use of transphobic tropes, which you MUST know cannot be read as "tone-deaf at best," because such a reading would be predicated on not knowing whether the author themself has transphobic views. We know how the author feels about trans people. If you aren't able to understand this, then I truly don't believe you have the critical thinking skills necessary to read this book without being influenced by its clear inclusion of a bigoted trope as written by a mask-off TERF.

I will say that rarely should you use one specific person of color's writing as a cudgel with which to beat away all other criticism, especially if it is by other people of color (I don't know who was criticizing your story, to be clear). It's reductive and incredibly bad faith. Surely you knew that when writing the last paragraph, but I will try to speak to it anyway. First, you have to understand the difference between "very dark" and "caramel" here; one is a food, and is explicitly for consumption. I don't understand why you included that one. Anyway, I know people who would draw ire with "honey-coloured," especially when we take into account the relationship sexism has with how women are viewed and described. People of color aren't a monolith. And I could go on at length about the difference between books written by a Black man which speak directly to themes of racism, and fetish fiction written by a white man for the explicit and sole purpose of sexual gratification, but again, I think you knew the difference when you said it. 

On 11/7/2020 at 3:45 PM, Heathcliff said:

If you want to criticise people you  should address questions like this.

People have addressed questions like this. People do talk about this, and we talk about it often. There is a lot of thought put into author theory and race in writing, and who is best-equipped to write which experiences, and it is absolutely not a slam dunk for you to admit that you have not been looking for these conversations. I don't have any one easy answer for you. Some people wouldn't be okay with these descriptions coming from anyone. Some people would not want to see them written by a White person. Many people, I would wager, would specifically not want you to write these descriptions, given your line of reasoning and blatant disregard for any  criticism around this topic specifically.