• LilB0kChoy@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    The minute you step back and realize that somebody is really trying to argue against letting go of Harry Potter from such a weird angle

    I haven’t argued that at all. What I have argued is that context and intent matters when it comes to an individuals actions and, while you’re free to judge away, just because someone lives there their life in a way you don’t like doesn’t automatically make them transphobic or mean they are literally promoting transphobia.

    Edit: I had to come back for this bit.

    Just not supporting jkr is a lot more clear-cut than all those other examples. It’s easy unless you start justifying it.

    I’m guessing this wasn’t your intent but it reads like you should only take a stand when it’s easy.

    • Jiggle_Physics@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 days ago

      You know systemic bigotry needs not intent, or context, from the individual, right? You seem to be arguing that your personal lack of hatred towards a group, and lack of direct harm, means your actions can’t be bigoted. And no, being forced to pay taxes is not the same as choosing to buy into something funding bigotry.

      • LilB0kChoy@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 days ago

        You know systemic bigotry needs not intent, or context, from the individual, right?

        I don’t know but I don’t disagree with it. It’s also not what I said.

        You seem to be arguing that your personal lack of hatred towards a group, and lack of direct harm, means your actions can’t be bigoted.

        I’m not. My feelings on the subject, hate or lack thereof, have nothing to do with it. I am arguing that consuming Harry Potter content or talking about it online is not equivalent to literally being transphobic or promoting transphobia. To make that determination requires context and intent.

        And no, being forced to pay taxes is not the same as choosing to buy into something funding bigotry.

        They are not directly equivalent though it’s interesting that’s the only example I provided you’re addressing.

        You’re not forced. You have the choice to not and face those consequences. It’s an awful and unfair choice that nobody should even have to consider but it’s there. By choosing not to refuse to pay doesn’t mean you’re literally being transphobic or promoting transphobia and that’s the point.

        You can disagree with someone’s choice to consume HP content or their decision to discuss it online but that doesn’t make it literally being transphobic or promoting transphobia. That requires context and intent.

        Transphobia, by definition, consists of negative attitudes, feelings, or actions towards transgender or transsexual people, or transness in general. Consuming HP content or talking about it does not meet that literal definition, until or unless there’s context to support it and/or expressed intent, e.g. someone says “I hate trans people so I bought all the HP books to show my support”.

        • Jiggle_Physics@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 day ago

          That is “classic” bigotry, if you will. Systemic bigotry does not need these feelings, as you thoughts on the subject mean nothing to those who are the targets of the bigotry, as buying things that enrich their persecutors, and actively donating to those people ideologically, bears no significant difference to the persecuted, in any practical manner. Also, if it is something I can practically avoid, living in the world I was born into, then I do. Entertainment is like the poster child of things you can choose to avoid. Suggesting people live an impossibility does no good, but that is not what is happening with people telling people to drop JK Rowling’s IP.