![Muggle Games [Good Bear Comics]](https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/fce6466d-99e0-4006-9db4-9862f5464c9f.jpeg){kind=link}
GoodBearComics | website
Transcript
4 Panel Comic
Panel 1: Ron Weasley sits in front of a fireplace with a Gameboy Yellow with Pokémon Red in hand.
Ron: Harry, these muggle games are so fun!
Panel 2: Harry Potter sits across the fireplace from Ron and holds his wand and a Gameboy Red with the screen and wand pointing at Ron.
Potter: Ron, look! My Pokémon is evolving from Abra to Kadabra!
Panel 3: Harry is horrified as magic flies from his wand
Panel 4: Harry comes to the depressing realization of what he’s done.
Ehh, Michael was fucked up by his circumstances and dad… He did terrible things, but I’m not sure how bad he knew he was being to those kids.
Rowling has made it clear any money she makes from a year’s back will be basically fully deployed to actively make trans people, and anyone who might support them, worse off.
But harm and “bad” are all inquantifiable, like all things that matter.
Besides, all of this is a very post-19th century problem where celebrity itself and the parasocial connection with creators has become such a large part of how people self-identify and find community. (As with Capitalism consumption = identity.)
Lots of the worst criminals have tragic back stories. Maybe demented by childhood trauma. Maybe they never had a chance due to sharing genetics with their abusers.
Heck, for all we know, Rowling might have some sort of trauma that helped shaped her into one of today’s leading assholes.
What I do know is that Rowling doesn’t seem to have broken any laws, but I have been told that Michael had individual victims whose lives he likely altered for the worse with criminal actions. (I speak with a little hedging because I haven’t actually reviewed any of the most recent evidence against him.)
I’ll acknowledge that Michael broke laws while (the thoroughly vituperable) Rowling has not.
But I don’t hold that to be an arbiter of morality.
For me it comes down more to how they seem to view other living beings.
Michael has no clear evidence of deliberate, knowing, harm. Yes, he should’ve known better, and without being in his head I can’t know for sure… But it seems to be plausible.
Meanwhile J. K. (I feel more comfortable with a gender neutral name even now everyone knows me but gender bending is right out) Rowling has made it clear that she doesn’t value trans-people as much as cos-people and is willing to set up conditions which greatly increase sexual assault against trans-women if it might only slightly reduce the threat of sexual assault against a single cos-woman, and does not find issue with cooperating with actual neo-nazis and crypto fascists who have strong misogynistic and homophobic stances on anti-trans issues - despite claiming she doesn’t want to harm those groups. She is choosing to value particular groups and ignore, and create, suffering for others she seems abhuman. (And yes she has a tragic back-story of an abusive husband and marital rape, which she says is why she must ensure gender is immutable.)
But - evil and harm can’t be compared and the totally different natures of what they do make comparison even more pointless.
If you continue to enjoy either of their work (or that of any other harmful person, be it Marquis de Sade, H. P. Lovecraft, or whomever) more power to you - but just try your best not to fund She Who Shall Not be Named’s warchest.
Absolutely. This is a fantastic reason to pirate certain material. I’m all for paying the owners and creators of materials I enjoy for said material, but there are exceptions.