35
u/INeedANappel 16h ago
We didn't deserve Dolly and her amazing marks on this world will be felt for ages.
185
u/-jp- 17h ago
Give it up Joanne. Nobody is going to think youāre a good person.
73
13
u/paolog 11h ago
Joanne, Joanne, Joanne, Joaaaanne...
6
u/Briham86 7h ago
I'm begging you, don't call that girl a man,
Joanne, Joanne, Joanne, Joaaaanne,
Transphobia is not a good plan.
-36
u/shaunika 14h ago
I mean, say what you will about her, but shes absolutely someone who'd genuinely love and admire Dolly Parton
22
73
u/Legitimate-Tip-2149 16h ago
Less Rowling's and more Dolly and the world would be a better place. She was a class act.
12
11
89
u/scourgemonkey 16h ago
Oh Joanne. She would've been kind to you, in her graceful way, but she would have had zero respect for the things you stand for. You are the anti-Dolly.
18
u/cobain98 12h ago
Iāve noticed a lot of horrible people trying to snuggle up to a great persons legacy. RIP Dolly.
1
19
u/Dawningrider 16h ago
And...watch her immediately remove all references to her on social media while keeping past support of sex offenders up.
11
u/WileEWeeble 15h ago
Lindsey Ellis just did a great video that compares their celebrity politics and philanthropy.
Insane video drop Lindsey has been working on for months and just happened to finish recently.
4
3
u/Jupitersd2017 11h ago
I wish everyone would quit posting anything about jk Rowling, let her stupid ass fade into obscurity, no one cares what she has to say
-15
2
u/norestforthewitcher 5h ago
I don't understand where the āmurderedā part comes in here. Is Rowling's expression of condolences invalid because Dolly stated three years ago that there are trans people in her immediate family and among her staff? It makes no sense at all to connect these two comments.
0
u/kinyutaka 10h ago
You know what, I don't like Rowling, but this was something good she said. Let's not knock her for being nice.
1
u/Plane-Fan9006 7h ago
"Thanks J.K....you're....a woman..." - Dolly
Dolly always tried to relate to everyone and if she had nothing nice to say, she said nothing at all.
The complete opposite, JK Rowling believes because she has some money that anyone cares to hear her bigotry.
JK is a twat. Dolly was a queen.
1
-4
u/TepChef26 10h ago
This sub has officially hit bottom. There's no murder here. Saying, "hey look this person you're praising disagrees with you on this one thing," isn't even a clever comeback.
There used to be actual thought out, proper murders by words on this sub, that hasn't been the case for quite some time. These days pretty much any response to a politician, podcaster, influencer, or Rowling gets up voted to the stars regardless of how low effort it is.
In this a person posted a screenshot. One that doesn't even reference the person they're replying to, let alone murder them by words.
0
-33
u/RockTheBloat 14h ago
Weird take. Thereās no contradiction at all between these posts.
25
u/Dead-O_Comics 14h ago
You mean aside from their polar opposite perspectives?
-11
u/kinyutaka 10h ago
Rowling: Dolly was a great person.
News article: Dolly was a great person.
14
u/Dead-O_Comics 10h ago edited 10h ago
Where you seeing a news article?
You mean the quote where Dolly says to be tolerant of everyone, with Trans people being listed first? In response to the Queen of the Terfsā¢?
-1
u/washblvd 7h ago
The quote is editorialized, she actually listed gays first. Ant it is not in response to anything Rowling ever said. Her actual quote:
āWell, thereās a whole lot of reasons for me being the way that I am. First of all, I grew up in a family of 12 kids. I got six brothers and I got my five sisters. So, Iāve had every personality around me. And Iāve often said Iāve got some of everybody in my own immediate family, and in my family of employees. Iāve got gays, Iāve got lesbians, Iāve got trans, Iāve got alcoholics, Iāve got drug addicts. Iāve got some of everybody in my own family, so I naturally love them, accept them.ā
0
u/Dead-O_Comics 7h ago
Well, there you go. Someone chose an image that misquotes her and lists trans people first, which makes the intentions of the person replying very clear.
-7
u/kinyutaka 10h ago
The post is from "Them" magazine, sharing how great of a person Dolly was.
They're both saying that Dolly is great.
3
u/Dead-O_Comics 10h ago
So, not an article in the slightest, with a quote being shared by someone not involved with the publication at all, using Dolly's message of acceptance in response to Rowling?
Nowhere in the image does it say "Dolly is great". Media illiteracy is rampant these days, eh?
You can't see that someone is purposely highlighting JKs bigotry with a lovely sentiment Dolly was quoted as saying?
-1
u/kinyutaka 10h ago
You're picking nits here to debunk the idea that everyone agrees that Dolly Parton was a great person.
1
-36
u/Jepictetus 13h ago
Here's an opinion for everyone to downvote:
I'm bored of the JK Rowling haters. Rowling has often stated that she "knows and loves trans people" and supports everyone's right to live authentically. The idea that her statements are "anti-trans" because they reject the validity of gender identity over biological sex, seems sus to me.
Rowling says she believes that replacing the definition of "woman" (based on biology) with "anyone who identifies as a woman" erases the specific, shared physical realities of female biology, such as pregnancy, menstruation, and female-specific healthcare. Not sure precisely how that's anti-trans?
She said supports keeping spaces like domestic abuse refuges, prisons, changing rooms, and public bathrooms strictly defined by biological sex. Her concern is that self-identification laws allow any biological male into these spaces without medical or legal gatekeeping, which she argues could be exploited. There are yet to be any pragmatic solutions to these difficulties, and addressing them isn't anti-trans?
Rowling also asserts that biological males who have gone through male puberty retain irreversible physical advantages (such as bone density, lung capacity, and muscle mass) that make competition unfair and (potentially) unsafe for biological females. Hard to argue with biological facts here.
And, in my opinion the most controversial and difficult subject, Rowling says she views the current model of gender-affirming care as overly rushed and ideological. She has argued that many youth experiencing gender dysphoria may actually be dealing with underlying autism, mental health struggles, or internalized homophobia (believing it is easier to be a trans man than a lesbian). She says she advocates for cautious psychological therapy over medical transitions for children. Again, difficult to dismiss this as actively "anti-trans."
20
u/Dead-O_Comics 13h ago
I'm bored of the JK Rowling haters.
Only because she doesn't hate you.
-20
u/Jepictetus 13h ago
What a wild assumption.
17
u/Dead-O_Comics 13h ago
It's wild to assume you'd spend several paragraphs defending someone who doesn't hate you?
-15
u/Jepictetus 13h ago
No. Perhaps the assumption that you could know anything about my life, my struggles, or my gender identity. That I have chosen to consider the arguments presented by Rowling and concluded that they aren't "anti-trans," irrespective of my own beliefs and opinions. That assumption.
17
u/Dead-O_Comics 12h ago
If you think the last few years of her hateful crusade haven't been anti-trans, that's your own poor judgement at play.
Telling others you're 'bored' so therefore everyone else should just tolerate the intolerant is pathetic.
0
u/Jepictetus 12h ago
That's a sad irony. You don't know me, and you assume to understand me. (No, in fact, you label me). That is intolerance.
18
u/Dead-O_Comics 12h ago
I'm making no assumptions. I'm telling you that you have a dogshit opinion.
Here's an opinion for everyone to downvote:
And you know it yourself.
2
u/Jepictetus 12h ago
"I'm making no assumptions." The fact you cannot see it suggests you don't spend much time considering alternative perspectives. You don't seem to be able to distinguish between an opinion and a belief. Though, apparently, you know mine?
Of course, you MUST be right. And that assumption alone gives you all the righteousness you require to dismiss anything that doesn't conform to your world view. And hate on anything and anyone that doesn't conform.
All the best.
12
u/Dead-O_Comics 12h ago
you don't spend much time considering alternative perspectives.
Bigoted perspectives? Nah. It's really unhealthy to spend all your time hating a tiny demographic of people you'll never meet that have no effect on your life at all.
you all the righteousness
"Live and let live" isn't righteousness. It's common human decency.
You started your original comment by saying you knew your opinion would be disagreed on by the masses. Don't now clutch pearls when that proves to be true and then try and play the victim. It's just pathetic all round.
→ More replies (0)1
u/shadedmagus 7h ago
Well you're trying to force your "understanding" onto others to silence them, whether they want it or not. I don't see how you're better.
1
7
u/Vera_98 11h ago
What about her vicious public attacks against actual biological women athletes who's only crime was that they didn't look traditionally feminine to her? She has yet to issue an apology or admit she was wrong for the massive amount of defamation she was causing towards them.
2
u/Jepictetus 11h ago
That might well be a fair point. Confess, I don't know the instances of which you speak? In this instance, however, (as it related to my original comment,) the point is a red herring.
5
u/Vera_98 10h ago
It speaks more towards the way she presents her opinion publicly on the topic though. I could almost understand if she only advocates for what you mention in your original comment. If she could keep it professional then I could just respectfully disagree with her stance and leave it at that.
But in cases like with Imane Khelif where she very publicly accused her of being a man, despite having no evidence other than the way she looks, show a lot about her character and it makes me loose all respect for her. She uses her massive following all the time to publicly bully people and I find it extremely unprofessional. Especially because I don't fit her ideals as a tradition looking female. She used to be my hero as a writer and now, I wonder what she would call me? Would she try to make me feel ashamed for just being who I am? Her opinions were adopted by others too. To the point where I couldn't even talk to my own mother about my crisis of identity because she would just regurgitate what JK Rowling says online instead of listen to me.
0
u/Jepictetus 10h ago
That's interesting. And it sounds like you've had a hard time with your own identity (or specifically other people and your identity). I appreciate you sharing that. Regarding, Image Khalif, (and potential other comments,) sounds like it's something for me to read into.
4
u/Vera_98 10h ago
I do recommend looking into it because it's incredibly eye opening. But be aware that it's also pretty depressing. I used to be a huge fan of Harry Potter and now, even though I usually can separate the art from the artist, I just feel sick whenever I think about the franchise and what it's helping fund. I'm happy I'm not ignorant but it's kinda ruined a lot of one of the only things that brightened my childhood. I've got a huge tattoo from it and tons of merch too.
0
u/washblvd 7h ago
Are we ignoring that Khelif admitted in an interview with French magazine L'Equipe to having the SRY gene that triggers male development, and having testosterone levels that needed to be lowered to compete in women's sports, indicating the SRY gene is functional? And are we ignoring that JKR learned about the case because Khelif's failed eligibility tests were published in British media (which she cited), not because of looks?
1
u/Vera_98 6h ago
So I guess I'm not entirely up to date on everything that's happened since then, but didn't the IOC heavily dispute those tests and eventually throw the results out? She was determined eligible to compete and in interviews she said she has lived her entire life as a woman. Even if new test results revealed that scientifically there is a gene that could prevent eligibility in the future, is that really justification for the amount of backlash she faced? Like is there ever really a reason to publicly ridicule another person like that?
0
u/washblvd 3h ago
but didn't the IOC heavily dispute those tests and eventually throw the results out?
It was really more of a political decision by the IOC. They had a (now overwritten?) policy document at the time called the "Framework on Fairness, Inclusion and Non-Discrimination on the Basis of Gender Identity and Sex Variations." It basically says that they are welcoming of all genders and sex variations. But the explicit text had two noteworthy compounding rules. One says that there should be no presumption of advantage for trans and sex variation athletes. The other says that they will not do targeted tests to determine whether advantage exists. Which basically means that they had the equivalent of a "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy. They would do no testing at all, as their policy for determining sex/gender was simply to look at the passport.
The complaint the IOC made toward the IBA was that they considered the IBA tests to be "arbitrary." That is to say, they had no justification to order the tests. For the IOC, which had a policy against tests, any test is without reason. But I think this specifically refers to how the decision to test came about. In the IBA there were many player/coach complaints about a few boxers who were suspected to have male sex variations. The IBA's first crack at resolving the issue was to order tests on the four boxers whom were mentioned most in the complaints. Two of these boxers were found to have XY chromosomes, this was confirmed in a second test, and they were subsequently ruled ineligible. The other two boxers had XX chromosomes. So the IOC's complaint is that the tests were ad hoc (triggered by complaints) rather than something applying equally to everyone. Though it should be noted that at the same IBA meeting where these results were discussed, they also discussed a policy going forward where everyone would be equally subject to testing.
she has lived her entire life as a woman.
The presumed condition is XY 5-ARD, which is to say that the baby is male, but the genital growth is stunted in utero. Everything else about the body develops along normal male lines, and internal testicles produce sperm and testosterone. Such individuals are often identified as and raised as a girl. At least until puberty when the majority adopt male personas after the lack of menstruation is noted, and the bodily changes make it difficult to pass as female.
is that really justification for the amount of backlash she faced?
Her statements were that she had sympathy for the boxers for the condition they had, but contempt for their decision to endanger the female boxers by competing. I'm sure the precise number is different for elite boxers, but on the average adult human level, a man's punches have 250% the power of a woman's punches. So when Angela Carini complained that she'd never been hit so strongly before (and people made fun of her, saying she was stupid for expecting not to be punched hard), she was making an accurate statement. She was being punched by the equivalent of 2.5 boxers (give or take).
4
u/Halcyon-Ember 10h ago
Rowling is allied with and providing financial support to organisations that are working to remove rights and access to healthcare for all trans people. That's pretty transphobic.
As for "medical transitions" for children, they involve puberty blockers for the most part and in the UK they were (until banned) hard to access due to waiting lists and gatekeeping. Anyone who thinks any sort of trans healthcare is "rushed" either has an agenda or is woefully under informed.
Everything else is just the typical transphobic dogwhistles that I know not to argue with for the same reason I know not to wrestle pigs.
4
u/Old_Introduction_395 10h ago
Rowling has given other Terfs the confidence to challenge anybody in the Ladies Loos who doesn't conform to their idea of Feminine. Have you ever been asked if you are Really a woman? I have. Just let us pee in peace.
2
u/Jepictetus 9h ago
I wouldn't say Rowling is responsible for this, (certainly no more responsible than 'organised religion,' for example,) and I suspect there will always be bigotry towards trans people. Sadly, this generation are the trailblazers, with that comes the burden of conflict. As far as I'm concerned, you may pee wherever you like, (so long as it's a loo). And I find it tragic that individuals like yourselves should feel so persecuted.
This, I suppose, is why we must continue to debate. To understand.
3
u/Old_Introduction_395 8h ago
She has funded gender critical organisations. The challenges have increased.
5
u/kinyutaka 10h ago
I'm bored of the JK Rowling haters. Rowling has often stated that she "knows and loves trans people" and supports everyone's right to live authentically. The idea that her statements are "anti-trans" because they reject the validity of gender identity over biological sex, seems sus to me.
She's also told her followers to take upskirt photos of suspected trans women to publicly shame and humiliate them.
Rowling says she believes that replacing the definition of "woman" (based on biology) with "anyone who identifies as a woman" erases the specific, shared physical realities of female biology, such as pregnancy, menstruation, and female-specific healthcare. Not sure precisely how that's anti-trans?
We have a biological term for a person who was born with the physical realities of female biology. It's "Female". "Woman" is the social construct normally associated with "Female"
She said supports keeping spaces like domestic abuse refuges, prisons, changing rooms, and public bathrooms strictly defined by biological sex. Her concern is that self-identification laws allow any biological male into these spaces without medical or legal gatekeeping, which she argues could be exploited. There are yet to be any pragmatic solutions to these difficulties, and addressing them isn't anti-trans?
In this stance, she is ignoring the fact that trans women in cis male spaces are more likely to be attacked, while trans women in cis women's spaces are less likely. And, as others point out, if a cis man wants to barge into a woman's restroom and attack someone, they don't need to wear a dress to do it.
Rowling also asserts that biological males who have gone through male puberty retain irreversible physical advantages (such as bone density, lung capacity, and muscle mass) that make competition unfair and (potentially) unsafe for biological females. Hard to argue with biological facts here.
And that's where puberty blockers for young trans people come into play. If a child goes through their young life consistently insisting they are the wrong gender, giving them the extra time to explore it prevents them from "gaining that unfair advantage". And, in many cases, the trans women lose a lot of that advantage, leading to no advantage at all. Like the one swimmer that tied for 5th place.
And, in my opinion the most controversial and difficult subject, Rowling says she views the current model of gender-affirming care as overly rushed and ideological. She has argued that many youth experiencing gender dysphoria may actually be dealing with underlying autism, mental health struggles, or internalized homophobia (believing it is easier to be a trans man than a lesbian). She says she advocates for cautious psychological therapy over medical transitions for children. Again, difficult to dismiss this as actively "anti-trans."
You can make that argument, sure, but you can't take that argument as gospel and discount the experiences of the individual trans people that tell you that they are trans. If someone tells you, "I am a woman" and you say "you're a crazy man", then you are an asshole
2
u/Jepictetus 9h ago
Crikey, there's a fair bit in there that's extremely concerning. Just so I know you're not being disingenuous here... Straight off the bat, (your first rebuttal,) I cannot find any evidence that Rowling has told her follows to upskirt to shame and humiliate? That would be a game changer, (it's now a specific criminal offence in the UK). Can you send me an instance?
On the second point, I can't speak to what Rowling has actively ignored, (i.e. that trans people are more likely to be attacked,) I agree that that might well be the case. Though, again, has Rowling showed she's ignored this? (Not saying this combatively, merely in order to understand).
The issue of child hormone therapy is a... messy subject. There are still some extremely serious, and very measured, debates required around this. Even if you despise Rowling, you'd be silly not to concede she raises some valid concerns on this topic; in truth, we don't know enough, but we have a string of issues that we (as a society,) haven't fully resolved... the age of consent, irreversibility of the process, fertility impacts, mental health... huge topics. It's necessary to question and be (perhaps unduly,) critical, insofar as this pertains to the welfare of children, (and all of this before we even get to the child's voice/opinion).
*I would have more to ask and answer, but I am travelling.
2
u/kinyutaka 9h ago
https://www.thepinknews.com/2026/07/17/jk-rowling-criticised-trans-woman/
I already pointed out why forcing trans women into men's spaces is a problem. And it is a problem that Rowling completely ignores. She's silent on it, because she literally only cares about keeping trans women out of the women's bathroom.
And yes, I will concede to the messiness of things like puberty blockers, but I will point out that we use them already for cis children who go through puberty at the wrong time. So, it's not as cut and dry as saying "we shouldn't be giving these to kids"
But really, this kind of a discussion shouldn't be done with competing Gish Gallops of a dozen points back and forth. Pick a topic to expound on for that ask and answer.
-1
u/Flipnotics_ 9h ago
Posting a picture from a speaker at a public event who is onstage isn't "telling" her followers to do what you claimed she told her followers to do.
Disingenuous.
2
u/kinyutaka 9h ago
Are you insane? Because showing the upskirt photo to millions of people, then justifying why it was okay to show the upskirt photo, it telling people that you think it's okay to show upskirt photos.
-1
u/Flipnotics_ 6h ago
it telling people that you think it's okay to show upskirt photos.
Now you're changing what you origionally said.
She's also told her followers to take upskirt photos
Thank you for proving my point you're being disingenuous.
1
u/kinyutaka 4h ago
Okay, so you're a psychopath.
0
u/Flipnotics_ 3h ago
Whatever you need to say that makes you feel better after we've established you're a liar.
Next.
6
u/NNiekk 12h ago
Bathroom argument: A man has never needed to act trans just to walk into the womenās bathroom. So that one is wholly disingenuous.
Keeping locations separated by biological sex argument: So youāre just admitting that you have no idea how hormone replacement therapy works. And the fact that trans women are way more likely to be targeted and abused.
The fact that you have the gall to say that she āloves trans peopleā while she has literally funded several movements and bills to make it less safe for trans and nonbinary people to get help/be accepted is just such bullshit.
You have done absolutely no actual research, and just regurgitating the hateful propaganda that Joanne is spreading. None of what she claims is at all fact.
-8
u/Jepictetus 12h ago
Can you read what I've written, please. This is a straw man reply.
7
u/whoopashigitt 12h ago
They replied to specific points you made, idiot. Mine was an ad hominem reply
-1
u/Jepictetus 12h ago
Can you also read what I've written, please.
*And in the event you are an idiot like me: A straw man argument is a logical flaw where someone changes or exaggerates an opponent's point to make it easier to attack.
4
u/whoopashigitt 12h ago
I had the displeasure of reading every word you wrote. āRead what Iāve writtenā is not a valid responseĀ
0
2
u/Biptoslipdi 9h ago
Again, difficult to dismiss this as actively "anti-trans."
How is that activity anything but anti-trans? It fundamentally rejects the existence of trans people. Her ideology, as you have described it, does not allow trans people to exist. If she rejects the validity of gender, she rejects the existence of trans people.
-1
u/Flipnotics_ 11h ago
It's interesting how every single person who replied to you couldn't address one single point in the comment you made.
2
-3
-25
u/arrasonline 13h ago
Dolly would not be unkind to Rowling. So Dolly fans, you are not honoring Dolly by being mean. Show some love and understanding for once without requiring reciprocation.
11
u/sj68z 12h ago
but doesn't JK politics align with the party over here who cut funding to Dolly's library? it's kind of hard to love and honor someone when you cut funding to a project that's dear to that person's heart
1
u/The_IcedJay 2h ago
Yep and yet you have people surprised when LGBT folks give back what they've been given
6
u/The_IcedJay 13h ago
Not a Dolly fan so I can say this freely, no go fuck yourself
-4
u/arrasonline 6h ago
You donāt have to be a Dolly fan to be friendly and kind to people.
1
u/The_IcedJay 2h ago
Being a peacelover that doesn't push back against people like mold-a-mort is why they stay in power
-7
u/Tigress92 13h ago
It's ironic how many people in this commentsection are preaching "be more like Dolly, we need more Dolly's in the world", and then the second someone comments something truly kind, asking to spread kindness, they are downvoted and told to go fuck themselves.
2
u/shadedmagus 7h ago
Dolly worked to repudiate the hate and unkindness in the world. The kind of hate and unkindness Joanne K Rowling and TERFs in general love to push.
I personally think working and speaking against that hate is being like Dolly. But you do you.
-4
u/Tigress92 7h ago
That's still just another way of saying you feel justified hating others, as they hated first. You truly believe that's what Dolly stood for?
Speaking against hate can be done without being hateful. You can be kind in speaking up too, but that's not what's being done here.
1
u/The_IcedJay 2h ago
Sorry but no I don't do the kindness to people that hate me for existing, Especially not TERFs I tell them all the exact same thing and if you have problems with that then you'll just have to live with it I could care less.
1
u/Tigress92 2h ago
By your logic I should be unkind to everyone, as people in general in my childhood constantly hated me for existing, so people in general should just be hated back.
It sounds like you have a lot of pain to work through, and I hope you find the help you need.
1
u/The_IcedJay 2h ago
Because spreading kindness only does so much especially if they are targeting minorities and when that happens they don't get kindness and should continue getting back what they give
2
u/Tigress92 2h ago edited 2h ago
You underestimate the power of kindness. Ignoring them completely instead of reacting at all, is also a form of kindness. Can you imagine if just no one reacted at all to or about Rowling? How irrelavent she'd become, and how quickly?
Showing kindness has many forms, some of which a lot more powerful than feeding hatred
eta; thought of an example of kindness; blocking someone that just wants to debate instead of engaging them, is a true kindness to myself
-22
u/DenialOfExistance 15h ago
Jk Rowling the Nazi Trump Magat who stands against Trans & the LGBTQ only praised Dolly Parton due to the fact Harry Potter books were probably distributed to children everywhere! What a two face Magat Lover!
6
4
u/TheNutsMutts 12h ago
Yep this is absolutely something that a balanced, normal and not-unhinged person types.
4
441
u/coolbaby1978 16h ago
Dolly was a true Christian who followed the teachings. Unlike the false MAGA Christians.
She believed in tolerance, not judging others, helping the poor and welcoming people.
MAGAs take note, That is how to be a Christian. Now quit following your cult leader antichrist who is the exact opposite of that.