J.K. Rowling’s Spiral into Madness (with ContraPoints)

From “sex is real” to Holocaust denial — if it happened to the wizard lady, it can happen to you.

Support me on Patreon! https://www.patreon.com/mattbernstein

Watch more from Natalie Wynn a.k.a. ContraPoints: https://www.youtube.com/@ContraPoints

Find more of A Bit Fruity: https://www.instagram.com/abitfruitypod/?hl=en
Find more of Matt: https://www.instagram.com/mattxiv/?hl=en

hello, hello and welcome back to A Bit

Fruity, the show where we think that you

should never live in the closet, Harry,

even if the woman who created you changes
her mind.

If you would like to support the show

or perhaps want a little bit more of the

show, we are on Patreon and by the time

this episode is up, it'll be around the

same time that I upload March's deep dive

on Patreon, which I do every month

and this month it is on the wokeness of

Sydney Sweeney, the right just figured

out who Sydney Sweeney is because

they saw her on SNL and they never watched

Euphoria and her being hot is, uh, is

causing a freakout of epic proportions.

So we're going to do a little analysis

of a woman's body, which is something

I'm fairly new to.

So, you know, wish me luck.

Today we are joined, once again, by

someone I'm honored to call a friend

of the show, Natalie Wynn, or as you may

know her online, ContraPoints is, an

ex-philosopher, she is a youtuber

but I think calling her a youtuber

is kind of diminutive to her craft.

She puts out a couple feature film length

videos a year that you've probably

watched but if you haven't, you really

should go check those out.

She talks about philosophy, sex and

gender, and capitalism, and twilight.

Natalie Wynn welcome back to A Bit Fruity.

Thank you much for having me back on.

I am excited to be here again.

I'm honored to be a friend of the show.

I'm honored to have you as a friend

of the show. So, a couple weeks ago

J.K. Rowling, she got caught up in a

little Holocaust denial.

She does Holocaust denial a little from

time to time, (laughter) yeah.

It wasn't always this way. J.K. Rowlings

wasn't always on Twitter denying

that, uh, queer people were persecuted in

the Holocaust. Until 2019, J.K. Rowlings

was a universally beloved children's

author who taught every kid that there

was magic inside of them no matter how

cast out they may feel. Today, though,

how would you characterize her position

in the culture today?

Well, her position in the culture is

kind of weirdly split, right, cause on

the one hand, there is her continuing

legacy as the author of the wizard books

and on the other hand, there's like

almost her entire public persona, that

which we mostly experience through Twitter

which is basically obsessive bigotry

towards trans people. That's become

sort of her definitive thing, right?

I think that people who don't follow this

kind of don't understand the extent of it

because, you know, I don't know, people

throw around like all kinds of accusations

on Twitter, so it's easy to think that

this is some kind of internet drama

blown out of proportion. But what you're

missing is that if you have not been

paying attention to J.K. Rowling's Twitter

for the last, at this point, we're

talking about four or five years, which

is a long time. Like, she's basically used

her platform more often than not to do

trans-bashing. There's a reason why that

this gets talked about so much because,

I mean, she's one of the most famous

authors in the world with an enormous

platform, and she's just using it

constantly to target this small and,

like, already besieged, minority of people

who are facing, like, all kinds of, like,

legislative and cultural backlash in

the U.S. and the U.K. So it's like really

devastating (chuckle) that an author

that, that's this influential is also,

like, this obsessively devoted to

persecute, you know, to contributing

to the persecution of this group of

people, who's already so harassed.

But it's also, I don't know, it's also

kind of a bizarre spectacle, like, in

it's own right it's kind of like another

reason I feel like we're drawn to this

maybe, is that it's kind of like darkly

fascinating. How does this happen?

Like, how do we go from, like, the

Gryffindor common room and, you know,

Severus Snape, to, like, these unhinged

rants about the transexuals. It's weird.

It, it is weird and I think also, I mean,

yeah, if you go to J.K. Rowling's Twitter

right now and scroll through her feed,

it is literal years of talking every

single day, almost exclusively, about

transgender people, for years.

Which I think is the type of behavior

we associate, with like boomer facebook

moms, and then I guess in a sense, she

kind of would have been that, if she

hadn't become a billionaire and one of

the most famous and beloved children's

authors of all time. But she is those

things and the idea of her behaving the

way, like, our homophobic aunt does

or whatever, but like from some castle

in the U.K., is just like a very jarring

image. (Natalie) I think that summarizes

it really well, right, like, it is, like,

your bigoted aunts deranged Facebook post

except on a platform with millions of

people as the audience. I feel like we

as a society, have, like, yet to know how

to deal with this type of thing cause

J.K. Rowling's not the only case of it.

I mean, like, Elon Musk has dabbled

a little bit in some similar forms of

bigotry with a (inaudible) or even

larger platform. But I feel like what's

unique about J.K. Rowling is that

she's, like, single mindedly focused on

trans people as this one issue.

(Matt) So she wasn't always this way,

though and what we're gonna do today

is use J.K. Rowling as what I think is

a valuable case study in the worm hole

that transphobia is. The way that it

can serve as it has for J.K. Rowling

and so many millions of other people

as a portal into the broader world

of right-wing ideology that gets pretty

scary pretty quickly. We're gonna

try to understand why transphobia, and

I think especially when it's cloaked,

no pun intended, as a progressive feminist

cause and especially effective

gateway into the alt right. One day

you're reminding people that you

just like to be preferred to as a woman

and that you are a woman and then,

you know, the next day you are

participating in Holocaust denial. It can

happen to you. (Natalie) Many such cases.

(Matt) Many such cases. And so, to begin

this story I wanna go back to 2019

to the first tweet that I remember

seeing of J.K. Rowling's, her foray into

the anti-trans movement, which at the

beginning was very tepid. I am going to

send you the tweet. (Natalie) "Dress

however you please. Call yourself

whatever you like. Sleep with any

consenting adult who'll have you.

Live your best life in peace and security.

But force women out of their jobs for

stating that sex is real? Hashtag I

stand with Maya. Hashtag this is not

a drill." (Matt) So what was the

context of this one?

(Natalie) So, the context is that there

was a English consultant named

Maya Forstater who, I guess she wasn't

fired but her contract was not

renewed because she had, like, refused

to use the correct pronouns for a trans

coworker or something along those lines.

And a lot of so called "gender-critical",

that is "transphobic", people in the U.K.

decided to turn this into a celebrated

cause, they, you know, rallied behind

this hashtag "I stand with maya".

The idea being, like, "oh, we shouldn't

have to submit to gender ideology by,

you know, using the correct pronouns

for trans people in the work place or

whatever. This is where J.K. Rowling

decided to join this discourse

officially. She decided to jump in on

the side of people who think that it's

terribly oppressive to have to use

the correct pronouns for a trans person.

And I guess at first, you know, there was

some ambiguity because you could be

like, "Well she's not transphobic. Maybe

she just believes in free speech, and she

thinks that, you know, that people

shouldn't be fired for having different

opinions." (inaudible) okay, like, at

first you could sort of plausibly think

that maybe, given the benefit of the

doubt, that's why she was getting

involved in this. But, like, to people who

kind of know the pattern that

transphobia takes place, we all pretty

much knew that, "Oh, okay she really

is transphobic behind the scenes".

Like, there is no way that you would

-go decide to die on this hill unless
- Matt: Hmm.

you already were. At least that's what I

think now. I mean, I think J.K. Rowling

was at her most dangerous in 2019 and

in 2020 because of the stuff she was

saying seems kind of plausible and

reasonable to the average person, you

know. And so, there's this kind of like

clever selection of which topics to

get behind, right, instead of just,

I don't know, calling trans women "men"

in dresses, or whatever, it's like she's

defending the "right" of people to not

use the correct pronouns if they don't

agree, right?. (inaudible) this people

kind of hedge in this way, like, when

they have a kind of like bigoted opinion

instead of just stating it out, right.

They sort of defend their right to have

-that opinion.
- Matt: Mhmm.

So, that was very much with this thing

with Maya Forstater is, right. It's like

she's not saying something sort of

directly transphobic, but she is kind of

indirectly getting there by being like,

"I am going to publicly champion Maya's

right to be transphobic. "

(Matt) I feel like in the early days

she did so much of this plausible,

deniability stuff where it's like, you

know, "I'm just saying sex is real".

Right? And the average person who

isn't, like, a terminally online queer

is going to be like, "Yeah, sex is real,

whatever, like, who cares."

You know? It's like not a big deal.

(Natalie) Yeah, she was very effective

early on at kind of like deciding what

it was that she thought people

were mad about, right? And so she

framed the conversation, "Oh here's why

I'm getting backlashed. I'm getting

backlash because I said quote on quote

'sex is real'. And so, it kind of seems

like if you believe her account of what

people are mad about, then it sounds like

everyone whose mad is unreasonable

because they are mad at her for taking

this kind of - taking what? An abstract,

philosophical position about the

metaphysics of biological sex? Like,

is that what people are mad about?

No, right? It's of course not that

because she is intervening in this

social and political debate, right,

on the side that wants trans people

functionally to not exist in public

life, or not to be acknowledged in

public life.