Harry Potter Cast vs. JK Rowling

Hey Spuds, how's it going? It's Jamie. Welcome back to another video, first one on the channel. I don't know, but welcome either way. I'm very glad to have you here. And today we are talking about Harry Potter and J.K. Rowling, the Harry Potter cast versus J.K. Rowling, the opinion of the Harry Potter cast of this new, very unnecessary TV show on J.K. Rowling and trans views and their involvement in the project. Despite her views, I recently made a video that looked at what the original cast of the movies thought of J.K. Rowling's transphobia, because recently Stephen Fry, who narrated the O.G. audiobook series, you know, the ones that came on cassette tapes. Retro. He stated that he viewed Rowling as a lost cause who had been radicalized. So I talked about the O.G. cast members who have come out in support of the trans community and do not support J.K. Rowling's views, which is actually quite a lot of them. And I also talked about the ones who defended J.K. Rowling and the ones who've not really said anything. Interestingly, as far as I could see, none had really come out and been like, Yeah, I support J.K. Rowling. She's right. Her views on trans people are absolutely correct. Woo. Really, it seemed like everybody was just defending her as a person, not understanding what was going on, probably not looking into it at all and saying that she shouldn't be hated on for her views, that she had freedom of speech. But these are views that she very rightfully gets called out on because they cause a lot of real world harm. Freedom of speech is not freedom of consequence. And the consequence of being a bigot is people are going to tell you you're being a bigot. But I've actually not seen any previous cast members open up and share transphobic views like J.K. Rowling does. So if you do want to know more about the opinions of the movie cast, then you can go check out my previous video right here. The short story is, is pretty much all of the cast who played the students are pretty pro trans. So that includes like the main three of Rupert Grint, Emma Watson and Daniel Radcliffe as well. And several of the adult cast are trans supportive as well. And then there's a handful, mostly older, who have been like, Oi, stop shouting at J.K. Rowling. I don't understand what's going on, but don't be mean on Twitter. Blah, blah, blah. I'm paraphrasing, obviously. But that's the general vibe of what's said whenever people do support her. And I'm being like support her because it's odd because nobody's actually been like, yes, I agree with her views. Unfortunately, someone somewhere, multiple people have decided that Harry Potter is the franchise that lives and now a completely unnecessary TV show remake. It really does seem like just a remake from what they've released so far. I'm like, wow, they are just trying to make every character look identical to the movie characters and the same age. So I'm assuming this is just going to be a direct remake. And it's not just the fact that there'll be a new TV show. That's the issue, because any new thing, any new Harry Potter thing keeps J.K. Rowling relevant and to keep her relevant, keeps her with a steady cash flow from Harry Potter stuff, which keeps her being well-known, spreading her transphobia and being able to use money to do so. So it's not just a TV show, but a new TV show also means a resurgence of various other things surrounding the Harry Potter world. We're already seeing it happen at the time of making this video. Very disappointingly, Krispy Kreme Donuts has a Harry Potter range. Lego are continuing to bring out Harry Potter sets and literally every nerdy shop you go to sells Harry Potter merch. But aside from it being entirely unnecessary and just something nobody asked for, why is this new TV show a bad thing? You may be asking if you are somebody who loves Harry Potter, is super into nostalgia, would love to see a remake, loves the Lego sets, would buy Harry Potter donuts, all of this stuff. But you're not fully aware of what's going on with J.K. Rowling and the genuine real world harm she's causing and how that is no longer able to be detangled from her creation of Harry Potter, mostly for financial reasons. So J.K. Rowling has become increasingly transphobic over the past five or so years. Started relatively softly with what felt like testing the waters and accidental like here, I'm standing up for women's rights, but I'd march for trans people if they were being discriminated against. Views and posts that could probably be forgiven with an apology and a growth moment, but not doubled down on. But she has doubled, tripled, quadrupled, whatever the word for ten times, a hundred times down on these views. And they have just gotten worse and worse and worse over the years. They've now developed into full on, often multiple tweets a day. If you scroll through her Twitter over the past few days, there are so many. And most of it is about trans people. They show an obvious dislike and prejudice towards a marginalized community within society. And she is sharing those views with 14 million followers. And she's become the poster child for so many tough groups. Not only has she been verbalizing this transphobia online and being a speaker at multiple anti-trans conferences and become somebody that a lot of bigots seem to take strength and inspiration from, but she's also putting her money into it. And this is a really dangerous bit. And this is why the Harry Potter franchise must die. I think it's safe to say that as a trans person and someone who doesn't want to support bigots, I will not be watching the new Harry Potter series. At the same time, I do acknowledge that there is a lot of nostalgia wrapped up in Harry Potter for a lot of people, especially millennials. I think myself included. Whenever we got a cold or we were ill, Sharper and I would cuddle up and watch the first Harry Potter movie. That was until it got totally tainted by transphobia. So was it really hard to let go of that nostalgia? There are so many other TV shows and movie franchises that are just as, if not more enjoyable than Harry Potter, with the added bonus of not supporting J.K. Rowling. Instead, I now like to watch the Lord of the Rings trilogy. One ring to rule them all. Made even better by the wonderful Ian McKellen as Gandalf. I found it is the small things. However, I'm in the UK and the Lord of the Rings is not available on UK Netflix. Whatever shall I do? Oh, what's that? Surfshark VPN. A virtual private network that lets you virtually travel the world, as well as protecting your data and privacy online. Turns out Lord of the Rings is available on Netflix in Japan. So by connecting to one of Surfshark's over 3,200 servers in more than 100 countries, this time Japan, I can watch Lord of the Rings from the comfort of my own sofa. Japan also happens to be a country I'd love to visit one day. There are also many other movies that you can watch that give you that same fantastical, magical vibes as Harry Potter without supporting a bigot, including Percy Jackson, the Spiderwick Chronicles, The Hunger Games, The Golden Compass, The Chronicles of Narnia and so many more. There are literal articles of lists of things that you can watch instead. If they're not available on the streaming services where you live, simply connect to one of Surfshark's many servers in different countries that does have it. And voila, all of the magical worlds are your oysters. Yes, all of the oysters. And it's not just movies and streaming that Surfshark can help with. Surfshark can also help me when I'm ready to book that trip to Japan that I want to take. Because did you know that websites can price things differently based on your location? So by virtually traveling with Surfshark, you can get the best deals when buying flights, tickets, hotels, car rentals and even everyday shopping items. And most importantly, on top of opening up your streaming possibilities and saving you money online, Surfshark also keeps you safe online. Think of Surfshark as the blowhive for the Internet. We have a trans protector and we have the Internet protector. Whether using the Internet at a local cafe, a hotel, the airport or at the beach, lucky you, Surfshark will keep you nice and safe even when you're on unknown public networks by encrypting your data online because using Surfshark keeps your data protected so you don't become a victim of identity theft or fraudulent purchases. And today's Surfshark has a very delicious deal. Everyone who signs up using my link surfshark.com forward slash jammy will get a whole extra four months of Surfshark for free. And if that's not enough, Surfshark One gives you access to features such as alternative ID and antivirus. So you'll be able to create a brand new online identity and proxy email with alternative ID to shield your info and avoid data leaks. And Surfshark antivirus will give you powerful device protection that secures everything from your files to your webcam and gives you instant notifications if you download malicious apps or files. There's also a 30 day money back guarantee, so you really have nothing to lose. Now, let's get on with the video. From what we know of, because she could have been doing a lot more behind the scenes, but what we know of, she's donated £70,000 towards a recent Supreme Court case, which was around a quarter of the total money raised for this court case. And this case has already had a detrimental impact on the trans community within the UK and also gender nonconforming cis women. But the Tufts won't accept that. We don't know yet the full extent to how trans rights are going to be impacted by this. The day I'm making it, final guidance from the UK Equality and Human Rights Commission has gone to the government, but nobody has seen it. And the interim guidance was abhorrent for the trans community, as in one element of it was not allowing trans people to use any kind of gendered spaces in public. So frankly, quite terrifying. And this is literally a cause and a specific situation that JK Rowling has put tens of thousands of pounds behind. On top of this, Rowling is now using her wealth and ongoing profits from Harry Potter to fund an anti-trans organisation. The organisation will offer financial support to individuals and groups fighting trans inclusion in the workplace, public life and gendered spaces. It is entirely privately funded by JK Rowling. Honestly, very scary time to be trans, generally, and in the UK right now, very heightened. I feel like as a trans person, everybody's on high alert. I laugh or I cry. I cry, you're laughing. A famous billionaire is putting her own wealth into helping people who want to legally backtrack trans rights in the UK. What the actual hell? Imagine being a billionaire author who created one of the most beloved franchises in the world that we've ever seen. And that's not good enough for you. And you decide to pivot into becoming one of the most famous transphobes trying to take away the rights of a marginalised community. It's a very odd trajectory. And while scary for trans people, also just sounds incredibly sad for the person doing it, because I can't imagine what's going on in somebody's head and life and their fulfilment and joy in life for this to be what they want to spend their time and money on. Just hating on other people is really weird. Anyway, this is why it's an act against the trans community to continue buying into the Harry Potter franchise, because it lines J.K. Rowling's pockets, shows her that she still has support, keeps her relevant and means that she can continue using that money to fund anti-trans causes. And that includes doing things like streaming the new show, buying the books, buying merch, going to the studios, showing brands that Harry Potter releases do well and it's something they should do more of, e.g. buying the Harry Potter doughnuts. Or, if there was a massive drop in Harry Potter Lego sets, Lego would stop making as many Harry Potter sets. It's all a supply and demand thing. If the demand goes down, so will the supply. But back to the new TV ---- show. I want to talk about the current cast and what has been said from any of them about what's going on with J.K. Rowling and transphobia, because this is a very recent thing. I'm assuming that all of them have publicly confirmed their roles in this new TV series, whilst J.K. Rowling's transphobia is incredibly well known and widespread. And a lot of them have faced pushback against the casting because there's pushback against the show happening generally and there's pushback against supporting J.K. Rowling, as there should be. So quite a lot of the cast have been announced now. And as far as I'm aware, only a small number have even spoken about this. I do think a lot of this can be influenced by the press in terms of what questions they're asked. I think a lot of what's been said has been in response to them being questioned. So it could be that the people who have not spoken out have not been directly questioned about it. Doesn't make it right that they've accepted the role. But seeing as they're willing to accept the role, I can see why they wouldn't volunteer the information about their views on J.K. Rowling. In all honesty, any actor who has accepted a role in this, whether they have come out as trans-supportive since, if they're still being in this TV show, I just automatically don't like and would no longer support any of the projects that they're in. The exception being the child actors. I'm not expecting a 10 year old to understand the nuances of what is going on and why people are upset with J.K. Rowling and the harm she is causing. I would expect their parents to, though. But because of that, I'm only going to be talking about and all of my judgments are about adult cast members, not any of the kids. So a recent casting announcement and somebody who's actually reprising the roles they played in the movie is Warwick Davis. He played Professor Flitwick and one of the goblins whose name I can't remember. That's how long it's been since I've watched Harry Potter. As far as I can see, he's not said anything about his specific casting in this new TV show in terms of J.K. Rowling and trans rights. But back in May this year, he was asked if he was aware of the controversy surrounding Harry Potter and J.K. Rowling and the trans community. He said, I don't tend to read the news. It's kind of one of those things I don't do. So I'm kind of out of touch with what's going on. It's not really something I'm particularly interested in. Producing entertainment is what I do. The rights of a marginalised community are not something I'm particularly interested in. That's how it sounds. Honestly, I think this is one of the most cowardly responses I've heard from a cast member who's been asked about their views on J.K. Rowling. It's literally ostriching. Like, nope, I don't care. I want this for whatever reason, money, fame, ego, staying relevant, whatever reasons he has for continuing to be in the series are far more important than paying any attention to the news. I don't actually believe for a second that somebody doesn't pay attention to the news these days. You're telling me you just don't watch the news, not any of it, or specifically just about J.K. Rowling. How this comes across, to be honest, is that he does know a little bit, but he doesn't care enough to let it impact what he does. Morally, I obviously disagree with this. I don't know why if people know someone's a bigot, they would want to continue supporting that bigot. It would be really nice if people could just be honest about it, though. I'm not saying it's actually where he's coming from. It's just how it comes across from what he said. The wording of I just don't read the news. I'm only interested in acting sounds like an excuse. It sounds like a way to avoid actually answering the question and addressing the fact that you are taking part in this. And it's controversial. A couple of other new castings have said similar things. John Lithgow, who's going to be playing Dumbledore. Guess you were picturing a different scenario. Has actually been quite open about his decision to take the role and the pushback he received from fans and people in his real life. But he still chose to take the role. He even said that he received feedback from friends and fans that he shouldn't take it, including a message from a friend with a link to an article called an open letter to John Lithgow. Walk away from Harry Potter. And as far as I can see, this was all done before he signed on to the role. Part of his letter included. That's why I'm writing to you today, asking for you to walk away from your role in Harry Potter. Your name leads credence to the adaptation, and by extension, it helps to grow J.K. Rowling's platform to further her crusade against trans people's rights. Stepping away would send a message to trans young people that they matter more than a fantasy franchise. It is disappointing to know that he's been sent those words and still taken part. I think it really just shows people's priorities. He said that he didn't expect to receive this kind of criticism. And from his perspective, he was just thinking about it being the last major role he would probably take on and therefore thinking about his mortality within this and his acting career. Further, he seems curious about how J.K. Rowling has absorbed it. I'm not really sure what it is, maybe the criticism to her views, but he's also said he's curious to speak to her. I don't know if this is good, curious or bad, curious, or just curious, curious. Ultimately, he revealed that the criticisms he'd received and the feedback he received did not impact his decision in taking the role. Something else he spoke about is that he's also been playing Roald Dahl in a play, and he said he was confused about why he's received criticism for playing Dumbledore in a Harry Potter remake, but not for playing Roald Dahl, who during his lifetime made antisemitic comments. I think there's a very simple answer to that, and it's that there are huge differences between J.K. Rowling and Roald Dahl. Firstly, J.K. Rowling is still alive. She's still actively causing harm, still directly personally profiting off of Harry Potter, and then using those profits to further harm the trans community, whereas Roald Dahl is dead and his family have publicly apologised for his antisemitic comments. I'm very confident that once Rowling dies, if her family and her estate were to apologise for her transphobic views and state that those views were not shared by her descendants, who were now the ones profiting off of Harry Potter, and no more Harry Potter money was being funnelled into anti-trans causes, I'm like 100% sure there would then no longer be any criticism in Harry Potter remakes, buying Harry Potter merch, being involved in Harry Potter stuff. It's simply because she's still alive, she's still profiting, and she's still putting those profits into anti-trans causes. It's a very interesting response to me, and feels worse because he very clearly is aware of what's going on, and people in his life who are trans allies have literally told him what is happening and why it's not a good idea for him to take this role. He seems to be fully aware, yet he chose to ignore them, because, and his comment about it being the last major role and thinking about his mortality and his acting career, what comes across is that's more important to him. He cares about the ego of the role and having this last hurrah, a moment of relevancy and acting opportunity than he does about the rights over here. I'm sure another role would have come along. I also question longevity-wise how good an idea it is to be involved with Harry Potter like this, especially when you admit that at the time of taking part in Harry Potter, you knew about the transphobia, because history will not look back kindly on J.K. Rowling, and probably not look back kindly on anybody that facilitated her transphobia. I'm saving the somewhat positives for the end, because not everybody has been dismissive and uncaring. I say somewhat positive though because they're still taking the roles. Next up, we have Katherine Parkinson, who's going to be playing the role of Molly Weasley. Her input is incredibly small, so this is going to be a very short segment. All she said is, I don't want to add to that debate at all. I'm just delighted to be joining the magical world of Harry Potter. Firstly, it's not a debate. Human rights are not up for debate. Being trans is not up for debate, and people who describe it as a debate are a big red flag. But some people very aptly wrote back to her that by taking the role, she's already added to the debate. But again, it's also just not a f***ing debate. But I do think this is a very important point of, by taking the role, you are inserting yourself. You are involved now. It's not good enough to just be like, no, no, I'm not talking. I'm not going to add to that. You literally are, because taking the role gives a sign that you are supporting JK Rowling and therefore supporting her views. It refers back to the open letter to John Lithgow about how his name offers credence to this project. By simply being a part of it, these actors are supporting the world of Harry Potter, no matter what they say in and around it, no matter how supportive they try to be, no matter how much they try to ignore it. They are involved because by extension of being involved in the Harry Potter world, you are helping to financially support JK Rowling and thus validating her stance. The level of apathy from these people is honestly pathetic. The level of not shits given. And I'm sure these are all people that some of you watching and myself included have enjoyed the work of for many years. I remember all of these actors so far being in other things that I have enjoyed. Next up with the people who have been marginally better. They've said something more. They said something positive. They've done something slightly positive, but they still accepted the role, which in my opinion makes the words pretty useless. First up, proper SCA dude who's going to be playing the role of Snape. Earlier this year, he, along with around 1500 other figures from film and TV, signed an open letter condemning the Supreme Court ruling that basically shat all over trans rights and is the one that I spoke about earlier that JK Rowling donated towards. A quote from the letter that was also signed by former Harry Potter cast members, including Emma Watson, Eddie Redmayne and Katie Leung said, We believe the ruling undermines the lived reality and threatens the safety of trans, non-binary and intersex people living in the UK. Very true. It really does. And I mean, great. Thanks for signing a letter saying that you don't support trans rights being taken away in the UK. But how does that possibly pair up with taking a role that benefits one of the most known, if not the most well-known transphobe in the UK who literally contributed towards the Supreme Court case happening in the first place? It's a bit of a confusing contradiction. Someone else who's been a bit confusing is Nick Frost. And probably on this entire list, the actor I'm most disappointed in because the actor that I have enjoyed the most from over the years, he's going to be playing Hagrid. And back in June, he said, Rowling is allowed her opinion and I'm allowed mine. They just don't align in any way, shape or form. That sounds pretty pro-trans, but you're playing Hagrid. He was also asked if he thought Rowling's views will overshadow the show itself, which I personally hope they do. Frost said, I don't know, but maybe it shouldn't blow over. We shouldn't hope it will go away because it makes it easier. Maybe we should educate ourselves. How do these kind of statements alongside the fact that he literally starred in a TV show that was created by a trans woman and is about a trans woman called Transaction? It's very good if you want to go check it out. It's very pro-trans. But how do those statements and the involvement in that TV show match up with him taking this role? This is why I find him the most confusing. His comments were clearly in disagreement with JK Rowling. He starred in a pro-trans trans-created TV show, and he thinks that people should educate themselves and that this controversy shouldn't just blow itself over and we should pay attention to it. I can't get my head around why he would still accept this role. It would have been incredibly powerful if he'd have said no and given the reason for his refusal as because of JK Rowling's transphobia. The only thing that makes sense in my head is I feel like some people must be genuinely trans-supportive and not want transphobia to be happening and not agree with JK Rowling's views on trans people, but be totally unaware of how involvement in Harry Potter is pushing forward JK Rowling's transphobia and is facilitating it. Even if your views are not in line with hers, even if you publicly state that you disagree with her, being involved in Harry Potter is supporting JK Rowling, even if you don't see that direct connection. Finally, and a bit of a curveball for this video because she's not actually involved in the TV show, but she voiced Professor McGonagall in the latest audiobook remake because for some reason we also needed one of those for Michelle Gomez, who's acting stuff before I have also loved and I'm also very disappointed about. She posted a story on Instagram that was addressed to her LGBTQ plus fans, her LGBTQ plus fans and especially the trans community, and it said the following, I want to speak directly to the concerns that have been raised about my involvement in this project. I hear you and I understand why this is painful for many. I want to be clear that I stand with trans people and I support trans rights fully and without hesitation. When I accepted this role, I did so as someone who has always loved the stories and what they meant to so many, especially those who found comfort and identity in that world. I now understand more clearly how deeply complicated and hurtful this association can feel, and I take that seriously. Being an ally means listening even when it's uncomfortable and taking accountability where it's needed. I'm committed to doing both. This was met with a lot of mixed reactions and I feel very mixed about it. It feels like the boldest statement of any body who's recently been involved in the Harry Potter universe in this way, but it's still disappointing and like just too little too late, you know, unless she does follow ups to it. Like, I don't know, follow ups. She doubles down on the trans supportive stuff. That would be great. Being a trans ally would be to not take the role in the first place, but this statement is a step in the right direction. It is important, as disappointing as it still is, as too little too late as it can feel, it is important that these people with platforms speak in support of the trans community and against JK Rowling's views. It's important that that message is sent and it's much better than ignoring it and saying you don't want to talk about it. I really hope Michelle Gomez is continuing to listen to the trans community and continuing to learn about the level of hurt that supporting anything to do with JK Rowling causes to the trans community. I think a major theme and issue among everybody we've spoken about today, including those who've come out as trans supportive, is not recognizing the link between involvement in and support of Harry Potter and supporting JK Rowling. It's almost like some people view Harry Potter and JK Rowling as entirely separate entities and they think, well, I can support and be involved in Harry Potter as long as I say or do something that publicly shows I don't agree with transphobia. But the more transphobic she's become and the more money that she's putting into anti-trans organizations and anti-trans causes, the more inseparable Harry Potter support has become from supporting JK Rowling to the point where it's like, if it were a Venn diagram, it would be a circle. The most positive thing I found out of all of this research for this video was Ben Barnes. Some of you might know him from Narnia, The Chronicles of Narnia. Now he's not been officially cast as anything or asked to be in it, but he is a fan casting with many fans wanting him to play Sirius Black. He's acknowledged the shift in the Harry Potter fandom since JK Rowling has become more and more transphobic. In the last few years, I found it much more a more difficult thing to talk about, because it's obviously like a clash between some of the author's views on things and the way I see the world. He also noted that whilst the stories used to bring a lot of joy, the franchise has been tainted by Rowling's extreme views. Although he didn't directly state whether he would say yes or no to a casting, to be coming out with these kind of statements when you haven't been cast or asked to be in it, I think he's quite positive and it sounds like he, more than the others we've discussed today, understand the link between supporting Harry Potter and supporting JK Rowling and how Rowling's views have had an impact on the enjoyment that trans people and trans allies can take from Harry Potter. It doesn't seem like anybody else from the reboot has said anything as of yet. This includes actors who've been cast as Quirrell and Madame Hooch and the Dursleys. There's still time. They still took the roles. So I don't know. Overall, very disappointing that the TV series is even going ahead. I am hoping, with all hopes, I am crossing everything that it is a flop and it is disappointing the number of people who are refusing to engage in the conversation and acknowledge the controversy that's going on and acknowledge the hurt that's happening. I struggle to believe that so few of them are aware of what's happening, at least to some extent. So therefore, it feels like a lot of them at least have made an active decision to put ego, fame, money, notoriety above human rights. And these are all actors who are well known. They have been in other things. They will be in other things. It was an active choice to take this job. Sometimes for moral reasons, we have to turn down work. I have done that. And sometimes when I'm not even really in a position to do so, but I don't feel like I can work with certain people. So it might sound mean, but I kind of hope that them taking these roles comes back to bite their butts in the end. Because in the long run, J.K. Rowling's views will not win. She will not be viewed favorably in the history books. She is on the wrong side, just like Anita Bryant. She is a modern day transphobic version of Anita Bryant, who was incredibly homophobic back in like the 70s. Dead now and not viewed favorably at all. I also think, therefore, those who support her either directly or indirectly, loudly or through their own silence will also not be viewed favorably in years to come. And that's a choice they've made. I kind of feel bad for the kid actors being involved in this when they probably have no clue what's going on. They just think it's super exciting. Ultimately, Harry Potter was a thing that could have been absolutely amazing for a very, very long time. But it is so incredibly tainted now. It deserves to become a relic that does not have ongoing and new support and new products and new merch and new studio tours and new theme park rides and new f***ing donuts. The trans community deserves all of this to stop until such a time that Harry Potter and those profiting off of Harry Potter are not directly causing harm to the trans community. Thanks for watching this. Please don't watch the new Harry Potter TV series. Think about giving the video a thumbs up and subscribing if you liked it, but no pressure. You'll see some names going up the screen of my patrons. Thank you so much for supporting me over on Patreon. If you want to go check it out, the link is in the description box. It's just something that helps me continue creating this content and is greatly appreciated as a form of support, but is totally not a necessity if you don't want to go look. But a big shout out to my top tier patreons. Thank you so, so much. Your support really means an incredible amount. And you watching this video means a lot to me as well. Thank you so much and I'll see you next time. Much love. Bye!