This year, many of us have found our voices when it comes to activism, devoting our time and energy to important causes like dismantling systemic racism and getting out the vote. But everyone has different priorities and causes they’re passionate about, and for J.K. Rowling, this year has been all about spreading her message of transphobia. She’s repeatedly made her trans-exclusionary views on feminism known, and unfortunately, she’s at it again—but this time her words may be even more harmful.
Until now, Rowling’s problematic beliefs about trans women have mostly lived on her Twitter feed. In June, she came under fire for a series of tweets that questioned the legitimacy of trans women as women, suggesting that they don’t experience discrimination based on their identity, and spreading false ideas about the trans community wanting to “erase the concept of sex.” She claimed, basically, that she doesn’t hate trans women, she just doesn’t think they’re “real” women. Gross. Last year, Rowling also caused controversy when she came to the defense of a British woman who was fired from her government job for criticizing a UK policy allowing employees to self-identify their gender.
So J.K. Rowling’s troubling views on gender identity are nothing new, but now, they’ve made their way into one of her books, and we need to talk about it. Troubled Blood, the fifth entry in her Cormoran Strike mystery series, debuts this week, and early reviews have identified a plot point that’s already drawing widespread ire. One of the main storylines in the novel is the investigation into a cold case murder from 1974—a murder carried out by a “cis male serial killer whose modus operandi is dressing as a woman.” In their review of the new book, The Telegraph wrote that it is a “book whose moral seems to be: never trust a man in a dress.”
While Rowling is not the first writer to use the concept of a cross-dressing killer (The Silence of the Lambs, anyone?), it’s a trope that is inherently problematic when you consider that trans people, and particularly trans women, are already so much more likely to experience violence in their everyday lives. According to the National Coalition of Anti-Violence Programs, trans women accounted for 72% of hate violence homicide victims in 2013, and trans women are nearly twice as likely to experience sexual violence than any other group. With statistics like these, it’s upsetting that a writer with such a wide platform is still relying on an outdated, problematic trope. Though Rowling’s books and the characters in them are fictional, the consequences can be extremely real for trans and non-binary people who are just trying to live. But considering we’re talking about JK Rowling, it’s probably not that surprising.
A few years ago, the second book in the Cormoran Strike series was also criticized for Rowling’s depiction of a trans woman character. In the book, the woman, Pippa, attacks the title character, and when he ultimately gets her under control and her trans identity is revealed, he tells her that prison “won’t be fun for you… Not pre-op.” Unbalanced depictions like these spread false narratives that trans people are aggressive and deceitful, and trans journalist Katelyn Burns wrote that Rowling’s character showed “an entirely common though insulting trope about trans women—that they are aggressive and unable to overcome their masculine nature, not to mention villainous.”
If I made a billion dollars with a combination of ripping people off and racism, I would just buy a cool island and fill it with dogs and grow an unbelievable garden but then again, I’m not brain poisoned like JK Rowling
— Listen to @onbeliefpod & @ongriefpodcast Li’l 🌳 (@karengeier) September 14, 2020
This latest anti-trans nonsense from Joanne Kathleen (the K really should be for Karen) was the final straw for thousands of people on Twitter, who made the hashtag #RIPJKRowling trend on Monday morning. While you could debate whether it’s right to tweet “RIP” about someone who’s still alive, it’s understandable why so many people have decided they can’t put up with their former favorite author’s bullsh*t anymore. No matter how much you love Harry Potter, it’s clear that J.K. Rowling just isn’t it in 2020, and it’s probably time we all moved on.
Don’t miss out on any pop culture or entertainment news. Subscribe to our weekly newsletter here.
Images: Featureflash Photo Agency / Shutterstock.com; karengeier / Twitter
Painful as it can be, growing up means sometimes realizing your childhood heroes kind of suck. Specifically, it’s become impossible to ignore J.K. Rowling’s transphobic views. Our whole generation basically grew up on Harry Potter, a series that is built on the idea that you should stand up for what is right, and fight evil at any cost. Well, somehow J.K. Rowling has turned into the villain in her own story, and it’s really sad to see.
For a while now, J.K. Rowling has been pretty public with her (trash) opinions on trans women, leading her to be labeled a TERF, or Trans-Exclusionary Radical Feminist. This term, which was coined in 2008, refers to a subset of feminists who don’t consider trans women to be women. In December 2019, Rowling voiced her support for Maya Forstater, who was fired after she tweeted criticizing a UK government policy allowing employees to self-identify their gender. Forstater contested her firing in court, but a judge ruled that her views created an “intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment.” In a tweet, J.K. Rowling claimed that the court decision against Forstater served to “force women out of their jobs for stating that sex is real”.
While J.K. Rowling has a history of tweeting cringeworthy things, this goes a step further than trying to retroactively claim that the Harry Potter books had gay characters. This tweet about Maya Forstater deliberately uses the concept of sex to discount trans women—it’s no accident. And this weekend, J.K. Rowling doubled down on her transphobic views in a major(ly gross) way.
On Saturday, Rowling tweeted the link to a Devex op-ed titled “Creating a more equal post-COVID-19 world for people who menstruate”. The article specifies that “An estimated 1.8 billion girls, women, and gender non-binary persons menstruate,” and discusses the structural inequality in their access to vital health resources. But rather than comment on any of the important points raised in the article, Rowling took issue with the phrase “people who menstruate.” She sarcastically commented that there “used to be a word for those people,” suggesting that “women” would be a more correct term.
‘People who menstruate.’ I’m sure there used to be a word for those people. Someone help me out. Wumben? Wimpund? Woomud?
Opinion: Creating a more equal post-COVID-19 world for people who menstruate https://t.co/cVpZxG7gaA
— J.K. Rowling (@jk_rowling) June 6, 2020
Her lame attempt at humor aside, J.K. Rowling is deliberately missing the point here. The op-ed isn’t aiming to erase the concept of biological sex, but rather use more inclusive language to reflect people who do not fall within the gender binary. Not sure why anyone would mock Devex’s attempts to be inclusive when discussing an important topic like this, but alas, here we are.
J.K. Rowling’s initial tweet was immediately criticized, but rather than back down or apologize, she attempted to further explain her views in a series of three tweets that made me want to throw my phone across the room.
If sex isn’t real, there’s no same-sex attraction. If sex isn’t real, the lived reality of women globally is erased. I know and love trans people, but erasing the concept of sex removes the ability of many to meaningfully discuss their lives. It isn’t hate to speak the truth.
— J.K. Rowling (@jk_rowling) June 6, 2020
Joanne, please. This is not, and never has been, about whether or not sex is real. It’s about understanding the difference between sex and gender, and choosing your words carefully to always be as inclusive as possible. The “lived reality of women globally” includes ALL women, cis and trans, but this tweet suggests that J.K. Rowling feels threatened by including trans women in those conversations. Why? Cis women have plenty of opportunity to “meaningfully discuss their lives,” and they should be just as open to learning about the lives of trans women.
The idea that women like me, who’ve been empathetic to trans people for decades, feeling kinship because they’re vulnerable in the same way as women – ie, to male violence – ‘hate’ trans people because they think sex is real and has lived consequences – is a nonsense.
— J.K. Rowling (@jk_rowling) June 6, 2020
I respect every trans person’s right to live any way that feels authentic and comfortable to them. I’d march with you if you were discriminated against on the basis of being trans. At the same time, my life has been shaped by being female. I do not believe it’s hateful to say so.
— J.K. Rowling (@jk_rowling) June 6, 2020
As a general note, if your tweet’s general thesis is “I don’t hate trans people, but…” you should probably go back to the drawing board. While J.K. Rowling may, as she suggests, have a trans friend or two (classic deflection), her words are unquestionably transphobic. Which, by the way, are not mutually exclusive. Her insistence that she has “respect” for, and is “empathetic” to trans people is incredibly patronizing, as if the trans community should feel grateful that J.K. doesn’t think they’re monsters. It’s telling that she never once uses the phrase “trans women” in her tweets—she respects “trans people” as people, sure, but she wouldn’t go so far as to actually respect their gender identity.
Out of this whole problematic mess, the most disturbing bit is when she says that “I’d march with you if you were discriminated against on the basis of being trans.” Excuse me, “if”? IF??? The trans community IS discriminated against, and it’s not difficult to find the evidence. Just last fall, the U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments in its first-ever case on transgender employment discrimination, and a ruling is still pending. A 2015 GLSEN Survey found that 75% of transgender students “felt unsafe at school because of their gender expression.” Lambda Legal found that “nearly one in six transgender Americans—and one in two black transgender people—has been to prison.” According to the National Coalition of Anti-Violence Programs, trans people are 3.7 times more likely to experience police violence than cis people, and transgender women are nearly twice as likely to experience sexual violence.
There are hundreds more statistics like this, but to put it simply, it’s insulting and wildly ignorant to suggest that the trans community is not discriminated against on the basis of being trans. J.K. Rowling could find out any of this information from a quick Google search, but I have a feeling she doesn’t want to educate herself. She’s made her transphobic views known in the past, and she continues to dig her heels in for the world to see. And in the middle of Pride month, no less! J.K. Rowling says that “it isn’t hate to speak the truth,” but I feel like we have different concepts of what the “truth” is.
For more LGBTQ stories, check out our Queerantine History series:
Images: lev radin / Shutterstock.com; jk_rowling / Twitter
At one point or another, we’ve all said things we shouldn’t have. Whether you said your boss’s idea was dumb in a meeting or gave your friend your honest opinion about how she looked in an outfit, it happens. But there’s a big difference between telling Jen her dress is too tight and saying sh*t that’s actually bigoted or otherwise problematic. Seems like an easy concept to grasp, but some celebrities just don’t seem to get this. Case in point: J.K. Rowling. While she became a billionaire by creating the Wizarding World, she f*cks up a lot when it comes to things in the real world. Today, she’s in hot water for a tweet about an important UK legal decision, and it’s really not a good look for her.
Here’s the background: a woman named Maya Forstater, who worked at a poverty think-tank, was fired for a series of tweets questioning government plans to allow people to self-identify as whatever gender they chose. In one tweet, Forstater specifically stated that “men cannot change into women,” blatantly disregarding scientific opinion, along with the experiences of countless trans people. Forstater contested her firing at the Central London Employment Tribunal, but this week, they ruled against her. The judge called Forstater’s views “absolutist,” and said that they serve to create “intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment.” Basically, it’s almost 2020, and trans people aren’t going anywhere, sorry Maya.
What I am so surprised at is that smart people who I admire, who are absolutely pro-science in other areas, and champion human rights & womens rights are tying themselves in knots to avoid saying the truth that men cannot change into women (because that might hurt mens feelings)
— Maya Forstater (@MForstater) September 30, 2018
In the wake of the decision, J.K. Rowling did what she always does, and tweeted something outlandish even though nobody asked. She tweeted her support for Forstater, claiming that the Tribunal is trying to “force women out of their jobs for stating that sex is real,” and using the hashtag #IStandWithMaya. As someone who took like, two gender studies classes in college, this tweet immediately made me cringe. Rowling doesn’t seem to understand the difference between sex and gender here—so, for the people in back, let’s take a look at the GLAAD definitions. Sex is “the classification of a person as male or female,” which is assigned at birth, “usually based on the appearance of their external anatomy.” Gender identity, however, is “a person’s internal, deeply held sense of their gender,” and “for transgender people, their own internal gender identity does not match the sex they were assigned at birth.” No one said sex isn’t real here, because the issue was never about sex. It was about gender and gender identity.
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? #IStandWithMaya #ThisIsNotADrill— J.K. Rowling (@jk_rowling) December 19, 2019
On top of being like, factually incorrect, with this statement, JK Rowling is dipping her toes into an area of feminism that’s hardcore problematic. In the wake of her tweet, she’s been labeled a TERF: Trans-Exclusionary Radical Feminist. This term, which was coined in 2008, describes a subset of feminists who have transphobic views, a main one being that trans women aren’t real women. While some women who have been called TERFs argue that the term is a slur, that’s probably because they’re not ready to talk about the fact that they believe in sh*tty, hurtful things.
Trans women are women.
Trans men are men.
Non-binary people are non-binary.CC: JK Rowling.
— Human Rights Campaign (@HRC) December 19, 2019
After her latest tweet, J.K. has been called out on Twitter by thousands of people, including some of the top advocacy groups for LGBTQ issues. She’s yet to respond to the controversy, but hopefully she can take this as a learning opportunity and fix her transphobic views. Maybe I’m being too optimistic, but it’s just kind of sad that J.K. Rowling sucks this much. Because she has created such beloved books and characters, it’s tempting to dismiss a comment like this as a misunderstanding, or a one-off tone-deaf moment, but that’s just not the case. She has sucked for a long time.
This latest issue is far from the only time J.K. Rowling’s behavior has raised questions. Perhaps most famously, many people have been upset by the decision to keep Johnny Depp in the Fantastic Beasts movies after he was accused of physical and verbal abuse by his ex-wife, Amber Heard. Even Daniel Radcliffe questioned the decision, telling Entertainment Weekly, “I suppose the thing I was struck by was, we did have a guy who was reprimanded for weed on the film, essentially, so obviously what Johnny has been accused of is much greater than that.”
Rowling has also been accused of using her after-the-fact revelations about Harry Potter characters as a deflection of criticism that the books aren’t very inclusive, and it’s hard to argue with this. If Dumbledore was really gay all along, would it have killed her to mention it even once in seven books? Yeah, she should probably just stick to writing, and maybe include a little more diversity in her next book.
Of course, J.K. Rowling is far from the only celebrity who has made an uncomfortable habit of saying things they just shouldn’t. Here are a few of the most prolific sufferers of foot-in-mouth-syndrome—have fun cringing while you remember all these moments.
Lena Dunham
Honestly, where to even start with Lena Dunham? I loved Girls, and I think most people can agree she’s talented, but every time she opens her mouth I dread what she’s going to say. You know you officially have a problem when your Wikipedia page has a whole section titled “Controversies,” and Lena Dunham’s history of putting her foot in her mouth is a lot to take in. For today, we’ll just enjoy some of the highlights.
In 2014, Dunham’s book Not That Kind of Girl created controversy around a story about being sexually assaulted by a classmate at Oberlin College. The issue wasn’t with the story itself, rather the fact that the pseudonym she used for her abuser was…not a pseudonym at all. She described a guy named Barry in great detail, and then a real-life guy named Barry came forward, claiming that her description matched up a little too closely. Random House had to reprint the book with a clarification apologizing for the “confusion.”
That wasn’t the only controversy surrounding Dunham’s book. She got even more backlash for passages where she writes about interacting with her one-year-old sister in a sexual nature when she was seven, which many people labeled as predatory behavior. Dunham’s sister defended her, saying people should be able to make their own decisions “for themselves what has and has not been normal,” but yeah, this didn’t sound normal. Everyone from attorneys to child psychologists weighed in on the controversy, and it still weirds me out, even five years later.
And by the way, if you were a little kid and never looked at another little kid's vagina, well, congrats to you.
— Lena Dunham (@lenadunham) November 1, 2014
One of Lena Dunham’s most puzzling moments came in 2016, when she said publicly that she wishes she’d had an abortion. When speaking on a podcast about abortion rights and understanding women’s experiences, she said “I can say that I still haven’t had an abortion, but I wish I had.” Whatever your thoughts are about whether abortion is okay or not, wishing you had one, like, for the story seems incredibly strange.
Scarlett Johansson
In case you haven’t noticed, Scarlett Johansson is white. In fact, you could say that she’s very white. And despite being an incredibly talented actor, she’s not so talented when it comes to accepting her privilege and staying out of the spotlight for all the wrong reasons. This has specifically been an issue with some roles she’s accepted in the past. She played an Asian woman in Ghost In The Shell, and was slated to play a transgender man in the movie Rub & Tug, before she left the project for unknown reasons. It would be nice to think that those reasons had something to do with her casting being problematic in the first place, but as recently as this summer, she’s stated that she doesn’t see the issue with her playing non-white, non-cis roles.
Definitely Scarlett johansson. Who else would even dare to play a tree?! https://t.co/rGZQiQzYV1
— V (@AllYouNeedIsATV) December 18, 2019
When speaking to As If magazine in July, she stated that “as an actor I should be allowed to play any person, or any tree, or any animal because that is my job and the requirements of my job.” She got trolled online for the tree part, but the whole thing is rough, whatever way you look at it. She also said that the trend toward political correctness “needs to happen for various social reasons,” but that it makes her uncomfortable, because she feels “art should be free of restrictions.” Oh Scarlett, honey, no.
Nicki Minaj
Nicki Minaj has been a polarizing figure throughout her career, and has a habit of feuding with basically every female rapper on the face of the earth. Whether you think the feuds are fun or exhausting, they’re not that problematic, for the most part. But Nicki’s track record when it comes to working with (and dating) known abusers is pretty bad.
Nicki has long collaborated with Chris Brown, and in 2018, lots of people got mad at her for working—and developing a close friendship—with rapper Tekashi 6ix9ine. As you may have heard, this week he was sentenced to two years in federal prison for gang-related offenses, but this isn’t his first time being in trouble with the law. Back in 2015, he pleaded guilty to three felony counts of “use of a child in a sexual performance,” which is as gross as it sounds. Last year, Nicki publicly voiced her support for him, despite him pleading guilty to all the charges against him. But her friendship with 6ix9ine was not a one-off instance of Nicki supporting a sex offender.
Also last year, Nicki started dating Kenneth Petty, who happens to be a registered sex offender. He was convicted of attempted rape back in the 1990s, which seems like it would be a dealbreaker for most people, but Nicki clearly has no issue with it. In fact, she’s bashed people on social media for criticizing her relationship decisions, and she and Kenneth are still going strong and apparently married. Welp.
There are plenty of other celebs who have said their fair share of ill-advised things, but these are a few of the most egregious ones. Which celebrities have caused you to cringe the most over sh*t they’ve said? Is there anyone who’s overdue for a canceling? Lmk in the comments.
Images: jk_rowling, hrc, lenadunham, allyouneedisatv / Twitter; theshaderoom / Instagram
When the Harry Potter series ended back in 2007, those of us who grew up with the series shed a little tear for the end of the wizarding world. Little did we know that all we had to do was fast forward like, 10 years, and J.K. Rowling would be providing us minute-to-minute updates on aspects of the Harry Potter series that not even the most depraved FanFictions had touched on. And no, I’m not talking about the announcement that Dumbledore is gay, which was actually cool (though it would have been cooler if that had appeared in the books like, ever). I’m talking about all the other random, bizarrely sexual sh*t that J.K. Rowling has revealed since the series ended. As a Harry Potter fan myself, I had always hoped we’d hear more about some of our favorite unexplored aspects of the series *cough*Marauders Prequel*cough* but never once in the 20 years since Sorcerer’s Stone first hit the shelves did I wonder what wizards did with their waste before toilets. Now I know.
Here are just a few ways J.K Rowling has tainted what used to be a very wholesome series about children learning magic at magic school, for no other reason than I presume she was bored.
1. Dumbledore and Grindelwald’s “Intensely Sexual” Relationship
Why, Jo, why? Listen, we all love gay Dumbledore. We stan a gay Dumbledore. We wish we had any indication in the books that gay Dumbledore was gay Dumbledore, but this is too much. I want to know about Dumbledore’s sex life as much as I want to know about any of my teachers’ sex lives, which is to say, not at all. If Joanne really wanted to go down this road, there are plenty of canonically sexy Hogwarts staff members (Moonlit Lupin animal sex? Nearly Headless Nick in the third floor corridor with a vibrating wand attachment? I’m just spitballing here…) to go with.
JK Rowling: Dumbledore is gay.
World: OK.
JK Rowling: With Grindlewald.
World: OK.
JK Rowling: I mean, REALLY gay.
World: OK.
JK Rowling: Soooooo gay.
World: OK.
JK Rowling: I don’t think you get just how gay.
World: No, really, it’s fine with us.
— Apache Dreamsac (@NathanWurtzel) March 17, 2019
But Dumbledore? I don’t care that he’s Jude Law now, Dumbledore is, and forever will be, grandpa age. In fact, Dumbledore is supposed to be approximately 150 years old during the Harry Potter series. I do not need to go back in time to see his younger self and find out that he and Grindelwald once boned in a house he was renovating. This is not The Notebook. I’m done.
2. The American Houses
Shortly after Harry Potter ended, J.K. Rowling unleashed Pottermore on the fandom, a website whose sole purpose was to tell you you’re in Hufflepuff even though you’re clearly in Gryffindor (I’m not bitter). Rowling has also used this platform to reveal new info about the series, some of which was fun (McGonagall was in love with a muggle!) and some of which was just weird. Back in 2016, Rowling used the site to reveal info about the various wizarding schools around the world, and to publish a short story about the American wizard school Ilvermorny. “Finally!” American fans thought, “A wizard school just for me!”
Wrong! Because once we found out the names of the American Houses, we were all already downloading Hogwarts transfer paperwork. They are: Thunderbird (A car), Horned Serpent (euphemism for penis), Pukwudgie (??), and Wampus (?????????). No to all of these. I’m not sure why these seem so much more fundamentally ridiculous than the words “Gryffindor, Hufflepuff, Slytherin, and Ravenclaw,” but they do. Personally, I think J.K Rowling is just too British to be naming American things. She doesn’t get how we roll. IMHO the American Hogwarts houses should be: Flag, Chicken Nugget, Gun, and Double Gun.
Tina: Thunderbird.
Queenie: Pukwudgie. https://t.co/JlbudCKxIl— J.K. Rowling (@jk_rowling) December 14, 2016
(Pottermore says I’m in Chicken Nugget, but I know for a fact I’m in Gun.)
3. The Time She Involved The Israeli-Palestinian Conflict
No one:
J. K. Rowling: Dumbledore voted for Bernadette Peters for the Tony Award for Best Actress in ’03.
— John Robert Allman (@Johnny_Allman) March 17, 2019
J.K Rowling likes to get political on Twitter, which is fine because that’s like, the point of Twitter. But she definitely took it too far when she posted an essay saying Harry Potter would agree with her decision not to support a boycott of Israeli products. No matter what your personal opinion on Israeli politics is, I think it’s safe to say that Harry Potter did not have one at all. Harry Potter is not concerned with our muggle politics. He is concerned with fulfilling the prophecy, defeating Voldemort, and becoming the master of death. Like, if we’re gonna start giving Harry political opinions, then what does he think about Brexit? Does he believe in climate change? If so, can he use his magic to stop it? Can we get Hermione on this with a cooling spell ASAP?
4. Wizard Toilets
Hogwarts didn’t always have bathrooms. Before adopting Muggle plumbing methods in the eighteenth century, witches and wizards simply relieved themselves wherever they stood, and vanished the evidence. #NationalTriviaDay
— PotterMoreMischievous (@pottermore) January 4, 2019
In perhaps the most bizarre revelation of all, J.K Rowling also took to Pottermore to tell us that before muggles invented toilets, wizards “simply relieved themselves wherever they stood, and vanished the evidence.” Yes, that’s right, J.K. Rowling says wizards used to sh*t themselves on purpose. Why would she tell us this? I don’t know. Why would wizards even deal with installing toilets if they could just vanish their piss and sh*t to begin with? I don’t know. Does this mean that wizards under 17 just sh*t themselves because they weren’t allowed to do magic yet? Or did this predate the Degree for the Reasonable Restriction of Underage Sorcery? These are important questions that now need to be answered.
5. The Time She Shipped Harry/Hermione
Harry and Hermione are lifelong friends. They love each other like brother and sister. It’s cool because it shows you that a man and woman can be friends, with no sexual component, and just have a relationship based on respect.
But J.K Rowling had to ruin all the platonic friend love when she told Wonderland magazine that it was a mistake for Harry and Hermione to remain just friends, and that Hermione and Ron were “not a credible couple.” Umm excuse me, but if annoying the sh*t out of each other for years and then realizing you actually just wanted to bone the whole time isn’t a “credible relationship” then WHAT IS MY ENTIRE LOVE LIFE?
NO ONE:
JK Rowling: Harry and Hermione had an affair.— Niranjan B (@UnitedNMB) March 18, 2019
Also can we not let Ron Weasley have anything? This is literally his horcrux nightmare come true. Also also, this is Ginny Weasley erasure. Plain and simple.
6. The ‘T’ In Voldemort is Silent
… but I’m pretty sure I’m the only person who pronounces it that way. https://t.co/HxhJ5XY5HP
— J.K. Rowling (@jk_rowling) September 9, 2015
This is false. I don’t care that J.K. Rowling technically invented Voldemort and therefore is the authority on how his name is pronounced—this is false. On that note, I also propose we all go back to pronouncing Hermione as “Hermy-own” à la Viktor Krum and/or me in 4th grade before I listened to the audiobook.
Look, J.K Rowling will always be a literary icon. She created Harry Potter and for that I am forever thankful, but for the love of God, please stop with these bizarre revelations and channel all this pent-up sexual energy into a Riverdale-style Netflix show about Hogwarts in the year 2019. Sh*t, you could put it on Pottermore behind a paywall for all I f*cking care. I would gladly pay money to see that. Take my money Jo, please.
Images: Shutterstock; jk_rowling (2), UnitedNMB, pottermore, Johnny_Allman, NathanWurtzel / Twitter
