A trans woman reacts to online debates, actor statements, and online commentary regarding the upcoming Harry Potter television series. The video analyzes arguments about separating art from the artist, financial support toward transphobic causes, and the broader social and legal impact on the transgender community.
The speaker criticizes the upcoming HBO Harry Potter series, arguing that supporting the franchise financially enables J.K. Rowling's anti-trans activism. While acknowledging that liking the story isn't inherently transphobic, they assert that new consumption directly funds legal battles and initiatives that harm the transgender community.
I am in support of this show because it's giving us what we didn't get the first time.
You're bullshitting me telling me that you can't separate the art from the artist.
Really?
Anime is really popular.
Didn't Japan bomb Pearl Harbor?
So get the f*** out of here.
I'm sorry, caring that much about a Harry Potter show is f***ing weird.
Get a grip, my guy.
She uses that money to lapi against human rights.
The human right to not be offended because someone didn't use language you prefer them
to use for you?
Says the one that was crying about cis last week.
John Lithgow, who is going to play Dumbledore, said,
I'd already said yes.
I was urged to walk away, and I was not about to do that.
Emphasis on dumb, Buldore.
Get it?
HBO's new Harry Potter show is premiering soon.
The trailer has been released.
And of course, the entire cast, as well as everybody and their grandmother, is giving
their opinions on J.K. Rowling's beliefs and their own personal beliefs on whether or not
watching this show makes you anti-trans.
I've seen a lot of normal takes, but of course, I've seen a lot of anti-trans people making
complete idiots of themselves online as well.
So let's react to both, shall we?
First one that we'll watch is the tamest of all of them, the most innocent, the most polite,
if you will.
But once we get to the later TikToks, you will see the craziness just on full display.
The audio says, who wrote it?
Who wrote it?
Basically, like, fess up.
Who's saying this?
And the audio has become a trend where people will put a controversial take on the screen
and say, like, yeah, I said it.
What about it?
On the screen, she put, just because you watch, read, and enjoy Harry Potter does not mean
you love and stand for everything J.K. Rowling has said.
I think she meant stand.
Stand for everything that she said?
Or, like, stand her.
And then her caption says, like, I'm not watching Harry Potter just for her now, am I?
No, I'm not.
And watching it doesn't mean you're transphobic either.
Okay, girl.
She came out the door swinging, prepared to fight a trans person.
The thing is, is I really don't think that this is a transphobic take to say that you
enjoy watching movies or you enjoy reading books of a certain series obviously is not
going to be transphobic.
Unless the series itself is, like, kill all trans people.
But there is, like everything that I talk about here on this channel, some new ones
that I would like to introduce.
If you bought a book 10 years ago before she went on these anti-trans tirades, if you borrow
the movies from your friend or you, like, steal them offline, just kidding, I can't
endorse that, you're not providing financial support to her or to the series or, like,
the, what would you say?
Like, the industry?
Whatever it is.
So go ahead.
Absolutely.
Enjoy.
I mean, the movies are ----, but like, have at it.
I'm just kidding.
I did enjoy them once upon a time.
I do love some wizardry.
I love some magic.
I have my magic wand, poofing away the transphobes.
All of that being said, if you choose to continue to financially support the, what is the word?
I can't think of the word.
Harry Potter world.
I don't know.
If you continue to support it now and you're still giving money, you're still buying the
merch at Universal, you're buying a special edition books, you're, you're renting it on
Amazon Prime, all of that.
It does provide financial support to JK Rowling, which she will then use to harm trans people.
So I personally think that's bad.
Like, God forbid, I think giving money to somebody who is bragging online about using
their money that they're making from Harry Potter to harm trans people.
God forbid.
I think that's bad.
How dare I?
Birdie's coming.
You guys want to say hi to Birdie?
Come on up.
Oh, hi.
Can I have the microphone, please?
She's hogging it.
This is Birdie.
She's going to be five years old this year, and she is the best girl in the whole wide
world.
She's actually named after Birdo, which is the trans Mario character.
Birdie, look at the camera.
There we go.
Birdie is a very, very well-behaved, sweet girl.
But one thing about her is she does have some allergies.
So sad.
She'll like scratch her ear so hard that it like gets red and like irritated.
So I feel so bad.
The only thing that really helped her was finding very specific food that worked for
her.
That is why I am so excited to tell you guys about today's sponsor, Unkibble.
Unkibble is made with 100% whole, fresh, human grade ingredients.
I'm like, if I can eat it, she can eat it, you know, and I really like Unkibble because
it's kind of the best of both worlds of kibble and fresh food.
It offers the same high quality nutrition as fresh food, but it's much easier to store
on shelves or at your house.
And it's also about 40% more affordable than many fresh food alternatives.
I chose the cod and salmon recipe for Miss Birdie because it is the best for dogs with
allergies.
But they also have recipes that are specialized for picky eaters, and all of them are actually
designed by vets to support a shinier coat, to boost energy levels, which Birdie does
not need, but she can have it, I guess.
And for better digestion.
So if you're also a pet parent who struggles with a picky eater type of dog, I definitely
recommend giving Unkibble a try.
You can use this code right here for 60% off.
And if your dog does not like it, you can get your money back.
So it's really no risk.
Thank you so much to Unkibble for sponsoring today's video.
And yeah, back to the video.
We're hearing this type of rhetoric, even from cast members from this new show, which
is so disappointing.
Katherine Parkinson, who's playing Molly Weasley said, I don't want to add to that debate at
all.
I'm just delighted to be joining the magical world of Harry Potter.
Not even a, I support trans people, not even a trans people deserve human rights.
She said, I don't want to add a single thing except the money to JK Rowling's pocket.
Who cares about the damn trans?
Like I said, this type of reaction, both from the cast and this TikTok that we just watched
are the most mild of the reactions we're going to see today.
But before we continue, I do want to say that there has been some people who have pushed
back against supporting JK Rowling's work.
Several directors who were approached to work on the new show shared online that they were
like, no ******.
Allie Pan-Q, I'm so sorry, I don't know how to say this name, Pan-Q, sorry girl.
She got a text from, I think her agent who said, I have an instinct on the answer, but
I feel compelled to ask.
Harry Potter, hard no, absolutely not, LOL.
She captioned it.
It simply is this easy to say no to funding transphobia.
I'm trying to keep this in mind for the people that we're going to see in a minute.
Like girl, it's so easy to just say no.
But another director, her username is HeronThatKate, commented on Allie's post and said, they asked
me twice and I've had to explain my answer is never going to change from a no.
Lily Wachowski, who is a trans woman who wrote The Matrix with her twin sister, right?
They're both trans.
Something crazy like that.
She said online, if you support Harry Potter, you're supporting trans genocide.
To which Rowling actually responded, but I'm going to save all of her responses for the
very end.
So hold on.
Nicola Coughlin from Bridgerton said, keep your new Harry Potter, lads, wouldn't touch
it with a 10 foot pole.
I love, I love them just being like, no, you bitch.
Apparently I'm transphobic because I support the new Harry Potter show.
**** you.
I love trans people.
People on Instagram are down my throat telling me that I'm a hypocrite, that I'm this and
that.
Oh, you support transphobia?
Unfollow.
Oh, you support all the profits of the show.
We're going to anti-trans communities, this and that.
First off, no, it isn't.
Yeah.
A portion of it is going to JK Rowling, but she owns the ******* IP.
Just for clarity, JK Rowling is making 16 to $20 million per year for this series.
That's expected to go on for eight years.
Can you do that math?
Be so ******* for real.
Like I am serious.
Like don't put ******* hate in my heart because you're mad at somebody else.
I am in support of this show because it's giving us what we didn't get the first time.
I love those movies, but they are not accurate to the books.
And this is our chance to actually get full-blown accuracy to the books.
I don't watch Harry Potter and think of JK Rowling in the back of my mind.
I'm not reading Harry Potter going, man, this would be so much better if JK didn't write
these.
You're bullshitting me, telling me that you can't separate the art from the artist.
Really?
Anime is really popular.
Didn't Japan bomb Pearl Harbor?
You go to the ******* doctors and get a shot or get your insurance, or when you break your
leg, you go to a doctor, get a cast.
You're going to tell me the medical industry, big pharma isn't evil too, huh?
So get the **** out of here.
I'm sorry.
Caring that much about a Harry Potter show is ******* weird.
Get a grip, my guy.
There probably are some people watching this who, like this creator, want to try to separate
the art from the artist and consume it for what it is.
And like I said, there are probably ways to do that without financially supporting her.
However, if consuming a show the standard way on HBO is more important to you than reducing
harm against trans people, first of all, you're a loser.
Like nobody likes Harry Potter that much.
You can't claim that you love trans people.
You don't, at least not as much as some fictional world, which again is just like crazy.
I don't really care about what you're thinking about when you're watching a piece of media,
but to say that it's enough that you're not thinking about JK Rowling when you're watching
the show and that it's totally fine and not harming trans people is both stupid and wrong.
You may not be typing in on your Venmo the $15.99 HBO subscription fee and sending it
to JK Rowling herself.
But like I said, she's going to be making $16 to $20 million per season of this show.
And when you watch it and defend it and try to convince other trans allies or whoever
you want to talk to to watch it as well, you're keeping the series alive and making sure that
she makes that money.
Honestly, I'm keeping it alive right now, just talking about it, but like I'm a trans
person.
I'm allowed to, bitch.
And then these dumb takes about Pearl Harbor.
Are you okay, my guy?
That's not how comparisons work.
Does Japan's Department of War make money whenever you stream Hunter Hunter?
No.
Dude literally compared watching an HBO show, an HBO show to receiving medical care.
Like, are you going to die if you don't watch Harry Potter?
It's kind of the same argument that people use when people criticize capitalism, right?
They'll say, oh, well you just bought the new iPhone.
You live in a house.
You buy this.
You buy that.
It's like, girl, what choice do I have?
When it comes to boycotting an HBO show, you very much have a choice.
You do.
Honestly, I do believe him when he says that he cares about trans people, but this is not
how you show that care.
It's like, imagine if you went up to Rihanna and was like, I'm so sorry, Rihanna.
I just, I really love Chris Brown's music.
Like, can't we just like separate the art from the artist?
And then Chris Brown is like bumping in the background.
It doesn't work like that.
When you give money to this new material, you are supporting the anti-trans efforts
that she is pushing that need money.
Honestly, I feel like even if you were to, you know, pirate the shows or something, which
again, I cannot support going ahead afterwards and talking about it in a positive light on
social media and saying like, oh my God, it was so good.
I enjoyed it so much.
Honestly, I think that's bad as well because you're supporting it, you're feeding into
it and you're keeping it alive.
Like keep it to yourself.
I don't want to hear about it.
She promised to happily fund sex discrimination or safety lawsuits for cisgender women, which
of course sounds great, right?
Who doesn't want to provide funds for a sex discrimination case?
The reality of it is these are not just simple sex discrimination cases where a woman is
accusing somebody of sexual harassment or unequal pay or something like that.
These cases that she's talking about are cases where people will express their anti-trans
beliefs at work.
They will delegitimize a trans identity at work and end up getting fired for doing so.
Surprise, you can't harass trans people in your workplace.
You're fired.
Or cases when women want to sue the government for being incarcerated with a transgender
woman.
The website for the fund reads that it provides women with the means and confidence to bring
to justice strategic cases that make legal precedence.
Those are the cases that she's actually funding with this Harry Potter merch money and this
type of rhetoric of, I don't care what JK Rowling does in her personal life.
Like I just love Harry Potter.
First of all, it pisses me off because congratulations, you have privilege enough to avoid the transphobic
things that she's pushing.
Now, a couple of the cast members had responses that were similar to this man's, a very lukewarm
defense of the trans community and more so a focus on the love that they have for this
series.
Bel Powley, who's going to play Petunia Dursley said, I strongly disagree with JK Rowling's
views on gender.
I think that the trans community deserves safety and dignity and respect and total acceptance.
But I love Harry Potter.
I'm from that first generation of readers and again, I love magic and spookiness.
Girl, go to a haunted house.
Go to a trans led haunted house.
Shut the hell up.
Johnny Flynn, who is going to play Luscious Mouth Boy said, obviously there's quite a
lot of stuff around Joe Rowling.
I suppose that's been quite interesting to navigate the conversations there, but all
important conversations to have.
The people working on this are really, really great and create a really special atmosphere
like the showrunner and various directors.
There's such care, just not if you're a trans person.
I'm not going to say that these people hate trans people, that they don't support trans
people, whatever.
I'm sure they have great intentions and they do just love the show, but I don't know if
it's really clocking to them how much damage JK Rowling is doing to the trans community.
To a point where supporting any of her work is actively funding the oppression of trans
women.
So are we just going to focus on the maybe few million that she spent on trying to make
sure that the law focuses on objective biological realities rather than subjective identities?
Not the dog whistles.
All in all, somewhere around 1% maybe of her philanthropic spending has gone towards something
that you might consider to be transphobic.
And I'm not out here trying to get you to watch the Harry Potter show.
I have no interest in watching it myself.
I have enjoyed the original movies and that's all the Harry Potter that I care for.
I just think it's weird to boycott something when you disagree with where 1% of the money
is going, even when 99% of it is going to charities that pretty much everyone would
He said, I don't even care about Harry Potter that much.
But by the way, I don't know if there's a technical name for this type of fallacy, but
I'm going to refer to it as the Brock Turner fallacy.
You guys remember Brock Turner, that swimmer that raped the woman behind the dumpster and
got like six months in jail for it because he was a great swimmer.
It's the same type of moral licensure fallacy.
Just because somebody has done some great things, given money to some great causes,
is a great swimmer, doesn't mean that the bad things that they're doing are not bad
and should not be punished and that they should not be held accountable for them.
One of the lead cast members from this new HBO show had a response that was like weirdly
similar to this guy's TikTok.
John Lithgow, who's going to play Dumbledore said, the whole subject of Rowling's imputed
prejudice, it came up after everything was already underway.
I'd already said, yes, I was urged to walk away and I was not about to do that.
He said, the reasons to do so were much, much stronger than the reasons to protest against
what J.K. Rowling has done and said.
I do disagree with much of it.
Much of it, I think, has been twisted and misrepresented and she has doubled down on
it at her own cost.
This is him balancing out the options.
He said, protect trans people from the legal discrimination that J.K.
Rowling is funding or I get to play Dumbledore.
Emphasis on dumb, Dumbledore, get it?
I can't wait for the Harry Potter show.
Oh, I didn't realize you were transphobic.
What?
No.
Oh, my God.
Trans people are fine.
Your claimed lack of prejudice means nothing.
You're giving money to people who want them dead.
Ah, yes, because any time that a woman has any type of belief system that does not cater
to mentally ill men, that means that she must want those men dead because she doesn't believe
in the same ideological beliefs that I have.
That must mean that she wants them dead.
Dog whistle.
Transness is not an ideology.
It's who we are.
Referring to it as an ideology is a strategy used by transphobes, TERFs, to separate transness
from the human experience so they can delegitimize it.
Every time someone buys her books or the movies or watches the show and she uses that money
to lobby against human rights.
Since when does Rowling lobby against anything?
Do you mean that she just shares her opinions?
She just says the wrong things on Twitter.
And so that means that she's lobbying against human rights.
Which, which human right?
The human right to enter the wrong sex bathroom?
The human right to not be offended because someone didn't use language you prefer them
to use for you?
Says the one that was crying about cis last week.
Okay, get this dementor off my screen.
So is donating almost $100,000 to redefine sex to not include trans identities as she
did with For Women Scotland, is that not lobbying?
Now if you want to reduce the things that JK Rowling has done to just saying things
on Twitter, you can but you're an idiot.
She on the Daily sends her 14 million followers to harass individual trans people.
She has for over six years claimed that trans women like myself are a threat to the safety
of women and children.
She conflates health care for trans people to conversion therapy.
And she says that trans kids don't exist.
So she just says a lot, huh?
She tries to act so smart.
Oh, you're right to not be called but you don't want to be called.
Shut the hell up.
The right to equality and non-discrimination is a human right.
The right to health and bodily autonomy is a human right.
The right to legal recognition and dignity.
The right to safety.
Human right.
JK Rowling has spoken against all of those things.
She's poured money into removing all of those things for trans people for seven years straight.
Get a grip.
You stupid cisgender.
Sorry, I know they're going to hate that I had to say it.
To my supportive cisgender allies, this is not a slur.
I'm sorry.
It's just a slur against her.
I swear.
That TikTok was just full mask off transphobia.
But there were some cast members, one specifically, who I think did a great job at supporting
the trans community, even though they are in the cast of this new Harry Potter show.
I'm so sorry.
I have no idea how to say this name and I sound like such a racist bitch.
But I'm just going to say Papa Essidu.
He's going to be playing Snape.
And after he was signed onto the show, he actually signed an open letter calling for
the film and TV industry to protect trans rights after this UK Supreme Court ruling
redefined sex to not include transgender people, which JK Rowling heavily funded, meaning trans
women don't have access to domestic violence shelters.
I would have to use men's public bathrooms.
Trans men would be forced to go into women's bathrooms, which is literally the thing that
they are always complaining about happening.
Essidu signed onto that letter advocating for the protection of trans people and rejecting
this UK Supreme Court ruling, which is in direct opposition to everything that JK Rowling
has been working on for the last seven years.
Fans of JK Rowling were actually petitioning for her to fire Essidu.
And the one thing that I will give to JK Rowling is that she said that she would not fire him
even if she had the power to do so, which she doesn't.
So you better not.
I'll Expelliarmus you girl.
Expelliarmus?
No.
Avada Kedavra.
Sorry, I just killed someone off screen.
Rowling responded to this proposed boycott twice actually.
The first time was back in 2023, when the show was first announced and the boycott was
first being discussed.
She just mocked it.
As forewarned is forearmed, I've taken the precaution of laying in a large stock of champagne.
Basically just saying to the trans community again.
So classy.
Honestly, the responses that she continuously gives to any form of backlash from a trans
person is all the reasoning that you need to not support her.
She posted this precaution of laying in a large stock of champagne in 2023.
And even now in 2026, she said, pretending you won't watch is cute.
Girl, I'm not watching it.
I don't give a ****.
And if I do watch it, you're not getting a cent.
I can assure you of that.
I don't know how I'll watch it without you getting a cent, but rest assured.
To be fair, the 2026 quote is not confirmed, but I feel like she would say some ---- like
that.
I know the very last thing that I have to show you guys actually happened like last
week.
Lily Wachowski from the Matrix called out JK Rowling and Rowling responded to that or
her publicist did.
To correct Lily Wachowski, through the JK Rowling Women's Fund, Rowling supports women
taking legal action in the UK to preserve their existing rights under the Equality Act
2010, which are often overlooked or threatened.
Mind you, this whole back and forth with the Supreme Court started because a trans woman
was allowed to be on a board of women.
And she didn't like that.
It continues.
She does not support legal actions aimed at harming transgender people or efforts to limit
trans rights.
Yes, she does.
Trans people are already being harmed from what JK Rowling has done.
Okay, guys, that is all I have for today.
Make sure to subscribe to this channel and my second channel.
Make sure to follow me over on Instagram and TikTok, and I will see you in the next video.
Good night.
Bye.