J.K. Rowling and Elon Musk have both been named in a criminal complaint filed to French authorities over alleged “acts of aggravated cyber harassment” against Algerian boxer and newl crowned Olympic champion Imane Khelif.

Nabil Boudi, the Paris-based attorney of Khelif, confirmed to Variety that both figures were mentioned in the body of the complaint, posted to the anti-online hatred center of the Paris public prosecutor’s office on Friday.

The lawsuit was filed against X, which under French law means that it was filed against unknown persons. That “ensure[s] that the ‘prosecution has all the latitude to be able to investigate against all people,” including those who may have written hateful messages under pseudonyms, said Boudi. The complaint nevertheless mentions famously controversial figures.

  • MermaidsGarden@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    174
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    4 months ago

    Has she walked back or apologized for any of her bullshit? Last I could stomach to listen she was denying Nazi war crimes.

    • TankovayaDiviziya@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      51
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      4 months ago

      What fame does to you.

      The core theme of Harry Potter is about the power of love; and yet now she is being an insufferable, bigoted bitch. Wasn’t she also for accepting refugees but then when right-wingers told her to allow refugees to stay in her house, she went silent?

      • Gsus4@mander.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        35
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        She ruined her IP, I used to look at death eaters as fascists and the good guys as people who were kind, welcoming, wacky, they transfigured, they were free to be whatever they wanted without having to prove their purity, now I’m not sure what she thinks death eaters are…and have to look at all the hidden stereotypes in the book in a different light.

        • Cosmonauticus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          24
          arrow-down
          9
          ·
          4 months ago

          Not to shit on one of your favorite works of fiction but this is exactly why it’s a book for kids/teenagers. There are VERY FEW cases were the bad vs good is so black and white. Life is made up of shades of grey and as I’ve gotten older I’ve lost respect for writing that paints such a simple view of right and wrong. Without nuance either side can look at themselves as the good guy and the other as pure evil.

          • Gsus4@mander.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            24
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            4 months ago

            But that nuance exists in the books, there are family ties that cut across faction allegiances, double agents, traitors, misunderstood people, ambiguous characters. However, faction construction and ideology is very reminiscent of 20th century european history, so there is a grounded sense of black and white, unless you consider elitism, classism, racism and gratuitous violence to subjugate others as something that can be seen in a good light, somehow.

            • Cosmonauticus@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              4 months ago

              But that nuance exists in the books, there are family ties that cut across faction allegiances, double agents, traitors, misunderstood people, ambiguous characters

              So there’s nuance in everything but the plot?

              So there is a grounded sense of black and white, unless you consider elitism, classism, racism and gratuitous violence to subjugate others as something that can be seen in a good light, somehow.

              Theres nothing grounded about magic Hitler. Hitler himself and the rise of nazi German had more nuance other than they were all just _pure evvviiiillll _. Works of fiction that have these black and white struggles between the knight in shining armor and the devil incarnate who wants to destroy the world lack depth. It’s easy to make yourself the good guys in Harry Potter when all you have to do is not be the devil. It’s like the old school Disney formula of pretty white and charming is good. Ugly, vaguely ethnic, and awkward is bad.

              I’m not going out in cloaks and masks killing minorities so I can’t be the bad guy. Making it harder for them to vote is no big deal. The death eaters go around killing unwarranted. There’s no way they’re pro-life like me. Clearly they’d love abortions! The Trans community is trying to corrupt and covert our kids just like voldemort! It’s literally that easy

              • Gsus4@mander.xyz
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                4 months ago

                Looks like you feel stronger about this than I do, buddy. I’m not close enough to being a fan to reply to all that :D Yeah, I guess abortion is a moral grey area…I don’t remember if that was in the book, but it would certainly have added some depth to it.

      • MindTraveller@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        26
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        4 months ago

        Harry Potter is racist AF. Rowling named the black guy Kingsley Shacklebolt and the Asian girl Cho Chang. The books are pro-slavery too, and argue that if you free slaves they’ll turn to alcoholism. Rowling has always been a white supremacist.

        • sudneo@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          4 months ago

          There are a lot of layers of arbitrary interpretation here. Can’t we just stick to criticize opinions JKR actually expressed and is known to support, without having to make shit up? There are plenty of them anyway.

          P.s. Even in the worst case scenario, not every book is a manifest for what the author thinks. People are able to write stories that do not reflect their worldviews.

          • Duamerthrax@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            4 months ago

            She invented a world with race based slavery and only addressed it by normalizing the slavery whenever an outside took issue with it. It would have been easy to have the Weasleys be opposed to House Elves, but they also wanted one and the reader is suppose to feel pity that our poor, loving, relatable family can’t have a house slave.

            See, it’s little things like that, building up over time, while I quit half way though. Way too many “that was weird” moments for me.

            People are able to write stories that do not reflect their worldviews.

            Are you sure? Like, regardless of JK’s politics, where else is an author going to get ideas from? People are able to write characters that don’t reflect their world view, but the thesis of a story is going to reflect the writer’s beliefs and morals.

            • sudneo@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              4 months ago

              She invented a world with race based slavery and only addressed it by normalizing the slavery whenever an outside took issue with it. It would have been easy to have the Weasleys be opposed to House Elves, but they also wanted one and the reader is suppose to feel pity that our poor, loving, relatable family can’t have a house slave.

              This discussion is the kind of stuff I really don’t care about. I read the book when I was a kid and I remember clearly feeling for the injustice of elves being slave, cheering when Dobby was freed and for Hermione and her movement (she started one, I believe). So I am not sure what’s the point to discuss what the author “could have written” or what you think she meant you to feel when writing. These are both assumptions that I can’t even relate to, so they fit perfectly into what I was talking about: starting from “she is racist” and then trying to find bits and pieces in the books that can be used to support the claim.

              but the thesis of a story is going to reflect the writer’s beliefs and morals.

              Assuming this is true in every case, which is debatable, none of the stuff mentioned is the thesis of the book. In fact, I answered to a comment that was claiming she was a white suprematist based on character names and stuff like this. On the other hand, a HUGE role in the story is taken by the opposition to the “pure blood” movement (embodied by the main villain), and basically every positive character is or supports mixed-bloods (in English they are called mud-bloods? Not sure). To me this in complete anthitesis with white suprematism, but I would use neither to try to infer what JKR views are on race/society.

              My point is that in 7 books and thousands of pages you will find details that you can use to suggest her views are anything you want. The main plot of HP is generally a positive story, nothing that can be linked to racism, white suprematism etc. and so are the main characters. So why picking minor details or creative interpretations of the books instead of her actual words as JKR? Like yes, a transphobic, racist, whatever wrote a nice book series, possibly before becoming transphobia, racist etc.

              • TheTetrapod@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                4 months ago

                You’re misremembering how the slavery plot goes, for what it’s worth. In Chamber of Secrets, yes, Dobby is meant to be a sympathetic figure who we’re happy is freed. However, following her pattern of “returning to a plot point that got pushback two books ago to justify it”, in Goblet we learn that Dobby is a little sicko for wanting freedom and payment, and Hermione’s efforts with SPEW (btw that’s slang for vomit in the UK} are consistently portrayed as misguided and naive.

                I think it’s incredibly silly to suggest that you can’t make some judgements about an author based on literally a million words that they pulled directly out of their psyche. Another classic example is Joanne’s portrayal of women. If a woman is evil, she’s fat, mannish, and ugly. If a woman is good, she’s motherly and, in the case of Hermione, Luna, and Ginny, not like other girls. Nobody is really saying she was a hateful bigot while writing those books, but the seeds were certainly there.

                • sudneo@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  I will leave out interpretations of stuff in the book. You can interpret it in multiple ways, the author might have meant it in multiple ways, plus there are probably way more facts to keep into consideration that revolve around a character in the book that is pivotal for the whole plot.

                  I think it’s incredibly silly to suggest that you can’t make some judgements about an author

                  You can make some judgements, of course. But there

                  Nobody is really saying she was a hateful bigot while writing those books

                  The first comment in this chain, which is the reason why I am discussing at all…:

                  Harry Potter is racist AF. Rowling named the black guy Kingsley Shacklebolt and the Asian girl Cho Chang. The books are pro-slavery too, and argue that if you free slaves they’ll turn to alcoholism. Rowling has always been a white supremacist.

                  So, the nuance of the characterization of women, whatever that actually means in practice, sounds already more reasonable. Stuff like this quote are completely insane IMHO.

                  • TheTetrapod@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    4 months ago

                    Fair enough, that person is definitely engaging in hyperbolic rhetoric, but I don’t think their point is entirely wrong. This feels like a classic case of racism and bigotry being seen as all-or-nothing situations. Those character names are obviously not coming from a place of cultural sensitivity (it’s been pointed out that Cho and Chang are both family names from entirely different cultures), and while you refuse to engage with the point, portraying slavery as anything other than abominable is just a terrible decision. I would not agree with the comment OP that Rowling has always been a white supremacist, but I would say that she is/was a rather thoughtless liberal, in the centrist definition of that word.

          • MindTraveller@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            4 months ago

            What JK Rowling has actually expressed is that when a black woman wins a medal for boxing, she is obviously a male, regardless of genetics, anatomy, endocrinology, the law, or her own personal history. Rowling thinks black women are below womanhood, and are only granted it by the grace of “real women” such as herself. She’s a white supremacist.

            • sudneo@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              4 months ago

              So there is no need to make triple jumps to infer her political stance based on elements in her books.

              I am glad we agree.

                • sudneo@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  It doesn’t bother me, it seems just a silly and far fetched way to retrofit opinions on her, using an invalid methodology (I.e., you don’t have to agree with every detail you write about in a fictional book - I don’t think the books are a good argument to show she thinks school should start at 11 and last 7 years, for example).

                  On a greater scale, IMHO it makes the arguments against her less compelling, as I can’t honestly take seriously an argument that is based on choosing a name for a character or something like this, or a person who unironically uses this argument.

                  • Cosmonauticus@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    ·
                    4 months ago

                    So you believe that a writer can somehow completely remove their opinions, morals, and political leanings from their writing? I mean we literally go through books in high school English and pick a part their themes in relation to their lives, beliefs, etc.

                    But I’m sure Lovecraft kept his fear of foreigners and contempt for minorities out of his writings tho

          • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            4 months ago

            She’s pretty racist, dude.

            Even the kindest interpretation there shows that she has some incredibly stereotypical concepts of black people.

            • sudneo@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              4 months ago

              I specifically suggested to use her actual opinions (like the shit she tweets) instead of making stuff up from the books.

              So I guess we agree…?

              • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                4 months ago

                It seemed to me like you were disagreeing with the claim that she’s racist. If you were not, then yes, we agree.

      • Duamerthrax@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        The core theme of Harry Potter is about the power of love

        Ground breaking stuff. No one has ever dared touch on such themes before. Truly a visionary. /s

        nah, she’s always been a terrible writer that only found success through her editor and media hype.

        • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 months ago

          Fucking seriously. Like I get that people have nostalgia for the children’s books they read when they were younger, but most of us moved on and grew out of it.

          Adult Harry Potter fans are worse than Disney adults. It’s like they found a series of (again, children’s) books and decided they never had to read anything else.