The Witch Trials of J.K. Rowling

A podcast stirs up new attacks on a beloved author: but is it warranted?

“This series is dedicated to everyone out there who is trying to have difficult conversations, trying to listen with empathy, and to speak with honesty and in good faith, even when it’s hard.” - THE WITCH TRIALS PODCAST

I was never a fan of the Harry Potter series. I read the first book as part of required reading in college, but nothing past that. I remember being more intrigued by the author herself, because of a gritty backstory: a single mother on welfare who worked on the Potter manuscripts between teaching stints, facing one hardship after another, overcoming poverty, and an abusive husband in a marriage she described as "short and catastrophic.”

Rowling was kept under tight reign, not allowed a house key, with the growing manuscript of her first book used as a hostage whenever she threatened to leave him.

Their marriage ended in 1993 after he threw her out of the house following a brutal argument. She returned with police to retrieve her young daughter before going into hiding for two weeks and eventually leaving Portugal for good. What proceeded was a grinding struggle to pull herself and her young child out of poverty on her own. For years, she was jobless in a "mouse-ridden" flat, a phase she describes as oddly "liberating" because it meant she could focus all of her efforts on finishing her book. A book that would ultimately be published under initials (to insinuate a man behind it), a book that would evolve into a billion-dollar empire.

As far as I knew, she was an inspiration to us all.

But especially women and single mothers who saw her story as a reason to never give up on their own life goals. So I was shocked to see how quickly her supporters turned on her. Many friends I reached out to in the LGBTQ community, whom I knew to be hardcore fans of Rowling, were ready to cancel her without even reading what she had written. Their fury came shaped instead by reading what others had interpreted of her. The outraged was carved out and framed for them.

Rowling's now infamous (3,600-word) statement was published on her website in June 2020 as an in-depth response to the backlash she received over her tweeted support for Maya Forstater (a tax specialist who'd lost her job for what were deemed ‘transphobic’ tweets.) In the essay, Rowling explained how she landed at the center of an increasingly bitter and polarized debate surrounding gender identity. She identified herself as “a domestic abuse and sexual assault survivor,” and credited her experience as a teacher as another reason behind her position.

“I’m mentioning these things now not in an attempt to garner sympathy, but out of solidarity with the huge numbers of women who have histories like mine, who’ve been slurred as bigots for having concerns around single-sex spaces,” she wrote.

She opened up about her struggles with sexism and misogyny and described her adolescent self as “mentally sexless,” adding that in that state of mind, reading accounts of gender dysphoria written by trans men made her wonder, “If I’d been born 30 years later, I too might have tried to transition”.

---

“The allure of escaping womanhood would have been huge. I struggled with severe OCD as a teenager. If I’d found community and sympathy online that I couldn’t find in my immediate environment, I believe I could have been persuaded to turn myself into the son my father had openly said he would have preferred.”

---

“When you throw open the doors of bathrooms and changing rooms to any man who believes or feels he’s a woman – and, as I’ve said, gender confirmation certificates may now be granted without any need for surgery or hormones – then you open the door to any and all men who wish to come inside. That is the simple truth."

She confessed that initially, the criticism left her “in a very dark place inside my head, as memories of a serious sexual assault I suffered in my 20s recurred on a loop. That assault happened at a time and in a space where I was vulnerable, and a man capitalized on an opportunity. I couldn’t shut out those memories and I was finding it hard to contain my anger and disappointment about the way I believe my government is playing fast and loose with women’s and girls’ safety.” 

She also expanded on the physical abuse she endured in her 20s. “If you could come inside my head and understand what I feel when I read about a trans woman dying at the hands of a violent man, you’d find solidarity and kinship,” she wrote. 

The essay, if you recall, prompted a heated debate on Twitter. Emma Watson was the first of the Potter cast to distance herself tweeting: “Trans people are who they say they are and deserve to live their lives without being constantly questioned or told they aren’t who they say they are.” In her follow-up response, she wrote: “I want my trans followers to know that I and so many other people around the world see you, respect you, and love you for who you are.”

---

“I've now received so many death threats I could paper the house with them, and I haven't stopped speaking out. Perhaps — and I'm just throwing this out there – the best way to prove your movement isn't a threat to women, is to stop stalking, harassing, and threatening us."

---

The release of the Witch Trials podcast has stirred new attacks on Rowling’s views on feminism and the trans community as a whole. In it, she is accused of perpetuating harmful stereotypes that contribute to the marginalization of trans individuals. Yet Rowling refuses to apologize or backtrack on her stance despite her comments igniting further divide between those who support her and those who condemn her, to the point of burning her books in public protests. In one episode (which Luana touches on below), Rowling basically explains that she's too rich to cave to social pressures or surrender to woke expectations. Extreme wealth offers her the freedom to be unwavering, so she sees herself as a voice for those who share her perspective, but - in an age where people risk losing their jobs for expressing honest opinions online - do not have the luxury of financial security to vocalize it.

---

“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.”

---

This contentious divide surrounding this podcast seems to highlight the ongoing struggle of balancing free speech with the desire to create a safe and inclusive society that embraces all individuals. 

But at what cost? 

And to what end?

To me, the uproar is just another example of cancel culture seeking immediate elimination — wanting to erase anyone who rejects a decided narrative, even if it means that the contributions and works of beloved artists, entertainers, and authors get stripped from the consciousness of our social collective, depriving us of valuable perspectives and cultural touchstones when we could be using these opportunities to engage and evolve through uncomfortable discourse & dialogue. 

Somewhere along the way, civil conversation has become a risky alternative. Everyone is terrified to speak up about what feels "right" or unjust to them because misinterpretation can be so vicious in a cyber setting. But how do we expect to get anywhere if everyone continues to succumb to increasing degrees of self-censorship, if conversation is deemed controversial, and our visionaries continue to be virtually stoned for expressing honest opinions with sound reasoning as backing?

Since when is cultural dissonance considered the greatest threat?

Below is a roundup of celebrity support + two reviews from women whose opinions I respect. Please feel free to voice your thoughts & opinions in the comments sections. 

---

CELEBRITIES DENOUNCING ROWLING

NY Times Op-Ed Defends J.K. Rowling

The New York Times published an op-ed in February defending J.K. Rowling from accusations that she is transphobic, a day after the newspaper’s staffers and other celebrities criticized its “anti-trans bias.” The op-ed was published a day after GLAAD — the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation — posted an open letter demanding that the Times “improve their coverage of transgender people.” The letter was signed by several Times staffers as well as high-profile Hollywood celebrities, including Judd Apatow, Gabrielle Union-Wade, Jameela Jamil, Maragaret Cho and Lena Dunham.

“For those of us who truly treasured the Times coverage for so many years, it is appalling to see how the news and opinion pages are now full of misguided, inaccurate, and disingenuous ‘both sides’ fearmongering and bad faith ‘just asking questions’ coverage,” the GLAAD letter read.

Paul insisted in her op-ed that “nothing Rowling has said qualifies as transphobic.”

“There is no evidence that she is putting trans people ‘in danger,’ as has been claimed, nor is she denying their right to exist,” Paul wrote of Rowling.

---

CELEBRITIES IN SUPPORT OF ROWLING

Ralph Fiennes

“J.K. Rowling has written these great books about empowerment, about young children finding themselves as human beings. It's about how you become a better, stronger, more morally centered human being," he said.

"The verbal abuse directed at her is disgusting, it's appalling. I mean, I can understand a viewpoint that might be angry at what she says about women. But it's not some obscene, über-right-wing fascist," Fiennes continued. "It's just a woman saying, 'I'm a woman and I feel I'm a woman and I want to be able to say that I'm a woman.' And I understand where she's coming from. Even though I'm not a woman."

I can understand the heat of an argument, but I find this age of accusation and the need to condemn irrational. I find the level of hatred that people express about views that differ from theirs, and the violence of language towards others, disturbing," - The Telegraph.

---

Judy Blume

“It can also be said that Rowling’s a victim of Twitter, because people believe what they read on Twitter, whatever you actually said.”

The important thing is that people keep speaking up — and for that reason she recently said in an interview, for the first time, that she had two abortions during her brief second marriage.

I didn’t intentionally not speak about it before. But it’s really, really important to speak about it now.” Because of the overturning of Roe v Wade? “Yes, and I was there the first time around, and in the 1980s when the book banners really started. There aren’t a lot of us left who were there then, and if you weren’t on the front lines you don’t know what it was like.”

---

Macy Gray on Piers Morgan

“A woman goes through a completely unique experience and surgery and finding yourself doesn't change that. Being a little girl is a whole epic book, you know? You can't have that just because you want to be a woman.'

When Piers pointed out Rowling being criticized for her views on trans women, Macy replied: 'But it's the truth.' Adding: 'I don't think you should be called transphobic just because you don't agree… there is a lot of judgement and throwing stones at people for just saying what it is, do you know what I mean?'

---

Bette Middler

"There was no intention of anything exclusionary or transphobic in what I said;  it wasn't about that," Midler tweeted. "It was about the same old s--- women – ALL WOMEN – have been putting up with since the cavemen. Even then, men got top billing."

She added, "But seriously, folks, if anyone who read that tweet thinks I have anything but love for any marginalized people, go to Wikipedia and type in my name."

"I've fought for marginalized people for as long as I can remember. Still, if you want to dismiss my 60 years of proven love and concern over a tweet that accidentally angered the very people I have always supported and adored, so be it," she continued. "But the truth is, Democracy is slipping through our fingers! I'm all in on trying to save Democracy for ALL PEOPLE. We must unite, because, in case you haven't been paying attention, divided we will definitely fall."

---

Helena Bonham Carter

"I think there’s a lot of envy unfortunately and the need to tear people down that motors a lot of this canceling. It’s horrendous, a load of bollocks. I think she has been hounded. It’s been taken to the extreme, the judgmentalism of people."

"She’s allowed her opinion, particularly if she’s suffered abuse. Everybody carries their own history of trauma and forms their opinions from that trauma and you have to respect where people come from and their pain. You don’t all have to agree on everything — that would be insane and boring. She’s not meaning it aggressively, she’s just saying something out of her own experience."

---

Luana Holloway : A Review

Initially I was annoyed at my phone for constantly suggesting The Witch Trials of J.K Rowling on my podcast explore page. 

I don’t personally align with the authors views on this issue so I wasn’t interested in a deep dive into the fall out from her comments because part of me thought that she had invited it. But it’s obvious that gender identity will continue to be a huge point of reckoning for our society and we are all going to have to get a little more comfortable with listening to each other. So I pressed play. 

Hosted by Megan Phelps-Roper (who has her own intriguing background) The show is very well made, very listenable. She moves through each episode with sensitivity albeit slowly. Everyone interviewed is articulate and intelligent, setting the scene for the social climate that positioned J.K Rowling against the Transgender community. Rowling is a staunch feminist and a master raconteur who has fought hard for her story, listening to her personal history is so compelling. I was surprised to get a real sense that she understands her views deserve to be questioned and that she can handle it. I wish the host pushed her further. 

While her opinions are not completely graceless, it’s hard to ignore the vacuum in which they are shared. She is interviewed in her house in Scotland which is in fact a castle. She is calm, well spoken and measured in the way that one can only be when they are personally completely detached from an issue. She is obviously not trans, She does not have trans children. She is many spaces removed from the reality of making decisions in the open wound that is the lived transgender experience. I could not for the life of me understand why she would want to lend her voice to this issue. A proper answer didn’t arrive until episode 5 and it took my breath away. In a complete paradox to current narratives around cancel culture, She claims that her success makes her obligated to speak for those that share her views but are not bouyed by notoriety. Wealth and power have placed her above cancellation. 

This revelation felt monumental to me, I know that those who value free speech above all else will find this point in the interview to be inspired but I felt there was something uncomfortable about knowing that she was using her voice because it was the loudest rather than the most effected. 

Excruciatingly, the reaction to her comments made me even more uncomfortable. The vitriol aimed towards her was absolutely vile. Rather than being asked to defend her views or challenged as someone who was clearly willing to engage, she was crucified. There was public book burning, repeated threats of sexual violence, even death. Contemplating the space between these two polars is where I found myself after listening to most of this podcast (there is still an episode to go) which is probably an indication that it does what it set out to do. It has left me with a lot to contemplate all month - Who gets to share opinions? How do we engage in debate with grace? Who gets to ask questions and who gets to answer them? Would a man have received received this level of backlash? 

Ultimately, I thought The Witch Trials of J.K Rowling’s greater message was a little bit too one sided to encapsulate the whole saga perfectly but it did give an excellent example of how incredibly frought it is talk about ideology online. 

---

Laksmi Hedemark : A Review

A few weeks after “The Witch Trials of J.K. Rowling” debuted, I recommended it to a collaborator of mine. Not because I thought she would be particularly interested in the content -  I hadn’t really given much thought to the controversy surrounding J.K. Rowling’s “legacy” and her apparent “fall from grace.” As a child, I had read some of the books, watched a few of the films, loved them, but then moved on. I do remember thinking it was absurd that Rowling wasn’t included when HBO did the whole “Harry Potter 20th Anniversary'' thing.

As an actor, I couldn’t imagine being in the position of agreeing to such a reunion, knowing full well that my whole career (and bank account) was built on the world and characters that Rowling had created. (To avoid confusion, I’m speaking specifically about Radcliffe, Watson and Grint here). I don’t think I had even read the tweets or Rowling’s statements. I just didn't care enough.

I actually recommended the podcast because Megan Phelps-Roper is an incredible journalist and does incredible work as the host. She asks mindful questions and listens to her guests. But before I could finish my sentence, I was met with, “NO. NO. NO. I will not be listening to that podcast. I have read plenty about it, and I’m fine”. Or something along those lines. The conversation abruptly ended, and I found myself sitting in my parked car, shaking. What had just happened? And why was I having such an intense physical response to someone being unwilling to listen to a podcast? It’s not that big of a deal.

My colleague's vehement refusal to listen left me rattled and deeply introspective for days. As someone who grew up in a cult that continues to perpetuate violence and abuse against children and women, I have a visceral aversion to groupthink and closed-mindedness. And yet, here was someone, an artist I deeply respect, who couldn't even entertain the idea of hearing an alternative perspective. What struck me most was the irony of it all. As artists, we have the opportunity to explore multiple perspectives and uncover truths. Isn’t creating art, engaging in conversations, and asking the hard questions, the most normal response to injustice? Isn't the very essence of creating art about having the conversations that challenge us, even when they're uncomfortable?

And somehow, when it comes to a topic as sensitive as women’s rights and one of the world's most revered writers, J.K. Rowling, most are quick to shut down the conversation entirely. I’ve experienced a few more of these types of responses when I’ve recommended the podcast again, especially from women. I’m no longer surprised. I no longer shake in turn. 

And I’ve thought more about my past in the process. At 15, I left my family home in India and the religious community that was foundational to my entire identity because I knew that environment and its ideology were not safe for me, as a woman, and that it would not be safe for my children, if I ever had them. I found the strength to do this because I am a woman.

After listening to more of The Witch Trials of J.K. Rowling, I refuse to ignore the conversations we're not having around women’s rights out of fear of somehow being interpreted as Anti-Trans. I refuse to let anyone dismiss a topic as off-limits or "-phobic" simply because it falls outside the narrow confines of what is deemed acceptable or "affirming." The consequences of not having these conversations could have a lasting impact on women and children for years to come and I will not be complicit in that silence. 

As an artist, I believe that our work is at its best when it engages with the world around us, even when that means wading into thorny, contentious subjects. Only then can we truly begin to move forward, both as artists and as a society with respect, understanding, compassion, and ultimately, love for one another.  

With this in mind, it is my humble opinion that J.K. Rowling might have created her best work of art from a few tweets: a conversation so few felt safe enough to have.