J.K. Rowling: My view on women

I believe a woman is a human being who belongs to the sex class that produces large gametes. It’s irrelevant whether or not her gametes have ever been fertilised, whether or not she’s carried a baby to term, irrelevant if she was born with a rare difference of sexual development that makes neither of the above possible, or if she’s aged beyond being able to produce viable eggs. She is a woman and just as much a woman as the others.
I don’t believe a woman is more or less of a woman for having sex with men, women, both or not wanting sex at all. I don’t think a woman is more or less of a woman for having a buzz cut and liking suits and ties, or wearing stilettos and mini dresses, for being black, white or brown, for being six feet tall or a little person, for being kind or cruel, angry or sad, loud or retiring. She isn't more of a woman for featuring in Playboy or being a surrendered wife, nor less of a woman for designing space rockets or taking up boxing. What makes her a woman is the fact of being born in a body that, assuming nothing has gone wrong in her physical development (which, as stated above, still doesn't stop her being a woman), is geared towards producing eggs as opposed to sperm, towards bearing as opposed to begetting children, and irrespective of whether she's done either of those things, or ever wants to.

Womanhood isn't a mystical state of being, nor is it measured by how well one apes sex stereotypes. We are not the creatures either porn or the Bible tell you we are. Femaleness is not, as trans woman Andrea Chu Long wrote, ‘an open mouth, an expectant asshole, blank, blank eyes,’ nor are we God’s afterthought, sprung from Adam’s rib.

Women are provably subject to certain experiences because of our female bodies, including different forms of oppression, depending on the cultures in which we live. When trans activists say 'I thought you didn't want to be defined by your biology,' it’s a feeble and transparent attempt at linguistic sleight of hand. Women don't want to be limited, exploited, punished, or subject to other unjust treatment because of their biology, but our being female is indeed defined by our biology. It's one material fact about us, like having freckles or disliking beetroot, neither of which are representative of our entire beings, either. Women have billions of different personalities and life stories, which have nothing to do with our bodies, although we are likely to have had experiences men don't and can't, because we belong to our sex class.

Some people feel strongly that they should have been, or wish to be seen as, the sex class into which they weren't born. Gender dysphoria is a real and very painful condition and I feel nothing but sympathy for anyone who suffers from it. I want them to be free to dress and present themselves however they like and I want them to have exactly the same rights as every other citizen regarding housing, employment and personal safety. I do not, however, believe that surgeries and cross-sex hormones literally turn a person into the opposite sex, nor do I believe in the idea that each of us has a nebulous ‘gender identity’ that may or might not match our sexed bodies. I believe the ideology that preaches those tenets has caused, and continues to cause, very real harm to vulnerable people.

I am strongly against women's and girls' rights and protections being dismantled to accommodate trans-identified men, for the very simple reason that no study has ever demonstrated that trans-identified men don't have exactly the same pattern of criminality as other men, and because, however they identify, men retain their advantages of speed and strength. In other words, I think the safety and rights of girls and women are more important than those men's desire for validation.

Was J. K. Rowling a fan of 'Lethal Weapon'?

In the movie 'Lethal Weapon' (1987) we follow the soon to be retired detective Roger Murtaugh. He is partnered with Martin Riggs, a former Special Forces soldier, who has become suicidal and erratic since his wife was killed in a car crash. Their superior officer believes Riggs is faking his psychosis to be forcibly retired with a generous pension.
Riggs and Murtaugh do not get along well at first as Murtaugh is equally dismissive of Riggs's mental state, but is eventually convinced Riggs is truly suicidal.

Together they uncover a massive drug-trafficking ring. As they encounter increasingly dangerous situations, Riggs and Murtaugh begin to form a bond. Riggs' volatile behavior might just help them apprehend the criminals.

Lethal Weapon remains one of those rare 1980s action movies that has managed to pass the test of time and is still shown regularly on television.

But how do we know that J.K. Rowling liked (or loved) this movie?

On page 48 of the Bloomsbury pocket-edition of 'Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets' (1998) we find ourselves in Ron's bedroom where Harry Potter spots a pile of comics which all seemed to feature The Adventures of Martin Miggs, The Mad Muggle.

Was J. K. Rowling a fan of 'Lethal Weapon'?

The origin of the word 'Quidditch'

Quidditch is a wizarding sport invented by my friend, the author J.K. Rowling. The sport first appeared in the novel Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone (1997). It is a potentially dangerous but very popular sport played by witches and wizards riding flying broomsticks.
So, it is the most popular game played by witches and wizards. As there are no known witches and wizards alive, one would imagine that quidditch isn't played anymore.

You'd be wrong in thinking that, because idiots with broomsticks between their legs imagined that they played quidditch. But now, because Rowling is a bit controversial in some small circles, these spineless people want to change the name of their game.

The 'governing bodies' said that 'Quidditch' will henceforth be known as 'Quadball.' The name change is to distance itself from author Rowling's comments to protect 'real' women from predatory men who claim to identify as women. Besides, the organisations do not own the tradename 'Quidditch', which is owned by Warner Bros. Discovery.

The question you might ask is: where did J.K. Rowling find the idea for the word 'quidditch'?

In scholastic philosophy, 'quiddity' – deriving form the Latin quidditas - was another term for the essence of an object, literally its 'whatness' or 'what it is'. The Latin word quidditas, which was used by the medieval scholastics as a literal translation of the equivalent term in Aristotle's Greek to ti en einai (τὸ τί ἦν εἶναι) or "the what it was to be (a given thing)".

In law, the term is used to refer to a quibble or academic point. An example can be seen in Hamlet's graveside speech found in Hamlet by William Shakespeare. "Where be his quiddities now, his quillets, his cases, his tenures" says Hamlet, referring to a lawyer's quiddities.

The adaption of the word 'quiddity' to form 'quidditch' shows how well-read J.K. Rowling is, in stark contrast to the people who continue to attack her with false arguments. Or fallacies, as Rowling would probably say.

J.K. Rowling killed off in book by vile author

What do you do if you have no talent, but still want to generate sales for your upcoming book?

Transgender author Gretchen Felker-Martin had a sinister idea: let's add a scene in which J.K. Rowling is killed off during a fire at a Scottish castle in a story a character is telling around a campfire. While J.K. Rowling is not an actual character in the book, there are several references to her.
[The killer]

Why, you of sound mind may wonder, would a sane person write such a reprehensible scene?

To explain we have to start with the acronym TERF which means trans-exclusionary radical feminists. Those are women who have a twisted sense of entitlement. If you are a regular gay person, they think, you are assimilated by the system, because you have all the rights (and duties) heteros also have.

TERF's are feminists who exclude transgender women in their fight for women’s rights — Rowling is considered by some as a TERF due to transphobic tweets she has shared on social media. Rowling is their personal Voldemort.

Felker-Martin's book, whose title will not be named, is set in an apocalyptic world in which people with a sufficient amount of testosterone get turned into monstrous beasts. All that remains of humanity are cisgender women, non-binary people, transgender men, and transgender women.

The story is told from a trans perspective, as characters hunt down feral former humans and try to escape a faction of authoritarian trans-exclusionary radical feminists (TERFs) called “The Legion,” who are trying to murder transgender people and anybody else who gets in their way.

[The victim]

You will understand that the book is utter rubbish. It was only published because the publishers were afraid they would be called racists or whatever phraseology is currently in vogue.

“I have no idea how this even got published. The existence of this book proves once again that misogyny is alright as long as you identify as a member of a certain group,” one reviewer complained. “If you want to read a messed-up individual’s unhinged violent sexual fantasies against women, then this is the book for you!”



[Update Februari 18, 2023] Gretchen Felker-Martin hasn't learned from the backlash of her 'book'. She now want's to slit J.K. Rowlings' troat. See here. Her depravity is beyond words.

J.K. Rowling gets 'doxxed'

You know when common sense and decency are in mortal danger of dying when complete brainless idiots think it's funny to publicize the home address of J.K. Rowling on social media.

On 19 November 2021, the eve of Transgender Day of Remembrance 'comedian' Holly Stars, 'actor' Georgia Frost (just three small parts) and 'drag king' Richard Energy staged a demonstration in front of Rowling's home near Edinburgh, Scotland, in protest against her controversial views on the trans community.

So, you already have a special day, you can safely walk the streets in any guise or disguise you feel comfortable in and still you think it's a good idea to demonstrate your complete stupidity.

In a thread on Twitter, Rowling bashed the trio for 'doxxing' her when they posted a now-deleted photo with her home address clearly visible in the background. 'Doxxing' is the publication of someone's private information online without their consent.
"I have to assume that @IAmGeorgiaFrost, @hollywstars and @Richard_Energy_ thought doxxing me would intimidate me out of speaking up for women’s sex-based rights," Rowling wrote. "They should have reflected on the fact that 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," she added.
Of course, they didn't mind that Rowling continuously gets threatened and feels threatened by their brainless action, but the moment the trio were getting some flak back, they immediately felt victimised. All three activists have now (temporarily, mark my word) taken down their Twitter accounts, claiming online harassment. You reap what you sow.
[Look at the trio of losers]

The world is getting madder and madder. Where's real magic when you need it.

J.K. Rowling declines to be part of documentary

Some 20 years ago in July 2011 saw fans of Harry Potter queuing for cinemas for the last instalment of the saga in 'Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2'.
In November 2021 HBO Max announced it would bring together the cast members from all eight Harry Potter films for a retrospective special entitled 'Harry Potter 20th Anniversary: Return To Hogwarts'.

The press release mentioned the special would feature Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint, and Emma Watson. One name, however, was conspicuously absent, that of J.K. Rowling, who created the entire wizarding universe. Rowling made Radcliffe, Grint, and Watson famous and wealthy.

So, why does Joanne Rowling not appear in this 'retrospective special', one might ask. Rumours say that 'Rowling will be shown in archival footage from the creation of the first movie, but will not make a new appearance in the special'.

The carefully worded press-release is deliberately vague of  why she wasn't invited. I know she declined to be part of this reunion, because of the treacherous behaviour of Radcliffe, Grint, and Watson in Rowling's war of words with the eternally angry woke community.

The facts are here. Rowling is victimised for speaking the truth.

These spoiled brats bit the hand of the very woman who fed them. One had hoped that this trio would have a compassionate heart or had grown a spine, so they would have stood bravely by their friend. By by cowardly choosing the side of woke idiots, Radcliffe, Grint, and Watson betrayed Rowling and everything she stands for.

Look at them now. Radcliffe looks like an alcoholic who has been living rough for years. Grint has a career that seems to be heading to Knockturn Alley, and the talentless Watson seems to have retired from acting altogether. I can therefore quite understand that they gladly took the opportunity to get some much needed publicity (and money).

It's also easy to understand that Joanne Rowling kept her distance from 'Harry Potter 20th Anniversary: Return To Hogwarts'.

J.K. Rowling: The Christmas Pig

J.K. Rowling’s new children’s book has been announced!
'The Christmas Pig' will be simultaneously published on Tuesday 12th October 2021 in the UK, Australia, New Zealand, Ireland and India by Hachette Children’s Group, in the US and Canada by Scholastic, in over twenty other languages by other publishers and as an audiobook in English, Spanish, German, French, Japanese and Italian by Audible, making it a truly global publication.

'The Christmas Pig' is a heartwarming, page-turning adventure about one child’s love for his most treasured toy, and how far he will go to find it. It’s a standalone story, unrelated to any of J.K. Rowling’s previous work, and is suitable for children 8+: a tale for the whole family to fall in love with.

Jack loves his childhood toy, Dur Pig. DP has always been there for him, through good and bad. Until one Christmas Eve something terrible happens – DP is lost. But Christmas Eve is a night for miracles and lost causes, a night when all things can come to life – even toys… And Jack’s newest toy – the Christmas Pig (DP’s annoying replacement) – has a daring plan: Together they’ll embark on a magical journey to seek something lost, and to save the best friend Jack has ever known…


Ruth Alltimes, Senior Group Publisher at Hachette Children’s Books, describes it as ‘a sparkling gem of a story that is destined to find its way into the hearts of children and families across the world this Christmas, and forever after.’ Ellie Berger, President of Scholastic Trade books, says ‘a gift for children and families alike, this story about the enduring power of love can be read together as a holiday tradition, and as a classic tale to be savoured, any day of the year.’

'The Christmas Pig' is J.K. Rowling’s first children’s novel since Harry Potter, and follows her brilliant return to publishing for children with last year’s fairy tale 'The Ickabog', which was serialised online for free for children in lockdown and then published with all her royalties donated to her charitable trust Volant to help vulnerable groups impacted by the Covid-19 pandemic. She looks forward to connecting with her younger readers again this winter.

J.K. Rowling Writes about Her Reasons for Speaking out on Sex and Gender Issues

[Published June 10th, 2020]

This isn’t an easy piece to write, for reasons that will shortly become clear, but I know it’s time to explain myself on an issue surrounded by toxicity. I write this without any desire to add to that toxicity.

For people who don’t know: last December I tweeted my support for Maya Forstater, a tax specialist who’d lost her job for what were deemed ‘transphobic’ tweets. She took her case to an employment tribunal, asking the judge to rule on whether a philosophical belief that sex is determined by biology is protected in law. Judge Tayler ruled that it wasn’t.

My interest in trans issues pre-dated Maya’s case by almost two years, during which I followed the debate around the concept of gender identity closely. I’ve met trans people, and read sundry books, blogs and articles by trans people, gender specialists, intersex people, psychologists, safeguarding experts, social workers and doctors, and followed the discourse online and in traditional media. On one level, my interest in this issue has been professional, because I’m writing a crime series, set in the present day, and my fictional female detective is of an age to be interested in, and affected by, these issues herself, but on another, it’s intensely personal, as I’m about to explain.

All the time I’ve been researching and learning, accusations and threats from trans activists have been bubbling in my Twitter timeline. This was initially triggered by a ‘like’. When I started taking an interest in gender identity and transgender matters, I began screenshotting comments that interested me, as a way of reminding myself what I might want to research later. On one occasion, I absent-mindedly ‘liked’ instead of screenshotting. That single ‘like’ was deemed evidence of wrongthink, and a persistent low level of harassment began.

Months later, I compounded my accidental ‘like’ crime by following Magdalen Burns on Twitter. Magdalen was an immensely brave young feminist and lesbian who was dying of an aggressive brain tumour. I followed her because I wanted to contact her directly, which I succeeded in doing. However, as Magdalen was a great believer in the importance of biological sex, and didn’t believe lesbians should be called bigots for not dating trans women with penises, dots were joined in the heads of twitter trans activists, and the level of social media abuse increased.

I mention all this only to explain that I knew perfectly well what was going to happen when I supported Maya. I must have been on my fourth or fifth cancellation by then. I expected the threats of violence, to be told I was literally killing trans people with my hate, to be called cunt and bitch and, of course, for my books to be burned, although one particularly abusive man told me he’d composted them.

What I didn’t expect in the aftermath of my cancellation was the avalanche of emails and letters that came showering down upon me, the overwhelming majority of which were positive, grateful and supportive. They came from a cross-section of kind, empathetic and intelligent people, some of them working in fields dealing with gender dysphoria and trans people, who’re all deeply concerned about the way a socio-political concept is influencing politics, medical practice and safeguarding. They’re worried about the dangers to young people, gay people and about the erosion of women’s and girl’s rights. Above all, they’re worried about a climate of fear that serves nobody – least of all trans youth – well.

I’d stepped back from Twitter for many months both before and after tweeting support for Maya, because I knew it was doing nothing good for my mental health. I only returned because I wanted to share a free children’s book during the pandemic. Immediately, activists who clearly believe themselves to be good, kind and progressive people swarmed back into my timeline, assuming a right to police my speech, accuse me of hatred, call me misogynistic slurs and, above all – as every woman involved in this debate will know – TERF.

If you didn’t already know – and why should you? – ‘TERF’ is an acronym coined by trans activists, which stands for Trans-Exclusionary Radical Feminist. In practice, a huge and diverse cross-section of women are currently being called TERFs and the vast majority have never been radical feminists. Examples of so-called TERFs range from the mother of a gay child who was afraid their child wanted to transition to escape homophobic bullying, to a hitherto totally unfeminist older lady who’s vowed never to visit Marks & Spencer again because they’re allowing any man who says they identify as a woman into the women’s changing rooms. Ironically, radical feminists aren’t even trans-exclusionary – they include trans men in their feminism, because they were born women.

But accusations of TERFery have been sufficient to intimidate many people, institutions and organisations I once admired, who’re cowering before the tactics of the playground. ‘They’ll call us transphobic!’ ‘They’ll say I hate trans people!’ What next, they’ll say you’ve got fleas? Speaking as a biological woman, a lot of people in positions of power really need to grow a pair (which is doubtless literally possible, according to the kind of people who argue that clownfish prove humans aren’t a dimorphic species).

So why am I doing this? Why speak up? Why not quietly do my research and keep my head down?

Well, I’ve got five reasons for being worried about the new trans activism, and deciding I need to speak up.

Firstly, I have a charitable trust that focuses on alleviating social deprivation in Scotland, with a particular emphasis on women and children. Among other things, my trust supports projects for female prisoners and for survivors of domestic and sexual abuse. I also fund medical research into MS, a disease that behaves very differently in men and women. It’s been clear to me for a while that the new trans activism is having (or is likely to have, if all its demands are met) a significant impact on many of the causes I support, because it’s pushing to erode the legal definition of sex and replace it with gender.

The second reason is that I’m an ex-teacher and the founder of a children’s charity, which gives me an interest in both education and safeguarding. Like many others, I have deep concerns about the effect the trans rights movement is having on both.

The third is that, as a much-banned author, I’m interested in freedom of speech and have publicly defended it, even unto Donald Trump.

The fourth is where things start to get truly personal. I’m concerned about the huge explosion in young women wishing to transition and also about the increasing numbers who seem to be detransitioning (returning to their original sex), because they regret taking steps that have, in some cases, altered their bodies irrevocably, and taken away their fertility. Some say they decided to transition after realising they were same-sex attracted, and that transitioning was partly driven by homophobia, either in society or in their families.

Most people probably aren’t aware – I certainly wasn’t, until I started researching this issue properly – that ten years ago, the majority of people wanting to transition to the opposite sex were male. That ratio has now reversed. The UK has experienced a 4400% increase in girls being referred for transitioning treatment. Autistic girls are hugely overrepresented in their numbers.

The same phenomenon has been seen in the US. In 2018, American physician and researcher Lisa Littman set out to explore it. In an interview, she said:

‘Parents online were describing a very unusual pattern of transgender-identification where multiple friends and even entire friend groups became transgender-identified at the same time. I would have been remiss had I not considered social contagion and peer influences as potential factors.’

Littman mentioned Tumblr, Reddit, Instagram and YouTube as contributing factors to Rapid Onset Gender Dysphoria, where she believes that in the realm of transgender identification ‘youth have created particularly insular echo chambers.’

Her paper caused a furore. She was accused of bias and of spreading misinformation about transgender people, subjected to a tsunami of abuse and a concerted campaign to discredit both her and her work. The journal took the paper offline and re-reviewed it before republishing it. However, her career took a similar hit to that suffered by Maya Forstater. Lisa Littman had dared challenge one of the central tenets of trans activism, which is that a person’s gender identity is innate, like sexual orientation. Nobody, the activists insisted, could ever be persuaded into being trans.

The argument of many current trans activists is that if you don’t let a gender dysphoric teenager transition, they will kill themselves. In an article explaining why he resigned from the Tavistock (an NHS gender clinic in England) psychiatrist Marcus Evans stated that claims that children will kill themselves if not permitted to transition do not ‘align substantially with any robust data or studies in this area. Nor do they align with the cases I have encountered over decades as a psychotherapist.’

The writings of young trans men reveal a group of notably sensitive and clever people. The more of their accounts of gender dysphoria I’ve read, with their insightful descriptions of anxiety, dissociation, eating disorders, self-harm and self-hatred, the more I’ve wondered whether, 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’d have preferred.

When I read about the theory of gender identity, I remember how mentally sexless I felt in youth. I remember Colette’s description of herself as a ‘mental hermaphrodite’ and Simone de Beauvoir’s words: ‘It is perfectly natural for the future woman to feel indignant at the limitations posed upon her by her sex. The real question is not why she should reject them: the problem is rather to understand why she accepts them.’

As I didn’t have a realistic possibility of becoming a man back in the 1980s, it had to be books and music that got me through both my mental health issues and the sexualised scrutiny and judgement that sets so many girls to war against their bodies in their teens. Fortunately for me, I found my own sense of otherness, and my ambivalence about being a woman, reflected in the work of female writers and musicians who reassured me that, in spite of everything a sexist world tries to throw at the female-bodied, it’s fine not to feel pink, frilly and compliant inside your own head; it’s OK to feel confused, dark, both sexual and non-sexual, unsure of what or who you are.

I want to be very clear here: I know transition will be a solution for some gender dysphoric people, although I’m also aware through extensive research that studies have consistently shown that between 60-90% of gender dysphoric teens will grow out of their dysphoria. Again and again I’ve been told to ‘just meet some trans people.’ I have: in addition to a few younger people, who were all adorable, I happen to know a self-described transsexual woman who’s older than I am and wonderful. Although she’s open about her past as a gay man, I’ve always found it hard to think of her as anything other than a woman, and I believe (and certainly hope) she’s completely happy to have transitioned. Being older, though, she went through a long and rigorous process of evaluation, psychotherapy and staged transformation. The current explosion of trans activism is urging a removal of almost all the robust systems through which candidates for sex reassignment were once required to pass. A man who intends to have no surgery and take no hormones may now secure himself a Gender Recognition Certificate and be a woman in the sight of the law. Many people aren’t aware of this.

We’re living through the most misogynistic period I’ve experienced. Back in the 80s, I imagined that my future daughters, should I have any, would have it far better than I ever did, but between the backlash against feminism and a porn-saturated online culture, I believe things have got significantly worse for girls. Never have I seen women denigrated and dehumanised to the extent they are now. From the leader of the free world’s long history of sexual assault accusations and his proud boast of ‘grabbing them by the pussy’, to the incel (‘involuntarily celibate’) movement that rages against women who won’t give them sex, to the trans activists who declare that TERFs need punching and re-educating, men across the political spectrum seem to agree: women are asking for trouble. Everywhere, women are being told to shut up and sit down, or else.

I’ve read all the arguments about femaleness not residing in the sexed body, and the assertions that biological women don’t have common experiences, and I find them, too, deeply misogynistic and regressive. It’s also clear that one of the objectives of denying the importance of sex is to erode what some seem to see as the cruelly segregationist idea of women having their own biological realities or – just as threatening – unifying realities that make them a cohesive political class. The hundreds of emails I’ve received in the last few days prove this erosion concerns many others just as much. It isn’t enough for women to be trans allies. Women must accept and admit that there is no material difference between trans women and themselves.

But, as many women have said before me, ‘woman’ is not a costume. ‘Woman’ is not an idea in a man’s head. ‘Woman’ is not a pink brain, a liking for Jimmy Choos or any of the other sexist ideas now somehow touted as progressive. Moreover, the ‘inclusive’ language that calls female people ‘menstruators’ and ‘people with vulvas’ strikes many women as dehumanising and demeaning. I understand why trans activists consider this language to be appropriate and kind, but for those of us who’ve had degrading slurs spat at us by violent men, it’s not neutral, it’s hostile and alienating.

Which brings me to the fifth reason I’m deeply concerned about the consequences of the current trans activism.

I’ve been in the public eye now for over twenty years and have never talked publicly about being a domestic abuse and sexual assault survivor. This isn’t because I’m ashamed those things happened to me, but because they’re traumatic to revisit and remember. I also feel protective of my daughter from my first marriage. I didn’t want to claim sole ownership of a story that belongs to her, too. However, a short while ago, I asked her how she’d feel if I were publicly honest about that part of my life, and she encouraged me to go ahead.

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.

I managed to escape my first violent marriage with some difficulty, but I’m now married to a truly good and principled man, safe and secure in ways I never in a million years expected to be. However, the scars left by violence and sexual assault don’t disappear, no matter how loved you are, and no matter how much money you’ve made. My perennial jumpiness is a family joke – and even I know it’s funny – but I pray my daughters never have the same reasons I do for hating sudden loud noises, or finding people behind me when I haven’t heard them approaching.

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. I have a visceral sense of the terror in which those trans women will have spent their last seconds on earth, because I too have known moments of blind fear when I realised that the only thing keeping me alive was the shaky self-restraint of my attacker.

I believe the majority of trans-identified people not only pose zero threat to others, but are vulnerable for all the reasons I’ve outlined. Trans people need and deserve protection. Like women, they’re most likely to be killed by sexual partners. Trans women who work in the sex industry, particularly trans women of colour, are at particular risk. Like every other domestic abuse and sexual assault survivor I know, I feel nothing but empathy and solidarity with trans women who’ve been abused by men.

So I want trans women to be safe. At the same time, I do not want to make natal girls and women less safe. 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.

On Saturday morning, I read that the Scottish government is proceeding with its controversial gender recognition plans, which will in effect mean that all a man needs to ‘become a woman’ is to say he’s one. To use a very contemporary word, I was ‘triggered’. Ground down by the relentless attacks from trans activists on social media, when I was only there to give children feedback about pictures they’d drawn for my book under lockdown, I spent much of Saturday in a very dark place inside my head, as memories of a serious sexual assault I suffered in my twenties recurred on a loop. That assault happened at a time and in a space where I was vulnerable, and a man capitalised 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 womens and girls’ safety.

Late on Saturday evening, scrolling through children’s pictures before I went to bed, I forgot the first rule of Twitter – never, ever expect a nuanced conversation – and reacted to what I felt was degrading language about women. I spoke up about the importance of sex and have been paying the price ever since. I was transphobic, I was a cunt, a bitch, a TERF, I deserved cancelling, punching and death. You are Voldemort, said one person, clearly feeling this was the only language I’d understand.

It would be so much easier to tweet the approved hashtags – because of course trans rights are human rights and of course trans lives matter – scoop up the woke cookies and bask in a virtue-signalling afterglow. There’s joy, relief and safety in conformity. As Simone de Beauvoir also wrote, “… without a doubt it is more comfortable to endure blind bondage than to work for one’s liberation; the dead, too, are better suited to the earth than the living.”

Huge numbers of women are justifiably terrified by the trans activists; I know this because so many have got in touch with me to tell their stories. They’re afraid of doxxing, of losing their jobs or their livelihoods, and of violence.

But endlessly unpleasant as its constant targeting of me has been, I refuse to bow down to a movement that I believe is doing demonstrable harm in seeking to erode ‘woman’ as a political and biological class and offering cover to predators like few before it. I stand alongside the brave women and men, gay, straight and trans, who’re standing up for freedom of speech and thought, and for the rights and safety of some of the most vulnerable in our society: young gay kids, fragile teenagers, and women who’re reliant on and wish to retain their single sex spaces. Polls show those women are in the vast majority, and exclude only those privileged or lucky enough never to have come up against male violence or sexual assault, and who’ve never troubled to educate themselves on how prevalent it is.

The one thing that gives me hope is that the women who can protest and organise, are doing so, and they have some truly decent men and trans people alongside them. Political parties seeking to appease the loudest voices in this debate are ignoring women’s concerns at their peril. In the UK, women are reaching out to each other across party lines, concerned about the erosion of their hard-won rights and widespread intimidation. None of the gender critical women I’ve talked to hates trans people; on the contrary. Many of them became interested in this issue in the first place out of concern for trans youth, and they’re hugely sympathetic towards trans adults who simply want to live their lives, but who’re facing a backlash for a brand of activism they don’t endorse. The supreme irony is that the attempt to silence women with the word ‘TERF’ may have pushed more young women towards radical feminism than the movement’s seen in decades.

The last thing I want to say is this. I haven’t written this essay in the hope that anybody will get out a violin for me, not even a teeny-weeny one. I’m extraordinarily fortunate; I’m a survivor, certainly not a victim. I’ve only mentioned my past because, like every other human being on this planet, I have a complex backstory, which shapes my fears, my interests and my opinions. I never forget that inner complexity when I’m creating a fictional character and I certainly never forget it when it comes to trans people.

All I’m asking – all I want – is for similar empathy, similar understanding, to be extended to the many millions of women whose sole crime is wanting their concerns to be heard without receiving threats and abuse.

Source

J.K. Rowling: The Ickabog

'The Ickabog' is a new (or perhaps not so new) short story by J.K. Rowling.

According to the dedicated website, J.K. Rowling had the idea for 'The Ickabog' a long time ago and read it to her two younger children, chapter by chapter, each night while she was working on it. However, when the time came to publish it, Joanne decided to put out a book for adults instead, which is how 'The Ickabog' ended up in the attic. Joanne became busy with other things, and even though she loved the story, but over the years she came to think of it as something that was just for her own children.

Then this lockdown happened. It’s been very hard on children, in particular, so J.K. rowling brought 'The Ickabog' down from the attic, read it for the first time in years, rewrote bits of it and then read it to her children again. They told her to put back in some bits they’d liked when they were little, and here we are!

The Ickabog is published on this website. It isn’t Harry Potter and it doesn’t include magic. This is an entirely different story.

Want to read 'The Ickabog'? Buy the book here.

Meanwhile, utter madness has gotten hold of the staff of Hachette, the publishing house that was working on 'The Ickabog'. Why, you might ask with some trepidation? Because these people refuse to carefully read what is written here by J.K. Rowling and only believe what they think is written. The think they are 'woke', but in reality, they are deluded.

Rowling's Lament: The Visitation of The Corbynites: A Festive Thread

[1]
And lo, unto her did appear a host of Corbyn defenders, who did descend upon her mentions, and she was not sore afraid, because she was used to it. And the host did sing with one voice, ‘ungodly woman, thou foolest us not. We know the true reason thou despisest Saint Jeremy.’

[2]
And she did say unto them ‘share thy hot take.’ And with righteous wrath they did declare, ‘thou fearest Saint Jeremy, friend of the poor, because he shall take from thee in taxation much more even than Herod, and so thou attackest the meek and honest saviour of this land.’

[3]
And she did reply, ‘I shall not call ye dimwits, for it is the season of goodwill, but tis not Saint Jeremy who shall tax me, nay, not even if he enters the house of Number Ten, for my tax rates are set by Queen Nicola, in whose kingdom I do abide, and unto her I do pay

[4]
my full portion, seeking neither to flee to Monaco nor to hide my gold in far flung lands, like St Jacob, Patron Saint of Filthy Hypocrites.’ ‘Speak not of hypocrites!’ cried the host, ‘for thou dost claim to care about the poor yet doth rail against their champion, St Jeremy!’

[5]
And she did answer, ‘How shall the poor fare under Brexit, which thy Saint hath always in his secret heart desired, yet he hath not admitted what was in his heart, lest fewer attend his next Sermon on the Glastonbury B Stage.’ And they did answer, ‘Saint Jeremy will achieve

[6]
a miracle, and he shall bring forth a Jobs First Brexit and all the land shall rejoice.’ And she did answer, ‘bollocks.’ But she bethought her of the season of goodwill, and repenting of her ire she did speak further. ‘I have, for all my life, voted Labour, yet now I cannot.’

[7]
‘But his goodness doth shine out of his every orifice!’ cried the host, swarming anew into her mentions. ‘Behold his beard! Look upon this picture of him being led off by police when he was protesting racism in all its forms!’ And she did say, ‘I have looked upon his beard

[8]
...and also upon this picture. It is a good picture and I do like a beard, as I have oft declared. Yet must I protest, thou it breaketh my heart so to do, that this party of Labour, which I have so long loved, has become, under St Jeremy -‘

[9]
‘Speak not of the Jews!’ cried the host. ‘Why must thou speak so oft of the Jews?’ ‘Yea, I must speak,’ said she, ‘for when Jews no longer feel safe in Labour then I too must leave.’ And one of the host did shout something about the Rothschilds

[10]
and he was hastily hushed by his brethren, who did declare, ‘he is not one of ours, thou he sports a #JC4PM halo.’ And another did speak and he said, ‘it is not antisemitic to criticise Israel,’ and she did put her face in her hands and want to weep.

[11]
But she did then look up and see many stars shining brightly in the sky and lo, they did arrange themselves before her eyes into a ‘who would make the best Prime Minister poll’ and she did cry, ‘Will ye not raise up your eyes to the Heavens? See there the People’s mind!’

[12]
And they did look up at the stars and read there that St Jeremy was, as for ages past, in third place after Pontus May and Don’t Know. And she spake further, ‘do ye not see that St Jeremy is hurting your party, yea, that his inability even to organise a vote of no confidence

[13]
doth embolden and strengthen this calamitous government, of which all despair?’ But they did close their eyes to the stars and some did answer, ‘you are a fool who doth not understand St Jeremy’s master plan’

[14]
and others still did beseech the woman to descend from the ivory tower in which, for the purposes of this story, they would wish her to dwell. And they besought her to descend into Bethlehem, and go to a certain allotment,

[15]
where she would find the Messiah busy with his marrows and she would be filled with the spirit of Momentum. But she did shake her head and declare that she was and would remain an unbeliever, yet full sorrowful she was, for Labour had been her home.

[16]
And the host did despise and condemn her, and many did tell her to fuck off and join the Tories, and before they did depart one of their number cried unto her, ‘it’s because he’ll tax you more, isn’t it,’ and she did sigh and wished him a Merry Christmas.

[This 'short story' appeared on Twitter on December 22th, 2018]

Aragog spider

Aname is a genus of spiders that is endemic to Australia, with one species (Aname tasmanica) found only on Tasmania.

Spiders in this genus are called 'wishbone spiders', for the shape of their open silk-lined burrow, which has the shape of the letter "Y", with one arm shorter than the other. Only the longer arm reaches the surface. The shorter arm is believed to allow the spider to survive flooding by trapping an air bubble.
Aname spiders prefer dry open country and occurs throughout much of Australia (though mostly inland).

Within this genus, we find the Aname aragog. This species is named for J. K. Rowling’s fictional spider Aragog which first appeared in 'Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets' (1998). Aname aragog has been discovered in 2012 at a single location in the Pilbara region of Western Australia, at the Jimblebar minesite, ca. 35 km E. of the township of Newman[1].

Aname aragog is a medium sized spider with a total length of 2.7 centimeters.

[1] Harvey et al: Molecular and morphological characterisation of new species in the trapdoor spider genus Aname (Araneae: Mygalomorphae: Nemesiidae) from the Pilbara bioregion of Western Australia in ZooTaxa - 2012

You've been pronouncing 'Voldemort' wrong

Despite the fact that there have been seven books and eight movies, it is more than likely that you’ve been pronouncing Lord Voldemort's name wrong.
In a little exchange on Twitter, author J.K. Rowling confirmed the proper Voldemort pronunciation, and it just might surprise you.

Here are the tweets from J.K. Rowling:
One piece of Harry Potter trivia I always forget to mention: the "t" is silent in Voldemort.
… but I'm pretty sure I'm the only person who pronounces it that way
Anybody who paid attention at school schould have an inkling that the name Tom Riddle choose, Voldemort, must have had French origins. The name can be traced back to voleur de mort ('stealer of death' or 'deathstealer') or vol de mort ('flight from death' or 'escaper from death'). In both versions you pronounce the name as 'voldemor'.
Even the surname of Bellatrix Lestrange should be pronounced as if it were French. Étrange in French means 'strange' or 'the strange one'. Well, Helena Bonham Carter certainly played a strange witch.

Bird louse named to honour Stephen Fry

Stephen Fry, comedian, actor, writer, presenter, activist and all-round intellectual is also known for his reading all seven of the Harry Potter novels for English-language audiobooks.

In 2017, he had a bird louse, Saepocephalum stephenfryii , officially named after him, in honour of his contributions to the popularization of science as host of QI[1].Well, if I were that louse, I would be etremely honoured.
QI (Quite Interesting) is a comedy panel game television quiz show running since 2003. In 2006, Fry won the Rose d'Or award for 'Best Game Show Host' for his work on the series. In October 2015, it was announced that Fry would retire as the host of QI.

[1] Gustafsson et al: Morphological revision of the hyperdiverse Brueelia-complex (Insecta: Phthiraptera: Ischnocera: Philopteridae) with new taxa, checklists and generic key in Zootaxa – 2016

Dinosaur named after Hogwarts

A new dinosaur species (Dracorex hogwartsia) was named in honor of author J.K. Rowling and her Harry Potter books.

The newly discovered, 66-million-year-old dragon-like dinosaur's name comes from the Latin words draco ('dragon'), rex ('king') and hogwartsia (after the fictional Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry created by Joanne Rowling). The name therefore means 'dragon king of Hogwarts'.
Rowling agreed to the name because her two children are huge dinosaur fans. "The naming of Dracorex hogwartsia is easily the most unexpected honour to have come my way since the publication of the Harry Potter books!" Rowling wrote. "I am absolutely thrilled to think that Hogwarts has made a small (claw?) mark upon the fascinating world of dinosaurs. I happen to know more on the subject of palaeontology than many might credit, because my eldest daughter was Utahraptor-obsessed and I am now living with a passionate Tyrannosaurus rex-lover, aged three. My credibility has soared within my science-loving family, and I am very much looking forward to reading Dr. Bakker’s paper describing ‘my’ dinosaur, which I can’t help visualising as a slightly less pyromaniac Hungarian Horntail”.

The dinosaur, a member of the Pachycephalosaur family, had a flat skull with spiky horns, bumps and a long muzzle. Other pachycephalosaurs had domed foreheads. Scientists believe the Pachycephalosaurs, which were herbivores, used their knobby heads to butt other dinosaurs.
The nearly complete skull of this previously unknown dinosaur species was discovered by three friends during a fossil collecting trip in South Dakota and then donated to The Children's Museum of Indianapolis.

When it was brought to the museum for cleaning and studying, it was little more than a box of parts. It took two years to glue the many fragments and restore the skull, museum officials said.

Wasp named after Dementors

A newly discovered species of wasp in Southeast Asia that sucks the life out of cockroaches was named after the dementors that so terrorized Harry Potter in the series by J.K. Rowling[1].
The wasp, Ampulex dementor, was aptly named as "an allusion to the wasps' behavior to selectively paralyze its cockroach prey," according to the report. The fictional, shadowy prison guards of Azkaban that are dementors, likewise, also literally suck the life out of their prey - only they use a kiss of death.

Native to Thailand, Ampulex dementor, has bright reddish and black coloring. It is one of over 200 species of wasp which reproduces using a host incubator - in this wasp's case, it uses the cockroach.

The female lands on top of a cockroach and uses its stinger to inject neurotoxins directly into the roach's head. The cockroach immediately takes on a zombie-like obedient state and follows the wasp back to her burrow. There, she lays her egg inside the cockroach, which incubates the egg for a few days until it hatches. The larva then feeds on the roach that birthed it until it's old enough to go off on its own.

[1] Ohl et al: The Soul-Sucking Wasp by Popular Acclaim – Museum Visitor Participation in Biodiversity Discovery and Taxonomy in PloS One 2014

J.K. Rowling 'borrowed' the concept of The One Ring

When reading the trilogy 'The Lord of the Rings' by J.R.R. Tolkien, one may encounter many similarities that show that Rowling 'borrowed' almost the entire storyline of 'The Lord of the Rings', as well as most of the characters albeit with a different name.
The Lord of the Rings' main character Frodo Baggins is sent on a perilous journey by the wizard Gandalf to destroy the One Ring, the ring to rule them all. The Ring was created by Sauron – the Dark Lord – as part of his design to win domination over Middle-earth. In putting such a great portion of his own power into the Ring ensured Sauron's continued existence so long as the Ring existed.

J. K. Rowling's main character Harry Potter is sent on a perilous journey by the wizard Dumbledore to destroy the Horcruxes. A Horcrux is an object was created by Voldemort – the Dark Lord – in which he hid a fragment of his soul for the purpose of attaining immortality. Voldemort would live as long as the Horcruxes existed.

The concept of the One Ring that was created by Sauron is too similar to the Horcruxes that were created by Voldemort to be a mere coincidence.

Sauron is from Quenyan language: saura means 'foul' or 'evil-smelling' or 'putrid'. Sauron is then said to mean 'the Abhorred', which seems to be almost equivalent to the meaning of the name of Voldemort.

J.K. Rowling 'borrowed' the Sorting Hat

Here we mentioned our discovery that J.K. Rowling borrowed the phrase 'He Who Must Not Be Named' from the late Terry Pratchett's book 'The Colour of Magic' which predated Rowling's 'Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone' by 14 years.
'Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone' was released in 1997, while 'The Colour of Magic' appeared in 1983.

Well, at the time I naturally thought it could be a case of subliminal or subconscious imitation, but know I've found second correlation.

In 'Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone' we encounter the sorting hat, a talking wizard's hat that sorts new students of Hogwarts into their houses.

But in Terry Pratchett's 'Sourcery', which entered the market in 1988, we also encounter a talking hat. It is the hat worn by every Archchancellor of the Unseen University since its inception and it speaks to Rincewind 'like a voice in your head'.
Also, '… through me speak all the Archchancellors that who ever lived', which is also strangely reminiscent of J.K. Rowlings Sorting Hat, because in her short story 'The Sorting Hat', Rowling writes that 'It literally contains the intelligence of the four founders'.

We now have a second instance of 'borrowing' by J.K. Rowling because 'Sourcery' is 9 year older than 'Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone'. It is like the famous saying: once is chance, twice is coincidence, third Time is a pattern.

Crab named after Severus Snape

In another post I wrote here that a new species of spider was named Eriovixia gryffindori in honour of the wizard Godric Gryffindor, one of the founders of Hogwarts.

Now, a species of crab that managed to elude capture for 20 years after it was first identified from its remains has become the latest real-life creature to be named after a Harry Potter character. The crab was given the scientific name Harryplax severus and takes its name from Harry’s teacher Severus Snape[1].
Discovered some 20 years ago in Guam by collector Harry T. Conley, who was digging in rubble fields at low tide, biologists have only now identified it as a new species. It was Conley’s first name that provided the genus name – in honour of his prolific rummaging for crustaceans, deep in the Micronesian island’s mud. The name Harryplax is an arbitrary combination of 'Harry' and the suffix '-plax'. It is a coral rubble-dwelling pseudozioid crab. It's closest relative seems to be Christmaplax mirabilis, described from Christmas Island in the eastern Indian Ocean. Harryplax severus represents the first record of Christmaplacidae in the Pacific Ocean.

Jose Mendoza and Peter Ng said they had named the new species severus as an allusion to the notorious and grossly misunderstood potions master Severus Snape “for his ability to keep one of the most important secrets in the story”.

[1] Mendoza, Ng: Harryplax severus, a new genus and species of an unusual coral rubble-inhabiting crab from Guam (Crustacea, Brachyura, Christmaplacidae) in Zookeys - 2017

Spider named after Gryffindor

A never before seen species of spider has recently been found by researchers from the University of Mumbai (India). Living in forests the Karnataka, a state in south western region of India, it has been given the honour of being named after a character of the novels of J.K. Rowling: Eriovixia gryffindori[1].
The spider, barely 7 millimeters in length, resembles the magical sorting hat that sorts students into one of four Hogwarts houses. The spider takes this peculiar shape to camouflage itself in order to resemble a dried leaf during the daytime to protect it from predators.

This uniquely shaped spider derives its name from the fabulous, sentient magical artifact, the sorting hat, once owned by the medieval wizard Godric Gryffindor, one of the four founders of Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry, and stemming from the powerful imagination of J. K. Rowling, wordsmith extraordinaire.

An ode from the authors, for magic lost, and found, in an effort to draw attention to the fascinating, but oft overlooked world of invertebrates, and their secret lives.

The findings were published in the well known and widely read Indian Journal of Arachnology.

[1] Ahmed et al: A New Species of Dry Foliage Mimicking Eriovixia Archer, 1951 from Central Western Ghats, India (Araneae: Araneidae) in Indian Journal of Arachnology - 2016. See here.

Dumbledore as Death

J.K. Rowling's 'The Tales of Beedle the Bard' is a booklet filled with five fables and it accompanies the Harry Potter novels. The book is also mentioned in 'Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows', the last book of the Harry Potter series. One of the fables, 'The Tale of the Three Brothers' is told in its entirety in that final Harry Potter novel.
'The Tale of Three Brothers' tells the story of three brothers who cheat Death (yes, with a capital C) because they did not drown in a river as most travelers did. Death pretended to praise them and told them they earned a prize for their effort.

One of the magicians wanted to have a wand more powerful than his own. The second wanted to have the power to recall others from death and the third asked for something that would enable him to go forth from place to place without being seen. Death reluctantly gave him his own Cloak of Invisibility.
Now, a novel interpretation of that fable has been debated online. And it suggests that Voldemort, Severus Snape and Harry Potter himself represent the three siblings in the 'Tale of the Three Brothers'. As a continuation of that theory, Albus Dumbledore is possibly the personification of Death.

Voldemort was then the brother who used the Elder Wand for murder, whereas Snape wanted the Resurrection Stone to bring back the dead. Concluding the theory, Harry is the brother who hides beneath the Invisibility Cloak and – in the end - greets Death as an old friend - the latter, of course, being Dumbledore.
J.K. Rowling mentions 'it's a beautiful theory and it fits'. But you never know if it's true, don't you?

J.K. Rowling 'borrowed' He Who Must Not Be Named

J.K. Rowling is globally praised for her originality. But, while she invented an entire new magical world when writing her adventures of the boy-wizard Harry Potter, she freely made use of existing myths, legends and even rumours. In fact, she is part of a fine classical tradition of mimesis. The term mimesis derives from the ancient Greek word μιμεῖσθαι (mīmeisthai), which means 'to imitate' and it can be translated as borrowing, adapting, personalising.
So, where did the name Voldemort originate? Voldemort is obviously French in origin and can be traced back to voleur de mort ('stealer of death' or 'deathstealer') or vol de mort ('flight from death' or 'escaper from death'). Both solutions seem very plausible and maybe Rowling did intentionally use this ambiguous play of words. Remember that Rowling studied French at the University of Exeter.

But some claim there was another mythical Voldemort. He was presumably named Voldermortist and reportedly appeared in the Arthurian legends. Well, I own a copy of 'The Arthurian Legends: An Illustrated Anthology' and no evil wizard called Voldermortist appears in its pages.

Then there's the question of 'He Who Must Not Be Named', one of the phrases people used because they were too afraid to mention the Voldemort's name. Rowling must have been a huge fan of the late Terry Pratchett, because in his very first novel, 'The Colour of Magic' (1983), a goddess is presented to the reader. She was the Goddess Who Must Not Be Named. If you don't believe me, simply buy a paperback copy of that brilliant book and turn to page 214. 'Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone' was released 14 years later in 1997.
Like I said before, J.K. Rowling is one of my favourite writers and she is part of a fine tradition that harks back to classical Greek times.

[Speech] The Fringe Benefits of Failure, and the Importance of Imagination

J.K. ROWLING, author of the best-selling Harry Potter book series, delivers her Commencement Address, “The Fringe Benefits of Failure, and the Importance of Imagination,” at the Annual Meeting of the Harvard Alumni Association.
[Image: telegraph.co.uk]
President Faust, members of the Harvard Corporation and the Board of Overseers, members of the faculty, proud parents, and, above all, graduates.

The first thing I would like to say is ‘thank you.’ Not only has Harvard given me an extraordinary honour, but the weeks of fear and nausea I have endured at the thought of giving this commencement address have made me lose weight. A win-win situation! Now all I have to do is take deep breaths, squint at the red banners and convince myself that I am at the world’s largest Gryffindor reunion.

Delivering a commencement address is a great responsibility; or so I thought until I cast my mind back to my own graduation. The commencement speaker that day was the distinguished British philosopher Baroness Mary Warnock. Reflecting on her speech has helped me enormously in writing this one, because it turns out that I can’t remember a single word she said. This liberating discovery enables me to proceed without any fear that I might inadvertently influence you to abandon promising careers in business, the law or politics for the giddy delights of becoming a gay wizard.

You see? If all you remember in years to come is the ‘gay wizard’ joke, I’ve come out ahead of Baroness Mary Warnock. Achievable goals: the first step to self improvement.

Actually, I have wracked my mind and heart for what I ought to say to you today. I have asked myself what I wish I had known at my own graduation, and what important lessons I have learned in the 21 years that have expired between that day and this.

I have come up with two answers. On this wonderful day when we are gathered together to celebrate your academic success, I have decided to talk to you about the benefits of failure. And as you stand on the threshold of what is sometimes called ‘real life’, I want to extol the crucial importance of imagination.

These may seem quixotic or paradoxical choices, but please bear with me.

Looking back at the 21-year-old that I was at graduation, is a slightly uncomfortable experience for the 42-year-old that she has become. Half my lifetime ago, I was striking an uneasy balance between the ambition I had for myself, and what those closest to me expected of me.

I was convinced that the only thing I wanted to do, ever, was to write novels. However, my parents, both of whom came from impoverished backgrounds and neither of whom had been to college, took the view that my overactive imagination was an amusing personal quirk that would never pay a mortgage, or secure a pension. I know that the irony strikes with the force of a cartoon anvil, now.

So they hoped that I would take a vocational degree; I wanted to study English Literature. A compromise was reached that in retrospect satisfied nobody, and I went up to study Modern Languages. Hardly had my parents’ car rounded the corner at the end of the road than I ditched German and scuttled off down the Classics corridor.

I cannot remember telling my parents that I was studying Classics; they might well have found out for the first time on graduation day. Of all the subjects on this planet, I think they would have been hard put to name one less useful than Greek mythology when it came to securing the keys to an executive bathroom.

I would like to make it clear, in parenthesis, that I do not blame my parents for their point of view. There is an expiry date on blaming your parents for steering you in the wrong direction; the moment you are old enough to take the wheel, responsibility lies with you. What is more, I cannot criticise my parents for hoping that I would never experience poverty. They had been poor themselves, and I have since been poor, and I quite agree with them that it is not an ennobling experience. Poverty entails fear, and stress, and sometimes depression; it means a thousand petty humiliations and hardships. Climbing out of poverty by your own efforts, that is indeed something on which to pride yourself, but poverty itself is romanticised only by fools.

What I feared most for myself at your age was not poverty, but failure.

At your age, in spite of a distinct lack of motivation at university, where I had spent far too long in the coffee bar writing stories, and far too little time at lectures, I had a knack for passing examinations, and that, for years, had been the measure of success in my life and that of my peers.

I am not dull enough to suppose that because you are young, gifted and well-educated, you have never known hardship or heartbreak. Talent and intelligence never yet inoculated anyone against the caprice of the Fates, and I do not for a moment suppose that everyone here has enjoyed an existence of unruffled privilege and contentment.

However, the fact that you are graduating from Harvard suggests that you are not very well-acquainted with failure. You might be driven by a fear of failure quite as much as a desire for success. Indeed, your conception of failure might not be too far from the average person’s idea of success, so high have you already flown.

Ultimately, we all have to decide for ourselves what constitutes failure, but the world is quite eager to give you a set of criteria if you let it. So I think it fair to say that by any conventional measure, a mere seven years after my graduation day, I had failed on an epic scale. An exceptionally short-lived marriage had imploded, and I was jobless, a lone parent, and as poor as it is possible to be in modern Britain, without being homeless. The fears that my parents had had for me, and that I had had for myself, had both come to pass, and by every usual standard, I was the biggest failure I knew.

Now, I am not going to stand here and tell you that failure is fun. That period of my life was a dark one, and I had no idea that there was going to be what the press has since represented as a kind of fairy tale resolution. I had no idea then how far the tunnel extended, and for a long time, any light at the end of it was a hope rather than a reality.

So why do I talk about the benefits of failure? Simply because failure meant a stripping away of the inessential. I stopped pretending to myself that I was anything other than what I was, and began to direct all my energy into finishing the only work that mattered to me. Had I really succeeded at anything else, I might never have found the determination to succeed in the one arena I believed I truly belonged. I was set free, because my greatest fear had been realised, and I was still alive, and I still had a daughter whom I adored, and I had an old typewriter and a big idea. And so rock bottom became the solid foundation on which I rebuilt my life.

You might never fail on the scale I did, but some failure in life is inevitable. It is impossible to live without failing at something, unless you live so cautiously that you might as well not have lived at all – in which case, you fail by default.

Failure gave me an inner security that I had never attained by passing examinations. Failure taught me things about myself that I could have learned no other way. I discovered that I had a strong will, and more discipline than I had suspected; I also found out that I had friends whose value was truly above the price of rubies.

The knowledge that you have emerged wiser and stronger from setbacks means that you are, ever after, secure in your ability to survive. You will never truly know yourself, or the strength of your relationships, until both have been tested by adversity. Such knowledge is a true gift, for all that it is painfully won, and it has been worth more than any qualification I ever earned.

So given a Time Turner, I would tell my 21-year-old self that personal happiness lies in knowing that life is not a check-list of acquisition or achievement. Your qualifications, your CV, are not your life, though you will meet many people of my age and older who confuse the two. Life is difficult, and complicated, and beyond anyone’s total control, and the humility to know that will enable you to survive its vicissitudes.

Now you might think that I chose my second theme, the importance of imagination, because of the part it played in rebuilding my life, but that is not wholly so. Though I personally will defend the value of bedtime stories to my last gasp, I have learned to value imagination in a much broader sense. Imagination is not only the uniquely human capacity to envision that which is not, and therefore the fount of all invention and innovation. In its arguably most transformative and revelatory capacity, it is the power that enables us to empathise with humans whose experiences we have never shared.

One of the greatest formative experiences of my life preceded Harry Potter, though it informed much of what I subsequently wrote in those books. This revelation came in the form of one of my earliest day jobs. Though I was sloping off to write stories during my lunch hours, I paid the rent in my early 20s by working at the African research department at Amnesty International’s headquarters in London.

There in my little office I read hastily scribbled letters smuggled out of totalitarian regimes by men and women who were risking imprisonment to inform the outside world of what was happening to them. I saw photographs of those who had disappeared without trace, sent to Amnesty by their desperate families and friends. I read the testimony of torture victims and saw pictures of their injuries. I opened handwritten, eye-witness accounts of summary trials and executions, of kidnappings and rapes.

Many of my co-workers were ex-political prisoners, people who had been displaced from their homes, or fled into exile, because they had the temerity to speak against their governments. Visitors to our offices included those who had come to give information, or to try and find out what had happened to those they had left behind.

I shall never forget the African torture victim, a young man no older than I was at the time, who had become mentally ill after all he had endured in his homeland. He trembled uncontrollably as he spoke into a video camera about the brutality inflicted upon him. He was a foot taller than I was, and seemed as fragile as a child. I was given the job of escorting him back to the Underground Station afterwards, and this man whose life had been shattered by cruelty took my hand with exquisite courtesy, and wished me future happiness.

And as long as I live I shall remember walking along an empty corridor and suddenly hearing, from behind a closed door, a scream of pain and horror such as I have never heard since. The door opened, and the researcher poked out her head and told me to run and make a hot drink for the young man sitting with her. She had just had to give him the news that in retaliation for his own outspokenness against his country’s regime, his mother had been seized and executed.

Every day of my working week in my early 20s I was reminded how incredibly fortunate I was, to live in a country with a democratically elected government, where legal representation and a public trial were the rights of everyone.

Every day, I saw more evidence about the evils humankind will inflict on their fellow humans, to gain or maintain power. I began to have nightmares, literal nightmares, about some of the things I saw, heard, and read.

And yet I also learned more about human goodness at Amnesty International than I had ever known before.

Amnesty mobilises thousands of people who have never been tortured or imprisoned for their beliefs to act on behalf of those who have. The power of human empathy, leading to collective action, saves lives, and frees prisoners. Ordinary people, whose personal well-being and security are assured, join together in huge numbers to save people they do not know, and will never meet. My small participation in that process was one of the most humbling and inspiring experiences of my life.

Unlike any other creature on this planet, humans can learn and understand, without having experienced. They can think themselves into other people’s places.

Of course, this is a power, like my brand of fictional magic, that is morally neutral. One might use such an ability to manipulate, or control, just as much as to understand or sympathise.

And many prefer not to exercise their imaginations at all. They choose to remain comfortably within the bounds of their own experience, never troubling to wonder how it would feel to have been born other than they are. They can refuse to hear screams or to peer inside cages; they can close their minds and hearts to any suffering that does not touch them personally; they can refuse to know.

I might be tempted to envy people who can live that way, except that I do not think they have any fewer nightmares than I do. Choosing to live in narrow spaces leads to a form of mental agoraphobia, and that brings its own terrors. I think the willfully unimaginative see more monsters. They are often more afraid.

What is more, those who choose not to empathise enable real monsters. For without ever committing an act of outright evil ourselves, we collude with it, through our own apathy.

One of the many things I learned at the end of that Classics corridor down which I ventured at the age of 18, in search of something I could not then define, was this, written by the Greek author Plutarch: What we achieve inwardly will change outer reality.

That is an astonishing statement and yet proven a thousand times every day of our lives. It expresses, in part, our inescapable connection with the outside world, the fact that we touch other people’s lives simply by existing.

But how much more are you, Harvard graduates of 2008, likely to touch other people’s lives? Your intelligence, your capacity for hard work, the education you have earned and received, give you unique status, and unique responsibilities. Even your nationality sets you apart. The great majority of you belong to the world’s only remaining superpower. The way you vote, the way you live, the way you protest, the pressure you bring to bear on your government, has an impact way beyond your borders. That is your privilege, and your burden.

If you choose to use your status and influence to raise your voice on behalf of those who have no voice; if you choose to identify not only with the powerful, but with the powerless; if you retain the ability to imagine yourself into the lives of those who do not have your advantages, then it will not only be your proud families who celebrate your existence, but thousands and millions of people whose reality you have helped change. We do not need magic to change the world, we carry all the power we need inside ourselves already: we have the power to imagine better.

I am nearly finished. I have one last hope for you, which is something that I already had at 21. The friends with whom I sat on graduation day have been my friends for life. They are my children’s godparents, the people to whom I’ve been able to turn in times of trouble, people who have been kind enough not to sue me when I took their names for Death Eaters. At our graduation we were bound by enormous affection, by our shared experience of a time that could never come again, and, of course, by the knowledge that we held certain photographic evidence that would be exceptionally valuable if any of us ran for Prime Minister.

So today, I wish you nothing better than similar friendships. And tomorrow, I hope that even if you remember not a single word of mine, you remember those of Seneca, another of those old Romans I met when I fled down the Classics corridor, in retreat from career ladders, in search of ancient wisdom: As is a tale, so is life: not how long it is, but how good it is, is what matters.

I wish you all very good lives. Thank you very much.

Copyright of JK Rowling, June 2008

Source here.