The Kanye West/J.K. Rowling disrepency

[Mr. Smith]

Kanye created good art, Rowling didn't

That's not even true though.

[Alben Barkley]

I do think in some ways women celebrities are held to higher political, moral, and personality standards. This also shows up with the differing receptions of Kanye and the woman celebrity he actually has a feud with, Taylor Swift, and with the fact that Stephen King has been able to position himself as wise and woke relative to JKR despite his love for Spooky Native American Lore and possibly-prurient interest in pubescent sexuality.

Yeah I think you’ve got a point there.

Don’t know how else to explain the discrepancies. Although part of it could be that the Harry Potter fan base was more “woke” than Kanye’s in the first place, so they're more likely to react when the artist says something they find offensive.

By tue way, I still think the most offensive thing Rowling has done is declare Cursed Child canon.

[morgieb]

I'm a bit more sympathetic to West than Rowling in that most of West's weirdness can be put down to bipolar (and most of his worst stuff came before he outed himself as a Trumpist) whereas Rowling's TERFness is a lot more reprehensible than West just saying that he supports Trump.

As for Cardi B, I never really engaged with her work so

[NYSforKennedy2024]

JK is a transphobe, Kanye is not.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

I'm a bit more sympathetic to West than Rowling in that most of West's weirdness can be put down to bipolar (and most of his worst stuff came before he outed himself as a Trumpist) whereas Rowling's TERFness is a lot more reprehensible than West just saying that he supports Trump.

As for Cardi B, I never really engaged with her work so

Kanye West is openly working with Republican operatives to undermine democracy. Rowling tweeted some insensitive things.

Personally which one I find more reprehensible and a bigger problem is a no-brainer.

[Kingpoleon]

People canceling J. K. Rowling is nothing more nor less than an assault on the very principles of free speech. Saying she’s “violently targeted a vulnerable minority” is nonsense propagated by people who want another scalp to claim rather than a better society.

[parochial boy]

People canceling J. K. Rowling is nothing more nor less than an assault on the very principles of free speech. Saying she’s “violently targeted a vulnerable minority” is nonsense propagated by people who want another scalp to claim rather than a better society.

You know, if you want to criticise cancel culture, then a passionate defence against the cancellation of a powerful billionaire who still has a platform and ability to be heard that the rest of us could only dream of looks a little bit ridiculous, seeing as she very clearly hasn't lost her ability to be heard.

Cancel culture isn't a problem because it means the wealthy and powerful losing a few twitter followers, it's a problem when it means less powerful people losing their ability to voice there opinion and be heard all together.

And I'm not saying this to defend cancelling in any way at all - but if you want to highlight that it is a threat to free speech, it might be better to use example were people were actually losing that right as a result of it.

[Kingpoleon]

You know, if you want to criticise cancel culture, then a passionate defence against the cancellation of a powerful billionaire who still has a platform and ability to be heard that the rest of us could only dream of looks a little bit ridiculous, seeing as she very clearly hasn't lost her ability to be heard.

Cancel culture isn't a problem because it means the wealthy and powerful losing a few twitter followers, it's a problem when it means less powerful people losing their ability to voice there opinion and be heard all together.

And I'm not saying this to defend cancelling in any way at all - but if you want to highlight that it is a threat to free speech, it might be better to use example were people were actually losing that right as a result of it.

The idea that you can’t deplatform powerful people is wrong headed. Look, Rowling is not some personal hero of mine. She’s sued people for saying she should be cancelled and tried to quash free speech. But your suggestion that it’s bad for me to ever say anything positive about someone because they’re too rich? I fundamentally disagree. Sure, the opposition to her comments and actions are not the worst form of cancel culture. But that doesn’t mean it is wrong for me to answer the charges of this opposition.

[parochial boy]

You know, if you want to criticise cancel culture, then a passionate defence against the cancellation of a powerful billionaire who still has a platform and ability to be heard that the rest of us could only dream of looks a little bit ridiculous, seeing as she very clearly hasn't lost her ability to be heard.

Cancel culture isn't a problem because it means the wealthy and powerful losing a few twitter followers, it's a problem when it means less powerful people losing their ability to voice there opinion and be heard all together.

And I'm not saying this to defend cancelling in any way at all - but if you want to highlight that it is a threat to free speech, it might be better to use example were people were actually losing that right as a result of it.

The idea that you can’t deplatform powerful people is wrong headed. Look, Rowling is not some personal hero of mine. She’s sued people for saying she should be cancelled and tried to quash free speech. But your suggestion that it’s bad for me to ever say anything positive about someone because they’re too rich? I fundamentally disagree. Sure, the opposition to her comments and actions are not the worst form of cancel culture. But that doesn’t mean it is wrong for me to answer the charges of this opposition.

I wasn’t saying you can’t be positive about her because she is rich, but that her wealth insulates her from the risks that people who aren’t as powerful as her are going to be exposed to.

In that respect using her as an example of the threat to free speech posed by being canceled or any other form of deplatforming isn’t convincing- as she very clearly still has a platform, several in fact

[Blue3]

Everyone already hated Kanye and knew he was a stupid megalomaniac with issues, and were able to separate him from his music.

JK Rowling was seen as a liberal hero for a long time, and she was herself part of the Harry Potter brand.

[It’s so Joever]

Kanye should be cancelled for being an anti-intellectual manic and supporting Trump in 2016.
JK should not be cancelled, because her opinions aren’t entirely incorrect.