The Harry Potter franchise is hugely successful, with seven books, eight movies, and three theme parks, this is a multi-billion dollar business. In the early days, writer J.K. Rowling was intimately connected with the fanbase, with fans keeping up with her on her blog and Twitter. In the past few years, many fans and even the lead actors have distanced themselves from the author due to her controversial opinions, namely on accusations of transphobia. With the launch of the new video game Hogwarts Legacy, an aggressive wave of opposition calls to boycott Rowling’s work, but misinformation is rampant in counterarguments.
The first argument against a boycott asserts that buying the game supports the developers, not Rowling. This is false; as the owner of the intellectual property, Rowling earns royalties and will profit from the game. Additionally, developers rarely if ever see a cut of the profit, and are paid before the release of the game. Whether a boycott would be effective in denting the tens of millions of royalties she receives each year is another issue. Rowling likely will continue to be absurdly wealthy regardless. Rowling believes that if you purchase any of her work, you support her views. In a snarky response to one boycotter, she tweeted, “The truly righteous wouldn’t just burn their books and movies but the local library, anything with an owl on it and their own pet dogs.” Her Twitter account is filled with self-righteous responses to the most incendiary comments from those who oppose her, making a strawman out of valid criticism.
The other case against the boycott is that the game is too compelling, it offers all the nostalgia a Harry Potter lover could want in a game. The game however, seems to fall short of users’ expectations. Even in the 9/10 review from IGN, the reviewer noted major performance issues, learning curves in combat mechanisms, and plot holes to the tune of “its magical world makes no sense.” Another reviewer found the game “clunky,” adding the experience was “less than I would expect from a game with this kind of budget.” It’s a question that the consumer must ask themselves: is a $70 game that benefits someone who uses their platform to promote anti-trans rhetoric worth it?
Rowling wrote an essay in 2020 opposing Scotland’s Gender Recognition Bill, which would make it easier for citizens to change their legal gender, including removing a medical diagnosis requirement. Rowling fears that the definition of sex is being eroded by trans groups and that young people are being socially pressured to transition as a result of homophobic ideas. She purports to respect the safety of trans people, saying she simply doesn’t want trans rights to be at the expense of women’s rights. The statement in itself suggests that even if she respects a trans woman’s identity, she does not view it as equal to a cisgender, “biological” woman. The argument against biological sex being the basis for legal sex is dense and cannot be quickly summarized. “Natural law” has been used to discredit the existence of trans people. In essence, it is difficult to draw a hard and fast line on where biology determines sex. Male chromosomes are not always XY and females are not always XX; humans can have allosomes that are neither, both, or sex-reversed, resulting in a human that can have a physically male body with XX chromosomes. Additionally, the mental processes that recognize gender in our peers are certainly not made on the basis of biology. We are not constantly aware of people’s chromosomes, sex organs, or testosterone levels as we stand next to them and decide which pronoun to use, suggesting a valid distinction between sex and gender. Nevertheless, Rowling’s rhetoric has been used in defense of anti-trans bills, proposing “separate but equal” sports teams and sanctioned denial of medical care for trans people.
This topic is monstrously convoluted, and Rowling’s other controversies were omitted, including the accusations of antisemitism on the basis of the greedy money-lender goblins in the books and game. While refusing to buy a video game isn’t activism, it is important to be able to recognize sources of misinformation and bigotry in our culture. A Stevens student and representative for oSTEM and TranSIT gives his input, writing “I was a very huge Harry Potter fan growing up. Now though, I avoid the franchise as much as I can. As a trans person, JK Rowling’s opinions on transgender people completely turned me off of the series. How can I continue being a Harry Potter fan if she actively lobbies against transgender rights?” If you’re feeling conflicted, take the advice of the people affected by the issue.
