J.K. Rowling, Elon Musk Named in Imane Khelif's Cyberbullying Lawsuit - eviltoast

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

          You can make some judgements, of course. But there

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

              Fair enough.

              it’s been pointed out that Cho and Chang are both family names from entirely different cultures

              Just for fun I opened LinkedIn, and I have found 2 pages of people called Cho Chang. This doesn’t say anything, of course, and I know nothing about Asian names and cultures, but I still found it interesting.