🚨 BOOM! President Trump responds to Trevor Noah’s joke implying he went to Epstein Island by saying he’s going to sue the sh*t out of him. 🔥
“Get ready Noah, I’m going to have some fun with you!”
https://t.co/uct9LZfbQO
I'm seeing quite a bit of comment about this, so I want to make a couple of points.
I'm not owed eternal agreement from any actor who once played a character I created. The idea is as ludicrous as me checking with the boss I had when I was twenty-one for what opinions I should hold these days.
Emma Watson and her co-stars have every right to embrace gender identity ideology. Such beliefs are legally protected, and I wouldn't want to see any of them threatened with loss of work, or violence, or death, because of them.
However, Emma and Dan in particular have both made it clear over the last few years that they think our former professional association gives them a particular right - nay, obligation - to critique me and my views in public. Years after they finished acting in Potter, they continue to assume the role of de facto spokespeople for the world I created.
When you've known people since they were ten years old it's hard to shake a certain protectiveness. Until quite recently, I hadn't managed to throw off the memory of children who needed to be gently coaxed through their dialogue in a big scary film studio. For the past few years, I've repeatedly declined invitations from journalists to comment on Emma specifically, most notably on the Witch Trials of JK Rowling. Ironically, I told the producers that I didn't want her to be hounded as the result of anything I said.
The television presenter in the attached clip highlights Emma's 'all witches' speech, and in truth, that was a turning point for me, but it had a postscript that hurt far more than the speech itself. Emma asked someone to pass on a handwritten note from her to me, which contained the single sentence 'I'm so sorry for what you're going through' (she has my phone number). This was back when the death, rape and torture threats against me were at their peak, at a time when my personal security measures had had to be tightened considerably and I was constantly worried for my family's safety. Emma had just publicly poured more petrol on the flames, yet thought a one line expression of concern from her would reassure me of her fundamental sympathy and kindness.
Like other people who've never experienced adult life uncushioned by wealth and fame, Emma has so little experience of real life she's ignorant of how ignorant she is. She'll never need a homeless shelter. She's never going to be placed on a mixed sex public hospital ward. I'd be astounded if she's been in a high street changing room since childhood. Her 'public bathroom' is single occupancy and comes with a security man standing guard outside the door. Has she had to strip off in a newly mixed-sex changing room at a council-run swimming pool? Is she ever likely to need a state-run rape crisis centre that refuses to guarantee an all-female service? To find herself sharing a prison cell with a male rapist who's identified into the women's prison?
I wasn't a multimillionaire at fourteen. I lived in poverty while writing the book that made Emma famous. I therefore understand from my own life experience what the trashing of women's rights in which Emma has so enthusiastically participated means to women and girls without her privileges.
The greatest irony here is that, had Emma not decided in her most recent interview to declare that she loves and treasures me - a change of tack I suspect she's adopted because she's noticed full-throated condemnation of me is no longer quite as fashionable as it was - I might never have been this honest.
Adults can't expect to cosy up to an activist movement that regularly calls for a friend's assassination, then assert their right to the former friend's love, as though the friend was in fact their mother. Emma is rightly free to disagree with me and indeed to discuss her feelings about me in public - but I have the same right, and I've finally decided to exercise it.
I'm seeing quite a bit of comment about this, so I want to make a couple of points.
I'm not owed eternal agreement from any actor who once played a character I created. The idea is as ludicrous as me checking with the boss I had when I was twenty-one for what opinions I should hold these days.
Emma Watson and her co-stars have every right to embrace gender identity ideology. Such beliefs are legally protected, and I wouldn't want to see any of them threatened with loss of work, or violence, or death, because of them.
However, Emma and Dan in particular have both made it clear over the last few years that they think our former professional association gives them a particular right - nay, obligation - to critique me and my views in public. Years after they finished acting in Potter, they continue to assume the role of de facto spokespeople for the world I created.
When you've known people since they were ten years old it's hard to shake a certain protectiveness. Until quite recently, I hadn't managed to throw off the memory of children who needed to be gently coaxed through their dialogue in a big scary film studio. For the past few years, I've repeatedly declined invitations from journalists to comment on Emma specifically, most notably on the Witch Trials of JK Rowling. Ironically, I told the producers that I didn't want her to be hounded as the result of anything I said.
The television presenter in the attached clip highlights Emma's 'all witches' speech, and in truth, that was a turning point for me, but it had a postscript that hurt far more than the speech itself. Emma asked someone to pass on a handwritten note from her to me, which contained the single sentence 'I'm so sorry for what you're going through' (she has my phone number). This was back when the death, rape and torture threats against me were at their peak, at a time when my personal security measures had had to be tightened considerably and I was constantly worried for my family's safety. Emma had just publicly poured more petrol on the flames, yet thought a one line expression of concern from her would reassure me of her fundamental sympathy and kindness.
Like other people who've never experienced adult life uncushioned by wealth and fame, Emma has so little experience of real life she's ignorant of how ignorant she is. She'll never need a homeless shelter. She's never going to be placed on a mixed sex public hospital ward. I'd be astounded if she's been in a high street changing room since childhood. Her 'public bathroom' is single occupancy and comes with a security man standing guard outside the door. Has she had to strip off in a newly mixed-sex changing room at a council-run swimming pool? Is she ever likely to need a state-run rape crisis centre that refuses to guarantee an all-female service? To find herself sharing a prison cell with a male rapist who's identified into the women's prison?
I wasn't a multimillionaire at fourteen. I lived in poverty while writing the book that made Emma famous. I therefore understand from my own life experience what the trashing of women's rights in which Emma has so enthusiastically participated means to women and girls without her privileges.
The greatest irony here is that, had Emma not decided in her most recent interview to declare that she loves and treasures me - a change of tack I suspect she's adopted because she's noticed full-throated condemnation of me is no longer quite as fashionable as it was - I might never have been this honest.
Adults can't expect to cosy up to an activist movement that regularly calls for a friend's assassination, then assert their right to the former friend's love, as though the friend was in fact their mother. Emma is rightly free to disagree with me and indeed to discuss her feelings about me in public - but I have the same right, and I've finally decided to exercise it.
Reminder:
Emma Watson is 35 years old.
She is not a little girl anymore. She is a grown woman, who spent years stoking the flames of hatred against the woman who treated her like a daughter.
Now that the JK Rowling hate train is less fashionable, she has decided to row back on her condemnation and claim that she still treasures and loves JK.
You don’t try to destroy someone you love.
You don’t light the torches and encourage the pitchfork-wielding mobs to hunt down and tear apart someone you cherish.
You don’t betray someone who has done nothing but love, protect, encourage and promote you.
Sure, Emma doesn’t owe JK her loyalty.
But JK doesn’t owe Emma hers, either.
And Emma doesn’t deserve the free pass she’s been granted her whole life because people still see her as the bushy-haired child playing a character in a magical world.
She is a woman who has grown up cushioned by fame and privilege. She has never had to know the fear of living in a mixed-sex children’s home with convicts and troubled young offenders. She has never had to understand the grief at training your whole life to excel in a sport, only for a man to steal your success with a biological advantage you can never match. She has never witnessed the discomfort of being placed in a mixed public hospital ward, or being naked and vulnerable in an ‘inclusive’ fitting room where random men could walk in at any time.
She has so little understanding of the world she so freely opines on. She has so little experience of the fear, struggle, and pain that women suffer at the hands of violent or predatory men.
She will never need a public women’s shelter, or a state-run sexual health clinic, or a rape examination where they cannot offer a female-only option because of “DEI requirements”.
I myself was sexually abused from the age of 5. I will never be able to forget the feeling of their hands on my skin, their breath against my face, their bodies overpowering mine and making sure I couldn’t fight back.
I know the consequences of letting men invade women’s spaces and safety. I feel the pain, fear and anguish of having women’s basic rights violated. I live with the scars of men’s oppression every day.
And so does JK.
JK Rowling speaking out about her is long overdue, because unlike Emma she is coming from a place of wisdom and experience. Unlike Emma, she has lived the life that she now tries to protect other women against. Unlike Emma, she knows what she is talking about.
Emma is a grown woman.
She isn’t owed the forgiveness of youth.
She should be treated as what she is: a spoiled, ignorant adult.
people are all ‘anti-death penalty’ until they see the crime the murderer committed then suddenly people want that murderer turned into a blood eagle live on CSPAN (i’m people)
If you believe free speech is for you but not your political opponents, you're illiberal.
If no contrary evidence could change your beliefs, you're a fundamentalist.
If you believe the state should punish those with contrary views, you're a totalitarian.
If you believe political opponents should be punished with violence or death, you're a terrorist.
My friend Charlie Kirk was the best of America. A self-made man, a young husband and father, and a patriot, he was relentlessly positive about the future. He dedicated his life to making a difference with young people, drawing huge crowds everywhere he went. He was open to ideas and willing to debate anyone. That good-natured openness is what got him killed by an intolerant lunatic. Charlie was winning the debate, and for that, he had to be silenced, permanently. Our thoughts and prayers are with his wife Erika and his family.