Recently, actor Daniel Radcliffe opened up to IndieWire to address his need to call out Harry Potter author JK Rowling in June of 2020 for her controversial tweets and opinions surrounding the transgender community.
Radcliffe shared:
"The reason I felt very, very much as though I needed to say something when I did was because, particularly since finishing 'Potter,' I've met so many queer and trans kids and young people who had a huge amount of identification with Potter on that."
"And so seeing them hurt on that day... I wanted them to know that not everybody in the franchise felt that way."
"And that was really important."
Radcliffe was referring to his response to Rowling's transphobic tweets regarding the phrase "people who menstruate:"
"Transgender women are women."
"Any statement to the contrary erases the identity and dignity of transgender people and goes against all advice given by professional health care associations who have for more expertise on this subject matter than either Jo or I."
Upon learning of Radcliffe's stance, columnist Judith Woods of the U.K.'s The Telegraph called him "the world's most ungrateful man" and a "33-year-old man child." Woods accused Radcliffe of attempting to "cancel" Rowling.
In her Telegraph piece, Woods refers to Rowling as Radcliffe's "creator" and claims that Radcliffe would not have a career without Rowling.
Many took to Twitter to call out Woods' piece, not only for her terminology but also for seemingly being unable to differentiate between the fictional character Harry Potter and Daniel Radcliffe himself.
\u201c@Telegraph Um, his parents are his creators\u2026\u201d— The Telegraph (@The Telegraph) 1667478601
\u201c\u201chis creator\u201d strongly implies that this journalist does not understand the difference between Daniel Radcliffe, a real human person, and Harry Potter, a fictional character he depicted in a film series that concluded more than a decade ago\u201d— Dr Charlotte Lydia Riley (@Dr Charlotte Lydia Riley) 1667476160
\u201cHis ability to pivot and play just about any role throughout his life has kept him famous.\n\nHis kindness and empathy for others continues to impress his fans and has kept him famous.\u201d— Mx. Amanda Jett\u00e9 Knox (@Mx. Amanda Jett\u00e9 Knox) 1667479444
\u201cJOANNE DID NOT PLUCK DANIEL FROM A TESCO AND PLACE HIM ON A MOVIE SET. HE ACTUALLY EARNED THAT ROLE.\n\nThe end.\u201d— Mx. Amanda Jett\u00e9 Knox (@Mx. Amanda Jett\u00e9 Knox) 1667479444
\u201cJ.K. Rowling is not, in fact, Daniel Radcliffe's "creator." Y'all know he isn't ACTUALLY Harry Potter, right?\n\nOh, and he did a job for 10 years while he was still a child and teenager. He doesn't owe her a damn thing.\u201d— Ashton Pittman (@Ashton Pittman) 1667498314
\u201c@Telegraph Seriously pathetic article and faux outrage. He is entitled to his views. Stop trying to cancel Daniel Radcliffe\u201d— The Telegraph (@The Telegraph) 1667478601
\u201cMore evidence that the right wing media - this is @dailytelegraph - are now using \u2018cancel\u2019 as a synonym for \u2018disagree with\u2019. Is the right to disagree no longer a fundamental aspect of free speech? Also JK Rowling didn\u2019t create Daniel Radcliffe. She\u2019s not his mum.\u201d— Billy Bragg (@Billy Bragg) 1667482317
\u201c@Telegraph \u2018Cancel\u2019\u201d— The Telegraph (@The Telegraph) 1667478601
\u201c@CatlolSea @LilySimpson1312 Considering how much they go on about \u201cbiological reality\u201d it\u2019s rather weird that they are willing to discount the biological entity Daniel Radcliffe in favour of a fictional male character as imagined by a female author \ud83e\udd37\u200d\u2640\ufe0f\u201d— Lily Simpson has blue hair + pronouns (@Lily Simpson has blue hair + pronouns) 1667488280
\u201ceven if jk rowling had saved daniel radcliffe from a pack of hungry lions as a child, he would not in fact be obligated to support her weird bigotry today\n\njust clearing that up for the tl\u201d— Dr. Samantha Hancox-Li (@Dr. Samantha Hancox-Li) 1667497834
\u201cHow could Daniel Radcliffe, whom JK Rowling formed herself out of clay, and breathed life into, and said \u201cGo now unto the World my child, I bestow upon thee the gift of mortality\u201d, and sent into the kingdoms of Elam and Edom to smote her enemies, disagree with her in print?!\u201d— Mikaela | aleakiM (@Mikaela | aleakiM) 1667563938
\u201c@Telegraph Does Judith think Daniel Radcliffe was created by JK Rowling like Adam was by God? lmao\u201d— The Telegraph (@The Telegraph) 1667466679
\u201c@Telegraph @JudithWoods Daniel Radcliffe is a human man, distinct from the wizard character created by JK Rowling\u201d— The Telegraph (@The Telegraph) 1667466679
Because of his involvement with The Trevor Project, Radcliffe said of his response to Rowling's tweets that he would not have been able to look himself in the mirror if he refrained from speaking out.
He added, "But it's not mine to guess what's going on in someone else's head."
@drandrealove/Bluesky
@thebulwark/Bluesky
@monicasanluiss/TikTok
@monicasanluiss/TikTok
@monicasanluiss/TikTok
@monicasanluiss/TikTok
@monicasanluiss/TikTok
@monicasanluiss/TikTok
@monicasanluiss/TikTok
@monicasanluiss/TikTok
@monicasanluiss/TikTok
@monicasanluiss/TikTok
@monicasanluiss/TikTok
@monicasanluiss/TikTok
@monicasanluiss/TikTok
@alexamcnee/TikTok
@alexamcnee/TikTok
@alexamcnee/TikTok
@alexamcnee/TikTok
@alexamcnee/TikTok
@alexamcnee/TikTok
@alexamcnee/TikTok
@alexamcnee/TikTok
@alexamcnee/TikTok
@alexamcnee/TikTok
@alexamcnee/TikTok
@alexamcnee/TikTok