The JK Streisand Effect?
Christopher T. Conner is Teaching Assistant Professor of Sociology at The University of Missouri, Columbia. He is co-author of Electronic Dance Music: From Deviant Subculture to Culture Industry. His work has also been teaching in a variety of outlets including YOUNG: Journal of Nordic Youth Culture, The Sociological Quarterly, Deviant Behavior, Symbolic Interaction, and Sexualities. He has also co-edited numerous anthologies including The Gayborhood: From Sexual Liberation to Cosmopolitan Spectacle.
Gay and Lesbian studies researchers use the term “pinkwashing” when companies, corporations, and governments donate to LGBTQIA+ causes without addressing the problems facing those communities—including their own practices that harm those groups. The discourse over the last few weeks surrounding the recent release of Hogwarts Legacy, a video game inspired by the J.K. Rowling book series Harry Potter, illustrates the limitations of online activism and the problem of pinkwashing.
For those unaware, J.K. Rowling has engaged in a range of anti-trans behavior, earning her the label as a trans exclusionary feminist—or the idea that women’s issues and trans issues are completely different and in order to advance equality we must focus only on cis-gendered women’s issues.
This is why, once the game was announced for release, many in the trans community have called for people to avoid playing the game due to the transphobic stances taken by Rowling on the internet. Even the game itself features a trans character who is Sirona Ryan—a name which is at best a pun to draw attention to the character’s trans identity, and at worst a transphobic troupe.
Both left and right wing political commentators have characterized calls for a boycott as an overreaction and a futile expression of identity politics. Even top leftist streamer Hasan Piker has been talking, nearly non-stop, about the game and his frustration with his subscribers asking him not to play the game.
Hasan Piker Reacting to Ben Shapiro’s Characterization of His Decision to Not Play Hogwarts After Reaction from Trans Community
His commentary is also echoed by popular trans activist, and former Canadian political contender turned livestreamer, Keffals, who made national news due to ongoing harassment campaigns from the site KiWi Farms. They both seem to suggest that boycotting the game is a meaningless action, and use a range of arguments to justify their decision. Elsewhere, those calling for the boycott have been getting death threats and other harassing messages from rabid fans upset about individuals' negative reactions—even those which use Harry Potter themed transphobic slurs such as a death curse which are directed towards trans people on social media.
Commentary From Trans Streamer Keffals Reacting to Jessie Gender’s Explanation of the Boycott
However, even before the game’s release, Warner Brothers knew the game might struggle to be successful and took efforts to adjust their marketing strategy. Their adjustments appears to be highly successful with the game rising to the number one slot on the online PC game store Steam. It was among the top games played on the streaming platform twitch. However, some leftist news outlets have claimed that the success is driven by the trans community’s anger towards the game.
While many online influencers seem caught in the cultural discourse, their commentary illustrates the fractures and fissures that exist among activists on how to advance political agendas. Those against the boycott argue that the game itself is as harmless as a child’s toy. Activists calling for political action, through a boycott, note that playing the game would reward one of the largest transphobic cultural figures in the world and advance harmful antisemitic and transphobic narratives.
Individuals like Hasan Piker, who have a long history of advocating for trans rights, suggested playing the game for money to raise money for a trans cause. However, his strategy also illustrates the limits of online activism in that it exposes the fact that political change cannot happen through mere discourse alone—sometimes action is necessary. While cultural narratives and critique can be powerful for raising public interest and awareness about social issues, real world mobilization is necessary in order for political change to happen.
Some may know this criticism as the slacktivism critique—a term used to describe the fact that online politics is one dimensional and often performative, and that focusing solely on online organizing obscures the interconnected nature of politics and economic conditions. Moreover, we live in a time where attention, views, and discourse have become commodified—a topic related to my recent book. While some have attempted to resolve this by suggesting that individuals play the game to raise funds for charitable causes, does raising money for charity offset the harm caused or does it undermine the very reason why trans activists have asked people to not buy the game?
While donating to a charitable cause might provide financial assistance to worthy causes, such actions illustrate Slavov Zizek’s critique of cultural capitalism—or that attempts to offset the harm created from the consumption of a good, by paying an additional cost in an attempt to offset those negative costs. Another example is the idea of carbon credits. While one might be led to believe that they are reducing or somehow alleviating the environmental harm they cause through the purchase of carbon credits, the fact is we cannot offset the consumption of resources or reduce the emissions of fossil fuels by paying a price.
Nearly two decades ago now Mark Fisher wrote Capitalist Realism. His scathing critique of contemporary society was that we live in a society in which we can’t even imagine a system outside capitalism—even our attempts to create change, he argues, have been co-opted by those in power. The discourse over Harry Potter, it would seem, lays bare the critique of Capitalist Realism in online political spaces. The individuals with the most massive audiences, the largest reach, and the social currency necessary to lead the charge against those pushing harmful transphobic rhetoric are unable to think of how they might advance the political agenda outside of raising money for charitable causes. More importantly, instead of siding with trans advocates it seems that many online leftists are unable to walk away and not play the game on their media platforms. Instead these individuals have argued the left just doesn’t want them to have fun, even if those harmed are the ones that made them famous.