I hate political partisan talk, which is all this is. At the same time I recognize the evil necessity of it. Intelligence must win, and whoever can convince the most people is the most intelligent and sees the biggest picture....hopefully. Therefore exaggerations sometimes must be fought with other exaggerations, although there is risk of losing arguments when your exaggerations get found out. In political fights you have to know how to get nasty. You cannot be a puritan. Rowling knows this, too. I think she is being treated unfairly but that all sides know it. It will blow over, and she'll be more popular than ever including with transexual persons. This kind of incendiary and semantically painful political talk is endemic and a necessity in public discourse.
I admit it would not be a necessity if some people were not trolls, but a troll is born every seventy-two seconds. Therefore a good politician must be skilled in evil speech. He or she must learn to give as good as gets, or the baddie will take advantage in debate. Angelic forms always hide daggers. In fact it is often wrongly asserted that all politicians and lawyers are bad.
They are not all bad, but you cannot tell. An evil can do good, and a good can do evil. The ones to worry about are weak willed, half hearted who believe they can win by a miraculous coincidence. Every inch of ground is only gained by cleverness.
It was an error to accuse Rowling but not necessarily an evil attempt. It was a mistake. She clearly believes in gay rights, doesn't drink blood and is somewhat cuddly.
