I think your point about her sex being irrelevant is disproved by the ongoing conservathot phenomenon.
Except you're the one drawing that connection. I didn't say there aren't any simps on the right (of course there are), I said I don't think that's what this is about. Because conservatives also simp for males they shouldn't. For example the non-conservatives like Peterson, Lindsay, Murray, Kissin, and all those pushing that brand of nonsense. Or, heck, people like Shapiro, or Dave Rubin.
People want to feel validated, by larger voices than their own. That's what they're often simpling for; that a famous person also shares some of their views. So they're more willing to look past their other faults, so they can continue to claim that person are Their Guy.
Again, there are those who simp for females because they're females, but that doesn't mean every instance of simping for a female is because they're female. I still don't think most people simp for Rowling because she's a woman.
The fact is that women are given much more leeway in right-wing spaces than men are...
Are they, though? Again, there are plenty of men and women both who escape the scrutiny they likely deserve, just because they espouse some conservative leaning opinions.
Conservatives were so beaten down by the Mainstream, and always portrayed as the Other, that there are plenty who will support any prominent voice who props them up.
As far as Rowling being useful...
Which I already said she basically isn't.
My point isn't to defend Rowling - something I have not done at any point here - but to say I don't agree with your characterization that there's a large group of people on the right simping for her because she's a woman.
We're in agreement that she's shit, and the right shouldn't support her.
Except you're the one drawing that connection. I didn't say there aren't any simps on the right (of course there are), I said I don't think that's what this is about. Because conservatives also simp for males they shouldn't. For example the non-conservatives like Peterson, Lindsay, Murray, Kissin, and all those pushing that brand of nonsense. Or, heck, people like Shapiro, or Dave Rubin.
People want to feel validated, by larger voices than their own. That's what they're often simpling for; that a famous person also shares some of their views. So they're more willing to look past their other faults, so they can continue to claim that person are Their Guy.
Again, there are those who simp for females because they're females, but that doesn't mean every instance of simping for a female is because they're female. I still don't think most people simp for Rowling because she's a woman.
Are they, though? Again, there are plenty of men and women both who escape the scrutiny they likely deserve, just because they espouse some conservative leaning opinions.
Conservatives were so beaten down by the Mainstream, and always portrayed as the Other, that there are plenty who will support any prominent voice who props them up.
Which I already said she basically isn't.
My point isn't to defend Rowling - something I have not done at any point here - but to say I don't agree with your characterization that there's a large group of people on the right simping for her because she's a woman.
We're in agreement that she's shit, and the right shouldn't support her.