San Francisco Bookstore Drops J.K. Rowling Titles Over Anti-Trans Controversy

 

A beloved independent bookstore in San Francisco has decided to stop selling any works by J.K. Rowling, including her globally celebrated "Harry Potter" series, in response to what it views as the author’s continued hostility toward transgender rights. The move comes after Rowling launched a new legal initiative, which the bookstore claims crossed a final line.

 

Booksmith, a fixture in San Francisco’s Haight-Ashbury neighborhood since 1976, made the announcement on Instagram earlier this month. The decision follows Rowling’s public declaration that she would be using her personal fortune to back the J.K. Rowling Women’s Fund — a legal project aimed at defending what she and her supporters call “women’s sex-based rights.” The fund states it will support “individuals and organisations fighting to retain women’s sex-based rights in the workplace, in public life, and in protected female spaces.”

 

Although the fund does not explicitly mention transgender individuals, critics point to Rowling’s outspoken opposition to the inclusion of trans women in women’s spaces as a clear indication of the fund’s intent. Activists and advocates for transgender rights argue that rhetoric framed around “sex-based rights” is often code for policies that exclude or disadvantage trans people.

 

“With this announcement, we’ve decided to stop carrying her books,” the Booksmith team wrote on Instagram. “We don’t know exactly what her new ‘women’s fund’ will entail, but we know that we aren’t going to be a part of it.”

 

The post was deeply personal for the store’s staff, who openly identify as queer and described how Rowling’s books had shaped their youth. “As a group of queer booklovers, we also had our adolescences shaped by wizards and elves. Look at us, it’s obvious,” the statement continued. “If you or someone you love wants to dive into the world of Harry Potter, we suggest doing so by buying used copies of these books.”

 

A representative for Rowling said she was unavailable for comment.

 

In addition to pulling Rowling’s titles, Booksmith also published a list of recommended fantasy novels that serve as alternatives to the “Harry Potter” universe. The list is available on their website and is intended to spotlight authors who, according to the bookstore, reflect values of inclusivity and diversity in their work.

 

However, the decision has not come without backlash. On social media, some users criticized the move as political censorship and accused the bookstore of ideological gatekeeping. “So you’re going to curate your selections to only sell books by authors that you agree with politically,” one commenter wrote. “Good to know. I’ll be shopping elsewhere.”

 

Despite the criticism, Booksmith has remained firm in its stance. The shop joins a growing number of institutions and individuals reckoning with the legacy of Rowling’s work and her polarizing views on gender identity. The incident is yet another example of the evolving relationship between artists, their politics, and the cultural spaces that once celebrated them.

 

  Adapted by ASEAN Now from NBC  2025-06-28

 

 

Unwise move. Stores carry copies of Mein Kampf, but that doesn't mean they are Nazi sympathizers. 

I consider myself a liberal, but banning of books puts that store in the authoritarian section of the arena. Bad move, hypocritical and narrow minded,

This is terrible.

 

Rowling will probably starve and end up living on the streets. 

 

Oh wait a minute.   

 

She hasn't published anything worth a poop in years. And who buys books at retail in bookstores anymore?

 

 

 

 

Honestly?  Who gives a toss about this 'moral high-ground' taken by this bookstore?

More pandering to the minorities!

 

 

 

 

Whats the betting the owner of this store is a fella called Arthur who wants to be Martha ?  

Liberal censorship. Par for course.

5 hours ago, Emdog said:

Bad move, hypocritical and narrow minded

Yup. Thats the left. Harry potter one of the few triumphs of women

I don't approve of their policy but on the other hand in that neighborhood there are probably some people that would deface those books, so it can be seen as a practical business decision. 

I'm not in favor of those who reject transgender people, but I also don't think someone's views on anything are justification for banning their books. I'd even say this about very controversial subjects like all sides of racism, sexism, xenophobia, and MAGA articles or books (or Forum posts 😉)

Imagine this? I bet she is sweating the loss of 15 book sales with her 9 figure fortune. I like the fact that she's so outspoken, this is such a politically correct culture these days, and it's so refreshing to hear somebody speak out and state how they really feel. So what, she offends a few people here and there, like it means anything. 

 

Just say no to PC, snowflake and victim culture. 

 

 

I think the stores's loss, and a stupid decision.........

2 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

Whats the betting the owner of this store is a fella called Arthur who wants to be Martha ?  

Did you read the OP?

1 hour ago, WDSmart said:

I'm not in favor of those who reject transgender people, but I also don't think someone's views on anything are justification for banning their books. I'd even say this about very controversial subjects like all sides of racism, sexism, xenophobia, and MAGA articles or books (or Forum posts 😉)

I don't think it's her books, but her activism on the subject.

7 minutes ago, stevenl said:

1 hour ago, WDSmart said:

I'm not in favor of those who reject transgender people, but I also don't think someone's views on anything are justification for banning their books. I'd even say this about very controversial subjects like all sides of racism, sexism, xenophobia, and MAGA articles or books (or Forum posts 😉)

I don't think it's her books, but her activism on the subject.

Yes, you're correct. I haven't read all her books, but the movies I've seen made from her books don't have any prejudice about transgenders in them, although, of course, they don't specifically mention transgenders. Anyway, what I said above about banning books would certainly also include the non-book-related actions of the author. 

Pathetic, look at me grandstanding. Go to their site and have a gander at the staff.
Despite being a billionaire, she wouldn’t give a monkeys toss and will probably make more as a result of this… staying in the public eye as it were. 

people buy books ?

1 minute ago, Ralf001 said:

people buy books ?

Yes, that is why we have book stores.........

18 minutes ago, WDSmart said:

Yes, you're correct. I haven't read all her books, but the movies I've seen made from her books don't have any prejudice about transgenders in them, although, of course, they don't specifically mention transgenders. Anyway, what I said above about banning books would certainly also include the non-book-related actions of the author. 

https://www.npr.org/2022/08/31/1120299781/jk-rowling-new-book-the-ink-black-heart

7 hours ago, Emdog said:

Unwise move. Stores carry copies of Mein Kampf, but that doesn't mean they are Nazi sympathizers. 

I consider myself a liberal, but banning of books puts that store in the authoritarian section of the arena. Bad move, hypocritical and narrow minded,

I agree. Just put her books in the transphobic section. 🙂 

3 hours ago, ignore it said:

This is terrible.

 

Rowling will probably starve and end up living on the streets. 

 

Oh wait a minute.   

 

She hasn't published anything worth a poop in years. And who buys books at retail in bookstores anymore?

 

 

 

 

 

Speaking of poop and san fran.....

 

https://www.arcgis.com/apps/View/index.html?appid=b6fab720912642b6aedafdb02a76d2a4

15 minutes ago, Baht Simpson said:

34 minutes ago, WDSmart said:

Yes, you're correct. I haven't read all her books, but the movies I've seen made from her books don't have any prejudice about transgenders in them, although, of course, they don't specifically mention transgenders. Anyway, what I said above about banning books would certainly also include the non-book-related actions of the author. 

https://www.npr.org/2022/08/31/1120299781/jk-rowling-new-book-the-ink-black-heart

Thanks for your link to her newest book. However, I would not be in favor of banning that book anywhere. I wouldn't recommend it to anyone, but I don't think it should be banned. 

Just another example of American arrogance, marred with ignorance to the disadvantage of that particular bookstore. If that rule would apply, most shelves would be empty. 

Anyhow irrelevant as the Americans are not know to be a reading nation to start with! 

So i see the left is too out of touch for the feminist cause anymore, having elevated rowling to a female mind to be celebrated now turned pariah

1 hour ago, stevenl said:

I don't think it's her books, but her activism on the subject.

Activism.... like only believing in men and woman

14 minutes ago, WDSmart said:

Thanks for your link to her newest book. However, I would not be in favor of banning that book anywhere. I wouldn't recommend it to anyone, but I don't think it should be banned. 

I agree. Although not stocking a book isn't really banning. It's not like you can't get hold of a copy elsewhere. I imagine a lot of bookshops decline to stock certain books for various reasons. Storm in a teacup really.

1 hour ago, frank83628 said:

Activism.... like only believing in men and woman

No, activism.

3 hours ago, Jingthing said:

I don't approve of their policy but on the other hand in that neighborhood there are probably some people that would deface those books, so it can be seen as a practical business decision. 

 

That speaks volumes about the level of discourse from the radical left.  

Dumbledore was gay. Not very inclusive... 

39 minutes ago, stevenl said:

No, activism.

Like there are only 2 sexes, men & women.... or do you have another biological theory?

4 hours ago, Jingthing said:

I don't approve of their policy but on the other hand in that neighborhood there are probably some people that would deface those books, so it can be seen as a practical business decision. 

So they deface property because they are immature bitchy ilttle weedy half men?