‘Absolutely incoherent!’ Emma Watson’s olive branch to JK Rowling torn apart amid fresh trans row

JK Rowling has been defended by Andrew Doyle after brutally shutting down Emma Watson’s “ignorant” offer of reconciliation.

Speaking to GB News, the commentator declared that although it is a “nice sentiment”, the Harry Potter actress is still “cosying up to a movement that wants JK Rowling dead”.

Speaking on the Jay Shetty podcast, Ms Watson publicly spoke of the feud for the first time: “I really don’t believe that by having had that experience and holding the love and support and views that I have means that I can’t and don’t treasure Jo and the person that I had personal experiences with.

“It’s my deepest wish that people who don’t agree with my opinion will love me, and I hope I can keep loving people whom I don’t necessarily share the same opinion with.”

Hitting back at the Harry Potter star on social media in a lengthy statement, Ms Rowling fumed: “Like other people who’ve never experienced adult life uncushioned by wealth and fame, Emma has so little experience of real life, she’s ignorant of how ignorant she is.

“She’ll never need a homeless shelter. She’s never going to be placed on a mixed sex public hospital ward. I’d be astounded if she’s been in a high street changing room since childhood.”

Throwing his support behind the author, GB News contributor Andrew Doyle said: “She makes a very good point that, of course, when JK Rowling wrote the Harry Potter books, she was living in poverty.

“And she has not had the kind of privileged experience of life that the likes of Emma Watson have had. Because of the success of her books and her films, she made Emma Watson a multi-millionaire.”

LATEST DEVELOPMENTS:

JK Rowling ANNIHILATES Emma Watson for ‘trashing women’s rights’ as she reacts to GB News videoJK Rowling finally responds to Emma Watson olive branch amid trans row as she mocks actressJK Rowling shares cryptic statement amid Emma Watson U-turn on author feud: ‘May be regretting’

Criticising Ms Watson’s “luxury belief” further, Mr Doyle added: “So the point she’s making is, of course, when it comes to women’s rights, Emma Watson is never going to have to share a mixed-sex ward at a hospital or be in a prison cell with a male rapist who identifies as female, or have any of these various issues.

“These are points that JK Rowling made in her rebuttal tweet just the other day, and she makes a very, very good point. It’s a luxury belief of Emma Watson, because she’s never going to have to face the problems that a lot of ordinary women will face.”

Delivering his verdict on JK Rowling’s response to Ms Watson’s remarks, Mr Doyle argued that until now she has been “incredibly restrained”, but has now “run out of patience”.

He told GB News: “She’s been incredibly restrained, and we have to put this into perspective, she’s had years and years of death threats, rape threats, threats of torture, activists doxing her, throwing the most disgusting abuse, and all of it coming from the trans activist movement, which has violence and violent rhetoric just completely normalised within it.

“That’s the movement that Emma Watson has thrown her weight behind and said that she would support.

“When it came to doing a podcast about her experiences, she specifically said to the producers she didn’t want to address the issue of Emma Watson, because she was concerned about bringing her into this toxic debate and getting her piled on and all the rest of it. So she was very considerate, I think she’s just run out of patience.”

Concluding his verdict on the row between the Harry Potter stars, Mr Doyle stated that although Ms Watson’s olive branch was a “nice sentiment”, it is an “incoherent” argument.

He said: “I think this latest podcast appearance where Emma Watson has said ‘we can completely, fundamentally disagree, but I can still love her’, well, that’s a nice sentiment, but this is a movement that has been saying that J.K. Rowling should be assassinated.

“And as JK Rowling says, if you cosy up to a movement that wants me dead, how can I then say, ‘oh, that’s fine, we can still be mates’. I mean, it’s absolutely incoherent.”