Emma Watson has said she still loves J.K. Rowling and refuses to “cancel her,” but the author’s reply shows the differences over the identity of trans women between Rowling and the star remains unresolved for now
Emma Watson recently spoke openly for the first time in five years about her rift with J.K. Rowling, the bestselling author of the Harry Potter series. In a conversation with podcaster Jay Shetty last week, the 35-year-old actor said she still loves the Harry Potter author and refuses to “cancel her out,” despite their very public disagreement over gender identity.
Watson, who played Hermione Granger in all eight Potter films, said: “It’s my deepest wish that I hope people who don’t agree with my opinion will love me, and I hope I can keep loving people who I don’t necessarily share the same opinion with.” She described Rowling as someone whose encouragement had mattered deeply when she was growing up, adding: “There’s just no world in which I could ever cancel her out, or cancel that out, for anything.”
Her words were conciliatory, almost an attempt to build a bridge. But Rowling, who has remained unapologetic in her defense of what she calls sex-based rights, offered little sign of softening. Hours later, she posted on X: “A little reminder for anyone who may be regretting their very public sprint to the front of the mob and is now trying to discreetly shove their pitchfork out of sight.”
What Watson said vs. Rowling’s position
On Shetty’s podcast, Watson talked about the depth of her bond with Rowling, even as she admitted the strain. “I think the thing I’m most upset about is that a conversation was never made possible,” she said. She praised the author’s “kindness and words of encouragement” during her childhood and credited her with creating Hermione, a role she said “barely exists in the history of English literature.”
Also read: Five non-Harry Potter books by JK Rowling that show her versatility as a writer
She added: “I just don’t know what else to do other than hold these two seemingly incompatible things together at the same time and just hope maybe they will one day resolve,” she said. “And I can love her, I can know she loved me, I can be grateful to her … and there can be this whole other thing. My job feels like to just hold all of it.” Rowling’s reply on X didn’t name Watson, but the timing left little doubt as to whom it was aimed at. She also linked back to an essay she had written in May, where she stated: “Nobody sane believes, or has ever believed, that humans can change sex, or that binary sex isn’t a material fact.” For Rowling, the issue is not personal reconciliation but a fight over principles.
The author’s critics, however, see her language as harmful to trans people. In 2020, her essays and tweets sparked the backlash that divided the Harry Potter fandom and prompted actors like Watson, Daniel Radcliffe, and Rupert Grint to speak out. Rowling insists she is not transphobic, but rather defending women’s rights in law, particularly in single-sex spaces. Her detractors argue that her framing erases trans identities.
That disagreement has hardened over time. Rowling has cultivated an audience of supporters who admire her refusal to back down, while her critics accuse her of punching down at a vulnerable community. The cultural influence of Harry Potter makes every word more visible, with every exchange hogging the headlines around the world.
The 2020 break and its fallout
The roots of the dispute go back to 2020, when Rowling mocked the phrase “people who menstruate” in a tweet. She later wrote: “If sex isn’t real, the lived reality of women globally is erased.” Watson responded on Twitter at the time: “Trans people are who they say they are and deserve to live their lives without being constantly questioned.” Radcliffe issued a statement through The Trevor Project declaring: “Transgender women are women. Any statement to the contrary erases the identity and dignity of transgender people.”
Watson followed with her own words on Twitter: “Trans people are who they say they are and deserve to live their lives without being constantly questioned.” Grint, too, added: “I firmly stand with the trans community and echo the sentiments expressed by many of my peers.” Each actor made a conscious choice to take a position, knowing they were inextricably tied to Rowling’s work. Watson, in particular, has continued to align herself with trans rights, speaking at events and using her platform to highlight the issue. Her recent comments, seen as another indirect rebuke to Rowling, were part of that ongoing pattern.
Also read: Harry Potter TV series: As HBO taps ‘Succession’ writer, director, here’s all you need to know
The three lead actors of the Potter films publicly distanced themselves from the author whose books had launched their careers. Rowling, in turn, has often alluded to the hurt she feels from their rejection, once describing it as a “public betrayal.” Watson’s recent remarks were the first time she suggested a way back, if not politically then at least personally. But Rowling’s reaction suggests that reconciliation, at least in public, remains unlikely.
Woman and biological sex
The Watson-Rowling exchange is not happening in a vacuum. The UK Supreme Court, in April 2025, ruled that under the Equality Act 2010, a woman is defined by biological sex and not a Gender Recognition Certificate(GRC)-recognised gender. In response, more than 1,600 figures from film and television — including Watson, Eddie Redmayne, Paapa Essiedu, and Katie Leung — signed an open letter expressing solidarity with trans, non-binary, and intersex communities.
Rowling dismissed those signatories as part of a “mob.” Her critics saw that language as dismissive of legitimate concern for rights and dignity. For Watson, who signed the letter, it underscored the ongoing gap between their values.
The Harry Potter series is built around tolerance and belonging. That the author and her actors now take such opposing positions is painful for many fans of the franchise. Some argue the story belongs to readers and viewers regardless of Rowling’s views; others say her words cannot be separated from the world she created.
For Watson, the challenge is to honour both truths. She said she cannot erase the gift Rowling gave her or the affection she once felt. But she also cannot stay silent about trans rights. Holding those two positions simultaneously might never resolve neatly. Rowling, by contrast, appears unwilling to compartmentalise. For her, the political stakes override the personal. Until that changes, they will continue to beg to differ.
