TL, DRThat's true enough. I'm sick of Pedderrs and his mealy-mouthed two-faced dishonest bullshit.
If JK Rowling was what he claims, then SJW themes would be far more prominent in her work. Affleck is not a direct equivalent - filmmaking is a collaborative process. Affleck picks his projects, but an Affleck-directed movie is not a reflection of him the same as a Potter book is a reflection of Rowling. The studio makes a hell of a lot more decisions for Affleck than the publishing house does for Rowling.
Regarding her work, who is the most prominent LGBT character in the entire series of seven books? Dumbledore, and his sexuality was not even revealed until years after the final book was released. His sexuality was irrelevant. Rowling didn't care about making anyone an LGBT representative.
Same with race. The main three characters are all white. The lead is a boy, the only girl is his sidekick and the only question about romance is which of the two male leads she'll end up with. But everyone in the books ends up in a heteronormative relationship. Nobody's sexual or cultural identity is a defining part of their character - in Hogwarts, nobody gives a fuck if you're white or black or Asian, or straight or gay. Being brave, morally consistent and a good friend are what is emphasised again and again and again. Not identity markers.
And two white males who are initially portrayed as aligned with evil, undergo significant redemption arcs and end up being celebrated.
If Rowling was "ludicrously woke", then she would have put a lot more SJW Bullshit in her work, and she sure as hell wouldn't have waded onto the trans debate with a clear and forceful statement of "you are not real women."
Sure, she'll make noises to support the style of the time, keep her public profile up and get praised for espousing the "correct" opinions. But if she was a real woke crusader, then her work would heavily reflect that. As opposed to not reflecting it at all...... even a little bit.