Today : Oct 20, 2025
Politics
19 October 2025

Margaret Cho And Right Wing Clash Over Trans Rights

A viral video, political scapegoating, and celebrity boycotts highlight deep divisions over transgender rights as activists call for solidarity and systemic change.

On October 18, 2025, the ongoing battle over trans rights in the United States erupted into new controversy, drawing in celebrities, activists, and political figures alike. In a fiery TikTok video, comedian and LGBTQ+ rights advocate Margaret Cho delivered a scathing rebuke of author JK Rowling’s stance on transgender issues, while, on the political front, the right wing intensified its campaign of scapegoating trans people, particularly in the wake of the assassination of conservative commentator Charlie Kirk.

Cho, 56, is no stranger to speaking her mind, but her latest video—posted to her 309,000 TikTok followers—pulled no punches. Wearing a t-shirt emblazoned with the colors of the trans pride flag, she addressed Rowling directly: “Shut up JK Rowling, shut up. You’re a joke. That’s why your name is JK, cause you are a joke.” The stand-up comic went further, linking her own experience with gender-affirming care to a pointed curse: “I hope that when you face menopause, you have to take a lot of gender-affirming care, as I do. And when you are taking these hormones, they make your pubes grow out so thick and hard it’s like steel wool. And if anyone goes down to eat it, they get a face full of scars. I hope they start calling you barbed wire.”

Cho’s video, which had already amassed 40,000 views within hours, was met with a flood of supportive comments. Many of her followers echoed her condemnation of Rowling, who has long been a lightning rod for criticism over her public statements on transgender people. Cho’s remarks were hardly her first foray into the debate—just weeks before, she had labeled South Carolina Rep. Nancy Mace a “stupid b****” for self-identifying as a “proud transphobe,” and earlier in the year, she called out fellow comic Dave Chappelle as “uneducated, negative, and destructive” for his own controversial comments about the trans community, as reported by Metro.

Rowling’s positions have repeatedly drawn fire from LGBTQ+ advocates and allies. Earlier in 2025, she helped fund For Women Scotland, a group that challenged the legal definition of “woman” in the UK Supreme Court—a case that ultimately ended in victory for the group and outcry from trans rights activists. The backlash has extended into pop culture, with calls to boycott the upcoming HBO Harry Potter TV series and public statements of solidarity with trans people from former Harry Potter stars Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint, and Emma Watson. Rowling, for her part, has made her own feelings clear, stating she would “never forgive” the actors for their opposition and recently doubling down by calling Watson “ignorant” after a podcast interview in which Watson lamented the lack of dialogue between them.

Meanwhile, the controversy has spilled over into the broader entertainment industry. Keira Knightley, who is involved in a new Harry Potter project, was recently asked about the boycott movement. “I was not aware of that, no,” Knightley told Decider with a laugh. “I’m very sorry. I think we’re all living in a period of time right now where we’re all going to have to figure out how to live together, aren’t we? And we’ve all got very different opinions. I hope that we can all find respect.” Her comments capture a sentiment that, for many, feels increasingly elusive in today’s polarized climate.

Yet the debate over trans rights is not confined to the realm of celebrity and social media. According to a Socialist Alternative article published the same day as Cho’s video, the right wing wasted no time in blaming trans people for the assassination of Charlie Kirk, a prominent conservative commentator. Kirk, who had just finished blaming trans people for mass shootings and making racially charged comments about “gang violence,” was killed in an incident that quickly became fodder for political opportunism. Right-wing figures seized on the fact that the assassin’s partner was trans and on ambiguous messages found on the killer’s bullet casings to construct a narrative of “transgender ideology” fueling violence.

This scapegoating comes despite statistical evidence to the contrary: transgender people—especially Black transgender women—are disproportionately the victims, not the perpetrators, of gun violence in the United States. Fewer than 0.1% of mass shooting perpetrators have been transgender, according to Socialist Alternative. Nevertheless, the Trump administration and its allies have ramped up their demonization of trans people, with the Department of Justice reportedly floating proposals to ban trans individuals from owning firearms—a move that stands in stark contrast to the right’s usual defense of gun rights.

The escalation doesn’t stop there. The FBI has recently classified “transgender activism” as “violent nihilist extremism,” a designation that many activists interpret as criminalizing trans existence itself. The past several years have seen record numbers of so-called “bathroom bills” and bans on trans participation in sports. Trump’s 2024 campaign slogan, “Kamala is for they/them, not for you,” exemplifies the fearmongering rhetoric deployed to pit groups against each other and distract from broader systemic issues.

For many activists, these attacks on trans rights are part of a larger pattern. Measures like slashing federal funding for gender-affirming care are often used to justify broader cuts to healthcare and social services, Socialist Alternative argues. Painting trans people as threats provides cover for authoritarian policies, including the repression of protesters and the deportation of students involved in movements like Gaza solidarity.

What, then, is the path forward? The Socialist Alternative piece contends that “existence is resistance” is not enough; instead, it calls for organized, collective action to secure reforms such as free, trans-inclusive healthcare and fully-funded social services. Examples of recent activism include a sit-in led by the Gender Liberation Movement at the Capitol to protest bathroom bans, and union letter carriers uniting against transphobic bullying by management. The article frames the struggle for trans rights as intrinsically linked with labor movements, immigrants’ rights, and even Palestinian liberation, arguing that the Trump administration’s actions are part of a broader attack on progressive causes.

As the debate rages, voices from across the spectrum—comedians, actors, activists, and politicians—are weighing in, each reflecting the deep divisions and high stakes of the moment. Whether in viral videos or on the campaign trail, the fight over trans rights in America is far from settled, and its outcome will have profound implications for the country’s social fabric.

In a time of heightened rhetoric and political maneuvering, the question remains: can mutual respect and solidarity prevail, or will division and scapegoating continue to define the national conversation?