Or: Why Tolkien would never have agreed with transactivists and why they ought to leave the fandom and boycott all of Tolkien's works.

*= I use "queer" in the sense in which Tolkien uses it in LotR, as that seems closest to what it has come to mean in the course of transactivism. Those TRAs sure are queer people, is what I'm saying.

There is, of course, the fact that Tolkien was very Catholic, but let's leave that aside for a moment.

Only looking at what he has written in his fictional works. I will be focusing on LotR, as I am re-reading that currently, and it's been a while since I read the other books.

First, things that directly concern gender roles. It is notable that while few women appear in the books, those who do appear defy gender roles rather often.

Éowyn, of course. I need not explain that.

Galadriel may not walk around wearing trousers, but she rules her forests. Not because there was no male heir, as far as I can tell, but just because she is just that awesome. And she didn't have to give up romance and marriage to do so.

Luthien goes to fight Morgoth to save her beloved.

(It has been a while since I read the Silmarillion, so I might have forgotten some women in it, but Luthien sure stands out for sheer badassery)

Now, let's look at the men. Do they engage in stereotypically male behaviour?

With the hobbits, I can't think of any example. When they fight, it is with reluctance and without joy. They fight for their lives, not for fun.

They do, on the other hand, enjoy singing, which I am told by people who grew up in sexist households is coded feminine. (Which is idiotic, but that is usually with gender norms.)

Poetry is also a popular hobby, and while in our world almost only men are lauded as great poets, the male poet, among his male peers, is often considered feminine.

They also are mentioned to wash and bathe pretty every time they have the opportunity to do so, which should not be a gendered thing, but let's be honest, it is. It's considered feminine.

Oh, and they cook. Without getting paid for it.

Aragorn and Boromir are pretty typical dudes doing dudely things, but Aragorn at least likes poetry, too. (I can tell why this is, but "death of the author", so ... let's pretend we don't.)

Then there's Legolas and Gimli. Of course, they both love poetry and singing. They are also fighters, which is coded masculine.

And Gimli admires Galadriel. Courtly love was a very manly thing in the times long past that Tolkien writes about, but I would argue that it is not a very manly thing in the days of MRAs and Transactivism. Actually, sincerely admiring a woman for her personality and not having any intent of perving on her (with Galadriels supernatural skills, I think she would know) is something anathema to incels, MRA and their TRA brethren. They would consider a man weak, and, dare I say feminine for it.

With that alone, there is enough material to support the assumption that the author of those books would not have been on board the trans train, because he would not have been convinced that a man who likes poetry, songs, cooks without getting paid, washes regularly and abhors violence must be actually a woman.

Nor that a woman who wears mens clothes and fights, has objections to the gendered expectations put on her by the men in her society, takes on a leadership position, or goes to save her dude in distress must be actually a man.

Oh, and the peoples of Middle Earth have been, according to the Silmarillion, explicitly created by god-like beings.

Any such creation myth does not really support the "born in the wrong body" narrative, as gods don't make mistakes.

Now, on to the less obvious things:

Let's take a look at the hobbits and compare them to the other peoples of Middle Earth.

They are smaller and weaker, but perhaps tougher than humans.

Now, how do the characters treat that difference? Do they ignore it and say it is socially constructed?

No. The Prancing Pony at Bree has special rooms for hobbits, even.

The members of the Fellowship acknowledge that the hobbits cannot walk through as deep snow as the rest of them can.

At no point does anyone pretend that the physical differences between humans and hobbits do not exist.

No one, unless I am much mistaken, expects the hobbits to hold their own in battle the way the humans, elves and dwarves do. It is openly acknowledged that they are at a steep disadvantage in a fight.

Also, the only time when one of the humans uses his physical strength to intimidate a hobbit, it's Boromir under the influence of the ring.

This is a statement by the author. It says: "Physical reality must be acknowledged. A smaller and weaker person is at a disadvantage when fighting a bigger and stronger person. Only someone who is morally corrupted to at least some degree would use their advantage in strenght over a smaller person to intimidate them."

Taken as a general statement, this can also be applied to women.

But I have saved the best for last:

Aragorn made it illegal for humans to enter the Shire. And then he visited his hobbit friends and stayed outside the boundary he had decreed.

Any TRA who still thinks that Tolkien would have been in favour of the abolition of women's spaces ought to read the books again.

Listen, TRAs: You were surprised when Rowling sided with women. I wasn't. I had paid attention to what she actually wrote instead of engaging, as you apparently were, in wishful thinking. Four words: Gryffindor girl dorm stairs.

So trust me on this. If Tolkien ever returns (I presume he himself believed in the resurrection of the flesh, so ... who is to say it can't happen? The end of the world seems to be nigh, looking at the state of it ...) I predict that he will turn out to be gender critical.

So, why not save time and boycott him right now?