It comes down to influence. One politician can only do so much damage, whereas Rowling is very wealthy and can b̶r̶i̶b̶e̶ lobby many politicians

Do you think Rowling has more political effect in the UK than UK politicians, or are you talking global influence here?

My own somewhat cynical take is basically the Planck-principle: Actual progress mostly happens one grave at a time...

I still think from a political effectiveness point-of-view, pushing against Rowling is almost completely futile, because she has no electorate to satisfy and her view (from what I understand, her focus is on "protecting" cisgender women/their spaces from maliciously misdeclared transgender women?) is strawmanny, but difficult to just dismiss/pick apart.

But I can see now how perceived "betrayal" and actual public engagement with personal issues would elicit a much stronger response than an ideologically even more distant politician that just hates you quietly. Thanks for the discussion!