Leaky Interview with GLAAD (The Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation)

113

Oct 24, 2007

Posted by Melissa Anelli
Uncategorized

Since Friday evening’s revelation that Prof. Dumbledore is gay, we’ve seen a lot of confused and oftentimes hurtful response and commentary on the topic. So, we called up GLAAD, the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation, an organization that works specifically with the representation of gay characters and people in media, to help clarify some of the issues and talk about what this fact about Dumbledore means for our culture. A transcript of our interview with Sean Lund, the organization’s director of Messaging and Communication Srategy, follows.

(Please again be reminded that debate is welcome but disrespectful, name-calling, hateful comments are being routinely deleted.)

~*~

The Leaky Cauldron: Thank you very much for taking the time to speak to us. Can you tell us more about GLAAD and what you do?

Sean Lund: GLAAD, the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation, is an organization that has at its core the fundamental understanding that words and images matter, that what people see in the media has a really important impact on how they view the people in the world around them and how they treat the people in the world around them.

I think we have a really great opportunity here to have a longer discussion about Prof. Dumbledore, about the characteristics and the qualiites that he embodies and to talk about the fact that one of the most beloved people in the Harry Potter series is gay.

TLC: What’s the reaction been like for you?

SL: Most of the reaction that we’ve been hearing from folks as we’ve been talking about it with various media outlets has been very positive. We’ve seen, as I’m sure a number of your readers have, some of the message boards at The Leaky Cauldron and elsewhere that have been largely very supportive of J.K. Rowling’s decision. There have been some of those who have seized on the opporutnity that the conversation provides to engage in some stereotypes and some slightly unkind behavior, but overall I think the conversation has been positive.

TLC: What do you think is the most important thing to urge people to remember as they are dealing with this revelation?

SL: I think it’s important to remember that Prof. Dumbledore is exactly the same wise, loyal, kind character that those of us who have been reading the books have always known. He still embodies generosity and integrity and courage and the importance of protecting others. Just because he happens to be gay doesn’t make him better and doesn’t make him worse. It’s just one of the parts of who that character is, which his exactly what being gay is in the real world: it’s just a part of what makes each of us unique and each of us different.

TLC: One of the things we’re noticing is that there are some real misconceptions out there about what it means when you say that somebody is gay. There is a bias toward, an unfortunate assumption that gay means other things, such as child molestation and pedophile. Is this common?

SL: I think any time you’re dealing with the misconceptions and myths and stereotypes about gay people you tend to be coming from a place of ignorance or more commonly fear about what it is like to be gay. I think one of the most important messages of the Harry Potter books is how fear, whether it’s fear of what’s different, whether it’s fear of losing power, whether it’s fear of change, can lead people to do and say things that are at best unkind and at worst sometimes even dangerous.

Some of the comments that we’ve seen about Prof. Dumbledore and some of the other comments that we’ve seen over the past several days relating to this story have kind of crept into those areas of stereotypes and misconceptions, and I think that the really valuable thing that folks like you and other folks that are really Harry Potter fans and other folks in the media are doing, is really raising the level of conversation so that those stereotypes and myths aren’t allowed to go unchallenged.

TLC: Can you remember a recent time when another fictional character has been revealed as gay that has had this kind of impact?

SL: I think that probably the one that springs to mind most readily is the character of Willow on “Buffy the Vampire Slayer,” back, I think it was probably about six years or so ago now when [the show's creator,] Joss Whedon, who revealed in a very gradual way and in a way incredibly authentic for that character that she was gay and introduced her girlfriend Tara, and the two of them became a really wonderful couple on that show. That was a really perfect exmaple of how to do this sort of storytelling and how to create these characters right. When you take a look at how the audience reacted to that, there was such an investment in those characters and in that relationship. The Willow and Tara relationship became in some ways the moral center of that show.

I think very much with how J.K. Rowling has brought Dumbledore out, I think that sort of quality of maintaining the authenticity and maintaining the truth of the character really goes a long way in terms of making sure people stay invested in those characters, and in fact that people could keep even more invested and feel like they have additional points of identification with those characters.

TLC: The Willow comparison also touches on something else – we’ve been getting a little backlash from gay people as well, who complain that it’s yet another gay character killed or was lonely (Tara, Willow’s girlfriend is shot in “Buffy the Vampire Slayer”). Is this a common theme in gay culture as represented in the media?

SL: I think that we have definitely seen some of that criticism and I tend to think about the fact that for many people who have read these books since the very beginning – I happened to come in around the time book three was published – for many readers who are coming into these stories now, they are coming into a series of books where the character of Dumbledore will always have been known to be gay. There are other people who just finished the series with the release of Deathly Hallows who are now able to go back as readers have been doing since the books came out, and go back into the stories and view the characters through this new revelations that have been in the new book or in J.K. Rowling’s recent interviews and really come to a deeper and richer understanding of these characters.

J.K. Rowling’s revelations, could they possibly have happened in the books? I’m not sure, you’d have to ask her. What you’ll see is that she set the stage for all readers of these books, be they those who have already finished them and those who have yet to pick up even the first book, to have a deeper and richer interaction with these characters.

TLC: This is the largest, most popular fantasy series of all time, this is a huge and respected character. To make not just any character but Dumbledore, the kind brilliant professor, Dumbledore, gay – is there any way to quantify what this means to the way that gay people have been portrayed in the media or accepted in culture?

SL: At the heart of GLAAD’s initiative is a very simple idea, that words and images matter, and I think the idea that J.K. Rowling would reveal that Prof. Dumbledore is gay sends a tremendously important message. It sends a message that heroes and people who we respect, and people that we look up to, come in all different shapes and sizes. And I think for the readers of the books, for the people who will see the movies in the future, I think that’s a tremendously important message for them to carry forward.

TLC: Some parents are dealing now with children who are confused about what it is to be gay, and there are children confused because they are taught that it’s bad, and they don’t want to believe their parents who say that it’s bad. What do you suggest parents do, and what do you suggest children whose parents aren’t willing to talk to them, do to understand what this means?

SL: I think a lot of that ties back to what we were talking about earlier, which is that a lot of these stereotypes and myths and misconceptions about gay people really are borne out of a lack of knowledge and more specifically a fear of things that are different and people that are different. I think that when you look back at the Harry Potter books, one of J.K. Rowlng’s most important themes is about treating people with dignity and respect.

I think one of the most important themes of the Harry Potter books is J.K. Rowling’s message about making sure that we treat all people, whether they are the same as us, or whether they are different than us, with dignity and respect. If you think about it, one of the central conceits of the books is that there are purebloods, and muggles and half-bloods, and there is constantly some conflict among those, particularly among those who fear and hate those who are different, and in one very vivid example of that, would call them mudbloods. That’s the sort of unkind language, the sort of stereotypes and sort of misconceptions that really do lead people to mistreat and dehumanize others.

You think about Prof. Dumbledore. Even before any of us knew that Prof. Dumbledore was gay, I think that we can agree that his character would never have approved of mistreating or abusing others or thinking ill of others. Now that we know that he’s gay I think it’s a very important reminder that whether you’re straight or gay or are in the process of figuring that out, being the kind of person who treats others with love and dignity and respect, who looks out for other people, who stands up for them, and who protects them, is really what being a good person and good friend is all about.

TLC: What do you think the overarching impact of this revelation will be on the culture going forward?

SL: When a character like Prof. Dumbledore is revealed to be gay I think it has a tremendously influential impact of readers of all ages. J.K. Rowling’s decision to allow readers to see Dumbledore for all of who he is, and I think also as importantly, her determination to preserve the authenticity of his character both in the films and the books, is going to enrich the power of these stories for generations to come.

I think that this provides a really great opportunity to remind ourselves and for readers of the books to remind themselves about one of the key themes of the Harry Potter series, and that is how fear of what is different can really lead people to do things that are unkind or dangerous and also at the same time elevate the sort of person that people really want to be in terms of the way they treat others. When you hear someone on the playground say “You’re so gay,” or, “That’s so gay,” that’s a word that they’re using as an insult. They’re trying to hurt another person and make themselves feel bigger by making other people feel smaller.

Even before Ms. Rowling revealed that Prof. Dumbledore was gay I can’t imagine that his character would ever have approved of mistreating or abusing others. And now that we know he’s gay it really is an especially important reminder that whether you’re gay or straight, treating other people with dignity and respect really is one of the most important values that we all can share.

~*~





419 Responses to Leaky Interview with GLAAD (The Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation)

Avatar Image says:

A very illuminating interview. Thank You Melissa!

Avatar Image says:

Thanks to Sean Lund for taking his time to give such intelligent comments on this matter. I completely agree with what he said. Dumbledore’s sexuality doesn’t affect his character in any way. He’s the same person he always was.

Avatar Image says:

To Melissa and the TLC staff: a brillant decision to include GLAAD in the discussion! Brava, bravo, and hearty pats on the back!

Avatar Image says:

If this interview makes at least one fan change his mind about a so important intolerance, it will be a great success. It’s has been a good idea to make them participates of it. Good luck and maybe this is the benining of a more tolerant generation :) we’ve to join it.

Avatar Image says:

Absolutely brilliant article Melissa! Thank you for contacting GLAAD – it was wonderful to read thier response. I must add my support to JKR, and to my continued and unceasing respect and love for the character of Dumbledore. These books have been such a treasure in my life and nothing could ever or will ever detract from that. Let’s keep in mind that the current world we live in is full of war, sadness, cruelty and terror – the Harry Potter books have been a constant source for joy and hope! – Let’s not change that! My two sickles worth….:o)

Avatar Image says:

I do believe that it can be seen as him being that orientation discretely in series. I think it just confirms what is harder to see in books. Though, it is possible she just got fed up with stupid questions and tossed it out there, but I doubt she’d do that. Long live Dumbledore in Hallows.

Avatar Image says:

I only read a fraction of the thousands of earlier comments, but saw no reference to the historical context in which Jo has ‘always thought of Dumbledore as gay’.

She has now given Albus’ DoB as 1881 (no birthday yet), meaning that the events surrounding Gellert’s visit and the deaths of Kendra and Ariana are conceived of as happening in 1899, when Oscar Wilde was wandering Europe after his release from Reading Gaol before his death the following year. In other words, a very different world from our own, folks.

By the time homosexual activity between consenting adults was leagalised in the UK in 1967, Dumbledore would have been 86 and Hogwarts’ headmaster for some years.

I mention this simply to point out that someone in his situation was very likely to have not concealed his inclinations and not been sexually active. His huge capacity to love, desite the tragedies of those summer months, is seen in his championing of the rights of oppressed groups and his care for the students of the school to which he devoted his life’s work.

Avatar Image says:

Please delete first ‘not’ from last para of my above post!

Avatar Image says:

Quite a wonderful interview! Thanks for that, Melissa and and Sean Lund! :)

Avatar Image says:

I don’t mean to be off topic. I thought to let you know that Bonnie Wright did an voiceover for Disney’s The Replacements in the episode London Calling. She played the villian. The show will be replayed tonight around 11pm (US time).

Avatar Image says:

A revised version of an earlier posting:

Actually I had assumed that Melissa (and Emerson) would be interviewing JKR during this tour. Perhaps now, with this renewed interest in HP and JKR, an interview would be even more relevent?

I know that many of us have been compiling our questions for JKR, and would like to submit those to Melissa (and Emerson) for JKR to answer….

Frankly, while of mild interest, I (and others, I know) have many other questions regarding the wonderful world and characters that JKR created for our enjoyment. I have five bucks in my wallet, come on, let’s chip in and send Melissa and Emerson back to Scotland!

Or, shall we overanalyze the meaning of Dumbledore’s “flamboyant cut suit of plum velvet” that he wore to visit Tom Riddle? (HBP, ch13 folks)

and now we wait for the ‘encyclopedia’, and only 12 and 1/2 months to wait for the HBP film….

Avatar Image says:

A persons sexuality does NOT define who they are…..GO DUMBLEDORE!!!

Avatar Image says:

Honestly, I don’t need to know more about Albus as gay from Jo. I think she has said all she wanted. Despite she reveals some boyfriend or other canon, I am more interested now on the rest of the story. Jo surprised us, but… do we need to ask her about it from now to 2030? no! there are other great questions here. i don’t find necessary to interview jkr about this.

Avatar Image says:

“BUDB”, Melissa and other Leaky staffers DID kind of interview JKR right before she announced that Dumbledore was gay, they talk about it in the last Pottercast. But yes, a new, more detailed interview would obviously be appropriate now that everyone is making a big deal with those news…

And that was a great interview! :D

Avatar Image says:

It doesn’t sound like the person Leaky interviewed has actually read the Harry Potter books. What do you think?

zr

Avatar Image says:

I wanted to thank both melissa and Sean for this interview. I found it enlightining and enjoyable though know that sadly, it is a uphill battle to change people’s perception when they are set in their ways, or, as many claim, they claim devine superiority on all matters and you cant have a moral discussion with them without them misquoting bible passages to tell you how they are better then you. I am a life long chirstian, and have spent years being attacked because people think I am gay, even though I am not. I understand just how hard it can be putting up with intolerence.

Sean, Well said, and I hope and know you all we continue to fight the injustice of bigottry that is running rampent in this country. kudos and I hope you can continue to break down the misconceptions that seem to be the holding a grasp on american soceity, and even worse, the current administration who takes a anti gay stance of many issues of constitutional equality for all american citizens.

Avatar Image says:

The thing is—the fundamentalist right wing is not the other side. There are Christian fans of Harry Potter, and actually some of them have already posted on their web site. They really do have a problem with someone engaging in lesbian and gay acts, but they also are really compassionate, kind caring people. They were so happy with JKR said there were Christian themes in the book. The fundamentalist right wing are not really Christian. Christ spoke of love; they speak of hate. Anyone who wants to laugh very loudly in the midst of all this should check out the Borowitzreport.com I’m afraid that you won’t enjoy this if you’re a Republican, but aside from the anti-Bush stuff, there is a HILARIOUS line about HP fans..

Bush Seeks to Ban Marriage Between Fictitious Gay Characters Harry Potter Revelation Prompts President’s Move

Congratulations to the Leaky Cauldron for taking leadership in promoting tolerance, love and respect…

Susan

Avatar Image says:

How about an opposing viewpoint?

Just to be tolerant, you know.

Avatar Image says:

Thanks Germain, was on a professional trip and haven’t listened to Potter Cast yet (tho i prefer accurate transcripts to audio, to be honest). I’ll make the time today. Were any new specific details relevent to the characters and plot lines revealed?

My point, ElC, is that any future interview necessarily would include something about the “Dumbledore Revelations”, but far more importantly might get around to asking JKR about all the other questions which interest us. Sorry, I should have been clearer about that….

Personally, this particular revelation is only mildly interesting to me, and only in terms of character development as envisioned by JKR, and perhaps more about what it reveals about JKR as a person. Otherwise, its in the same category for me as the questions “does Aberforth have a kinky thing for goats….” or “does George marry the pretty girl in the village”.

Avatar Image says:

Only if that person promotes tolerance. We have no interest in someone from the religious right wing telling us that homosexuals are not as good of people as everyone else. Disagree with homosexuality, think it’s wrong, fine: insult the people who are, no. When we find a good person for that we’ll let you know.

Avatar Image says:

Like many other readers and fans, I was struck by the Rowling’s revelation that Albus Dumbledore was (is?) gay. As my brother said to me when I came out to him as gay, “I didn’t know before you told me, but now that I know, a lot of things about you make sense…” Andrew Slack of the Harry Potter Alliance observed “the fact that we never would have guessed is what makes Dumbledore being gay so real.”

The interview on your Web site was great- I hadn’t really thought about the critique that the sympathetic gay characters always die. I’d also add that they never get to find love of their own in the same way that straight characters do.

In the end though, I applaud JK Rowling for doing this. There is perhaps no bigger pop cultural institution than Harry Potter and our inclusion therein merely reaffirms what we already know. That we’re here, we’re queer and hopefully more people will get used to it!

Avatar Image says:

Budb, we did find out in the pottercast that Harry was Not a horcrux. Dumbledore called him one for lack of a better term. That was about it.

Thanks for this interview Leaky. I have a friend who worked for GLAAD and it’s a fantastic organization.

Avatar Image says:

So it has come to this.

How terribly,terribly sad.

Avatar Image says:

And, just FYI, no one’s going to have an opposing viewpoint as to whether or not Dumbledore’s gay or should be. JKR said he is, and so he is – someone saying he shouldn’t be, isn’t at issue. We’re not making the argument for whether he should or shouldn’t be, and neither is JKR. He is. Now how we deal with that is what’s at issue – interviewing someone who’s gonig to tell us it’s wrong isn’t presenting an opposing viewpoint. There is no opposing viewpoint to the fact that Dumbledore is gay: it’s a fact now, and that’s it. Identify the opposing viewpoint – that we shouldn’t encourage acceptance of this fact? The argument isn’t whether or not JKR was right to say it, or right to have a gay character. It’s what do we do now, how do we make sure that people can deal with this responsibly? There’s not a clear opposition there.

Avatar Image says:

It was a really great idea to talk to GLADD about this. Really interesting interview and so very true.

Avatar Image says:

An excellent and much needed interview, Melissa….And more to the point, the views of Dumbledore are VERY relevant. He requested, of Draco, “don’t say that name, in my presence”...(Mudblood) He (Dumbledore) was always stressful and mindful of the power of love and hate. He was also a proponent(sp) of tolerance. I think that is a noble thing and a lesson MANY should take away from this “discussion”. See the whole series, and Dumbledore in particular, for what they teach: Tolerance, love of fellow human/and other beings, and friendship. No matter what. Good on, all of you!

Avatar Image says:

Thanks Mollywobble…but that was it? Oh, there are so many details and gaps and questions! For me, the only surprise that came out of JKR’s other talks during her tour was that Dudley (and the Dursleys) survived…I had thought the “five muggles killed in Gaddley” might be the 3 of them, plus their guards…ah well, another prediction gone wrong!

Avatar Image says:

Thank you for keeping the discussions on this site positive and not laden with hateful and stereotypical comments. At the end of the day, his desire to love men (or women) did not diminish his contribution as headmaster or as a great wizard.

Avatar Image says:

for all those who are like: wow, now i totally hate dumbledore; just keep the same perspective you had on him before last friday ever happend. a person’s sexuality is just a thing, not a label.

Avatar Image says:

To the leaky staff: I just wanted to let you know how much i (and many others repelled by the ignorance expressed by some hp fans) appreciate the effort you are putting in the forums, the pottercast, and the general coverage of this apparently quite delicate subject. Even if it some of the hate and repelling comments impressed me, the time and energy that you are spending in making the fans a bit more aware and tolerant impresses me so much more… for us the ones who have to deal with ignorance about these matters not just with our favorite character’s, but with our everyday life, it’s uplifting and inspiring to see people like you stepping up and giving the example.

Avatar Image says:

I really enjoyed reading this interview, but I hesitate to think that there is much to go back and read further into as far as Dumbledore’s character goes. JKR herself said that she never intentionally alluded to his feelings for Grindelwald too strongly in the books. What we have to go on is backstory that she has provided us and is not exactly in print.

Avatar Image says:

Melissa, do you think that the opinion that does not hate or insult gays, but still thinks that homosexualism is not moral, and opposes gay-marriage, is legitimate?

Avatar Image says:

I don’t like the idea of a gay Dumbledor, but he is what he is. It’s easy to tell the world he’s a homosexual after the series is concluded. It would have taken real courage to make that revelation in the text or before the series was over

Avatar Image says:

“Even before any of us knew that Prof. Dumbledore was gay, I think that we can agree that his character would never have approved of mistreating or abusing others or thinking ill of others.”

Well, he was willing to let Harry die, but, you know…

I still think that seeing as Dumbledore’s past history with Grindelwald was so important in DH, it should have been in the book. I’ve already thought of two different ways it could have fit in without sticking out like “Oh my God, stop the whole plot, Dumbledore’s gay!”, and I think that if Harry’s reaction hadn’t overshadowed the plot, the people for whom Dumbledore being gay did overshadow the plot would have had that as their problem and not the book’s.

Avatar Image says:

In general it’s a legitimate opinion, however, we’re not presenting sides of an issue here to determine whether it’s OK that JK Rowling says he’s gay. She does say he’s gay, and we’re not arguing that fact or trying to reach a public consensus. The issue isn’t whether he is, or whether it’s right – the issue is that he IS, and how to most responsibly handle that fact. If you can find a noninsulting way of responsibly handling that that is at odds with this viewpoint, then that’s OK. We’re not presenting an interview that says that homosexuality is wrong – that’s not the issue. We’re not trying to determine whether this was a right or moral choice for JKR to make: We are dealing with the fact that she made it, and how to responsibly handle that now.

Avatar Image says:

Marauder makes a very good point.

Avatar Image says:

Melissa, and all at Leaky, you just keep getting better! Thank you for having such a wonderful approach to all you do :)

Avatar Image says:

I don’t think that people who express prejudice against other people for being just what they are-for example, african american, female, lithuanian, or anything at all-can be said to have an opposing “viewpoint”. It’s not a point of view, it’s a negation of what another person is. To try to distinguish between a moral objection to homosexuality and a bigoted objection to homosexuals is contortionist pseudo-PC blather. In my opinion.

Avatar Image says:

Sorry about the strikethrough. I was trying for an em dash!

Avatar Image says:

It is heart warming to see how well Leaky (and Mugglenet) have handled the whole issue. Bravo well-done.

Someone requested ‘balance’ in the views expressed and Melissa addressed that directly with two comments.

To me there is ‘another side’ of the argument that has already been touched on, but I want to mention again and that is: once the book has been written and published it takes on a life of its own. It has grown up and moved away from home. Its parent, the author, needs to let go and move on.

If the author has not stated or implied something in the book itself then the reader is bound to fill in the blanks with their own imagination. The reader cannot be expected to have researched every interview with the author, so as to know the author’s own opinions on all aspects of their work.

Avatar Image says:

Melissa, Interviewing someone from one of the most militant gay rights groups on this site does in a sense constitute siding with them. It would be appropriate to at least interview someone like John Granger, Nancy Brown, or the folks at Sword of Gryffindor on this issue. I know to many stories about how GLAAD is not just advocating tolerance of gays but are trying to change the way people feel about their religion, their culture, etc. For some reason, only the Christian views are the “intolerant” ones and are not fit to be heard by anyone since they are not “PC”. What about tolerating other view points. Concerning the Dumbledore issue: I was suprised at first but I thought about it and it does make sense in the light of what we find out about him in DH. However, it seems that this was an obsessive infatuation (JK’s words) that lead to destruction (ie. Ariana’s death and his estrangement from his brother). Does Dumbledore see this relationship that he had in a good light? No, he doesn’t. He makes it very clear that he was very foolish and that he had abandoned his family to hatch plans for wizard domination with Grindelwald. This is supposed to be a celebrated gay relationship? A victory for gay rights? How? When an author finishes their work…they don’t own it anymore. It can be interpreted in any way that the reader wishes to. She has said in another interview that she didn’t mean for this information to come out in the books since it wasn’t relevant to the overall plot of the story. This is background information that helps the auther to understand the character’s motivations..nothing more. Since there is no mention of any homosexuality in the books..it can be interepreted that this wasn’t a “gay” relationship. In fact, an editorial for Time magazine has come out saying that this is hardly a victory for gay rights at all. But for this site to be fair and tolerant, I think you should have an interview with a Christian, preferably one who has read the books several times, who is a fan, etc to see what they think instead of only going to gay lobbying groups like GLAAD who have a clear political agenda.

Avatar Image says:

well i was honestly just shocked when i found out, but it wasnt bad shock, nor good..just shock! lol, but this doesnt matter to me, i mean, he’s still dumbledore!

Avatar Image says:

It is difficult for me to express in words the pride and joy I felt when I saw this interview. Really, there’s not much to be said that hasn’t been covered already. I agree that there is no “opposing viewpoint”; the interview expressed excitement and approval at the presence of another positive gay image. As Sean said, the core of their work is that words and images matter. What could be the opposing viewpoint to any of this article? I don’t understand how you can claim that posting just this isn’t fair. JKR said he was gay. Fact. Images and words matter in the perception of the subject. Fact. What would an opposing viewpoint be? Would we be asking for another viewpoint if JKR had said he was of a different race or religion?

Anyway, that’s been covered by Melissa here in the comments. Twice. I’m just writing to agree that yes, as a gay man, I find this revelation to be a positive one. I think much of the anger and agitation with it comes from the embedded idea that because he didn’t fall into a gay stereotype that it’s in some way deceitful or bad. Because Dumbledore isn’t Jack McFarland, he’s not the network approved, family-friendly gay. I agree with the statement that because we didn’t know, the fact is made more real.

His sexual orientation has no bearing on the quality of his character. He still made the decisions he made, spoke the wisdom of his years, and wielded the massive power he controlled. He was still incredibly human, and so much the better. I think, if anything, it’s a huge insight to how much more of his life included pain and loss. Jo was asked if he had ever deeply loved. She said yes… and it was a man. Which given the time he lived in and the outcome of that relationship makes him even more human than one could imagine.

Yes. I’m proud of this interview. I’m proud to work for a website (yup, I’m a staffer) that sees the importance of exhibiting a mature and educational way to present this material to its fans in such a way that hate and defamation can hopefully be curtailed. And if you’re really still wanting to get angry about this particular interview, well… homosexuals aren’t the only group of people with an organization watching their backs against defamation… and these other groups were openly represented in these books without anyone batting an eye.

-Josh

Avatar Image says:

What’s exactly the difference between not insulting/hating homosexuality and calling it amoral? Is being called amoral NOT an insult? Is it not hateful? “Oh you’re ok but this huge part of who you are is amoral and despicable.” How does that even work?

That said, I applaud Leaky on its responsible treatment of the entire situation. The GLAAD interview is exactly the type of thing that should be following this revelation.

Avatar Image says:

“being gay” is WRONG!-that’s still my oppinion no matter what this interview says! ...Dumbledore is sadly begining to lack style :( *So Albus will always remain straight in my head.

Avatar Image says:

Go straight Albus…Finally someone with DECENT morals! YAY!!!!!!!

Avatar Image says:

I quite agree!

Avatar Image says:

I don’t believe how harsh some of the mainstream media have been on this discovery. I’m from Napervillle, IL. We have an all-out party every release for a Potter book; the town literally gathers 40,000 people in a rally to celebrate it. Our local paper has really bit into this topic. www.napersun.com There is a blog down below that talks about the topic right away. MY Big Fat MOuth is the name of the blog.

I’ve already left my words.

Avatar Image says:

two headed boy,

do you honestly know what being hateful is? To call homosexual acts a sin is not hateful. I have been hearing on here and others that gays do not identify themselves by their sexuality but if you state an opinion that believes that homosexual acts are sinful then you are automatically considered hateful. Why is that? I guess its the case that gays do identify themselves soley by who they are attracted to. Otherwise, it wouldn’t bother them so much if someone says that it is sinful. That is what Christians, Muslims, some Jews, etc believe. It is not hateful to think that. What, are only certain views ok to express now? Only if it fits in with the “PC”, “tolerant” agenda? We all have a part of us that is prone to evil, to do wrong, etc. Some people believe that homosexual acts (note…I said ACTS…not the fact that the person is a homosexual) are sinful. Why can’t those who believe this express this opinion or are some opinions more tolerant than others..are more superior than others and therefore are not fit to be heard in a public forum. If we are going to go in this direction…watch out! The Harry Potter books should teach us that it is wrong to shut up certian groups of people because they don’t believe what society teaches and believes.

Avatar Image says:

Two-HeadedBoy, thes opinion that homosexuality is not moral does not hate the men who love men. it does say, that their deeds are wrong.

Avatar Image says:

Sure, if GLAAD is on the side of accepting this responsibly then I side with them and not with those promoting hate and intolerance instead. But again: We are NOT taking sides about whether it was right or wrong for JKR to put this out there. Some may, but this is not a “sides” issue. JKR didn’t ask us to make the decision for her – we are not trying to achieve consensus – we are not asking public opinion about whether it’s right or wrong. The fact is that Dumbledore is gay. How do we handle this responsibly? That’s the question. GLAAD (which is hardly militant) is experienced at handling that issue. That is why they were interviewed.

Avatar Image says:

just for you above, comments are not a place to debate (that’s what forums are for) but to say something about the article this relates to. This isn’t about anyone’s personal beliefs, but an interview from a respected organization regarding a character in the books we all love.

And its interivews like this that set Leaky apart from other fan sites, and make it the place news organizations go to.

Avatar Image says:

I find this whole thing so interesting. When I read that Jo said Dumbledore was gay, my first thought was, “what? Uh…where she getting that?” Now obviously it’s her world and if she say he’s gay then he’s gay. And what’s more, that information doesn’t change my love for the character at all. But what does surprise me is that people are cheering her for saying so. If I was part of the gay community, rather than cheer her, I would want to know why she didn’t say so in the books themselves? How can this be such an important thing when she didn’t even make it part of the actual books? It would have been very easy too – Rita could have discovered it when she dug around for her book. Or when Dumbledore had his heart to heart with Harry at the end he could have indicated it there. But months later? She throws out a “oh by they way, he’s gay”? I don’t see that as cause for celebration.

Avatar Image says:

And also to the one person who posted under six different names, and constituted all of the call for a religious right wing response, keep in mind impersonation is against our TOU. Thank you.

Avatar Image says:

Melissa, in fairness, you could have got someone else to interview than a gay lobbying group. That is what I am saying. I have only seen interviews on this issue from gay rights groups on this site and others and I feel that they should not be the ones to have the last say on this issue. I know that this site doesn’t like it..but this kind of debate has opened up a who can of worms and has caused a split within Harry Potter fandom. I love the books and I have defended them..as many other Christians have defended the books from others who have thought that the books advocated devil worship and who knows what. Adding this revelation to it is just going to stoke the fires further :(.

Avatar Image says:

I’m not personally gay and I do not think gay people define themselves by their sexuality; in fact, I never said they did. It is, however, still a part of who they are.

I think to call a homosexual amoral purely because of who they love is hateful. That’s just my opinion. You can put your quotes around tolerant like it’s a joke, or call it an “agenda” all you want, but that doesn’t make it any less intolerant. There is nothing wrong with being gay any more than there is something wrong with being straight.

Harry Potter teaches us to stand up against bigotry and intolerance. Those that call gay people amoral and bigots. If it is because of your beliefs, then your beliefs are bigoted.

Avatar Image says:

This is about how to deal with a gay character in media responsibly. That is GLAAD’s area of expertise. Find someone else with sufficient expertise other than a gay rights group, and we’ll be happy to speak to them.

Avatar Image says:

ha ha!

Avatar Image says:

two headed boy, what you have just said is very bigoted. You have painted a whole group of people with a very broad brush as being these “hateful” “bigoted” people. Why is that not a bigoted remark? So, you don’t think what you just said was “bigoted”? Calling homosexual acts sinful is not bigoted. It is what we believe. My beliefs are not hateful. I don’t hate gay people at all. I have worked with gay people, I have been friends with gay people. I don’t know how old you are or what you believe…but you should respect other people’s beliefs without calling them bigoted. That is wrong

Avatar Image says:

Melissa, I think that only seeing Dumbledore in light of his sexuality is short changing the character. This adds some motivation to his character, but nothing more and since it is not hinted at very well in the actual text then it is still open to interpretation because as much as JK Rowling doesn’t like to admit it…she doesn’t own it anymore. The books are out there for anyone to interpret now. Dumbledore is not portrayed as a gay character. His past relationship with Grindelwald is only hinted at in the last book. We can make inferences that he is gay by looking at everything but nothing more. I think that by only getting an interview with GLAAD makes what is an issue for literary interpretation into a political issue that honestly I don’t think Rowling was going for. That’s why I wondered why LC decided to interview a gay lobbying group.

Avatar Image says:

Very interesting article.Thank you for posting it for all of us to read TLC staff.I doubt that the article will have a huge impact on the issue but I am sure that it will make some people think.Even if it only makes 1 person think about tolerance it would have served it’s purpose.Melissa I do not know how old you are but you are well opinionated and do an excellent job with the site.Keep it up TLC staff :).Blessed be

Avatar Image says:

that should say, “only revealed in the last book. “

Avatar Image says:

Her lawyers would take severe issue with the question of whether JKR owns the books anymore. :)

Nothing in here infers that only seeing Dumbledore in light of his homosexuality is the right way to go. In fact we say quite the opposite.

Avatar Image says:

I have been watching this unfold for days, and I have to say that it hurts my heart to the core. More importantly, it hurts God’s.

I love my Lord and Savior Jesus Christ with all my heart, soul, and mind; and I do my best everyday to walk in that faith in order to show others how much Jesus loves them, wants to know them, and wants them to know Him.

Never in my walk with Christ have I – or will I EVER – tell someone, that because they love someone of the same sex, they are going to hell or unloved by God. Jesus would never say it. So neither will I.

Avatar Image says:

Thank you Leaky for doing this. Brillant idea for doing this interview. _

Avatar Image says:

Why should I respect beliefs that say that simply because an adult man loves another adult man their acts are shameful and amoral? Why should people have to give ideas like that credence? Do we do the same for racists and anti-semites? I guess we would if a book written thousands of years ago told us to. I’m not even saying you can’t have your beliefs. I’m just saying they’re bad beliefs to have as they shame an entire group of people who have done nothing wrong.

That’s all I have to say about that. Again, much respect to Melissa and Leaky as a whole. You guys are doing a great job.

Avatar Image says:

Melissa, I’m sure you know what I am refering to. Jk Rowling has written the books. They are published and so the literary interpretation can begin. To what extent that the author owns what she has written is in debate on some other sites that are dealing with this issue. She has said herself that the characters take on a life of their own and that they will be interpreted in so many different ways by different people. She choose not to reveal dumbledore’s sexuality in the books because it wasn’t relevant. This isn’t part of “canon” but extra canonical information that can be accepted or rejected by the reader. There are many things in her books that she may not have intended to be there. This is true with all literature.

Avatar Image says:

Two-headed boy: oh please…her we go again..”there is no need to respect Christian’s beliefs or anyone else’s that doesn’t jive with my own”, right? Think about what you are saying. Did I say anywhere that men loving other men is a sin? No. Do you have any idea what constitutes homosexual acts? Probably not and I am not going to say what they are here. We believe that the homosexual acts are sinful. Can’t there at least be some tolerance and respect for opposing beliefs? Especially if they are not PC and socially acceptable? I don’t agree with the beliefs of Hindus, Buddhists, Wiccas, etc but I do respect their beliefs. I don’t consider them hateful or bigoted. But its perfectly ok for people in general to riducule and disrespect Christian beliefs and to call us bigoted. Can’t you see that what you are doing is the same thing? That this is intolerant and bigoted? But I guess in your case as well as others, its fine…thats ok….we can ridicule Christians and their beliefs and shut them up by calling them bigoted just because our beliefs are different than what mainstream society believes.

Avatar Image says:

Thanks to this organization for so clearly answer. I don`t know why people feel so angry if dumbledore is Gay, I don`t think this affect any for the great fictional person he really is.

I think this will settled any argument about this subject.

Avatar Image says:

Rachel: You are generalizing homosexuals by assuming they all perform the same acts. Many of them are probably as disgusted of the thing I assume you’re thinking of as straight folks are (who, by the way, are not all innocent of the very same act, by any stretch of the imagination).

Avatar Image says:

Rowling’s “revelation” has left me feeling completely betrayed, angry, absolutely confused, deeply deeply hurt and sick to my stomach….literally. Why, JK, Why?

Why now….AFTER you cashed all the royalty checks? Are you so desperate for attention that you just had to come up with “just one more thing? just to keep you in the limelight?

Do I care? You bet! But I care about is the lies! Your omission lacks courage, character and honorability.

My first thought was that in the past, other young men were “inflamed”...about HITLER! Power breeds followers, history is full of examples other than your own example of Peter Pettigrew and others demonstrates.

To use the line of another author “With great power, comes great responsibility”. You failed in yours, JK and I, for one again feel as if you’ve betrayed us all in favor of keeping your name in the limelight.

Shame on you!

Avatar Image says:

Bratpack- you’re my kind of Christian. Thank you for not succumbing to the bigotry and hatefulness of others.

Avatar Image says:

GJ- she gave that interview in front of a packed house. She didn’t need the attention.

Avatar Image says:

Having read carefully every post above, these things seem quite clear -

1 – This is the most divisive topic (by far) that has ever been raised about our beloved world of Harry Potter; 2 – The fact that it plainly is so divisive should not escape the notice of those who would like to paint all of us who are deeply uncomfortable with the liberal consensus (as reflected with the above interview with the militant gay rites group) as being “religious nuts” or whatever. 3 – Melissa -It is your site (now more than ever) and you can use it to make whatever political points you wish, but if you invite debate, you should not react with scorn to that very great number of your long -time readers who are very, deeply shocked and saddened.

4 – Let me tell you how it has affected me. Do you remember the reason that JKR gave for killing off Hedwig ? She said that it was the final end of Harry’s childhood -his stuffed toy, if you like -he was now an adult and he (and the reader) had to be shocked out of their previous situation. For me, with the publication of the final book and now this (in my eyes) totally unnecesssary piece of information -AND now Leaky being used as a mouthpiece for gay rights, I feel as if I have been punched in the guts. It is as if -I am no longer wanted and the whole wonderful world of Harry Potter is now over.

Avatar Image says:

Thanks Melissa, GLAAD and TLC for this interview!

Avatar Image says:

Melissa, thank you for posting this interview, and also thank you for responding to some of the comments here—your presence seems to be helping to keep the conversation from spiraling out of control. Great job as always!

Avatar Image says:

ROONALD, sweety, there is no such thing as decent morals, obviously everybody would think of his own morals as decent. That why those are your morals in the first place.

Avatar Image says:

The beautiful irony behind all this is that we’ll now find people turning against Dumbledore because of his sexuality, who had otherwise loved him unequivocally beforehand, its not hatred of gays so much as it is their own homophobic disgust at themselves when they realise they’ve been so fond of a character that has turned out to be gay all along. I for one applaud Jo for revealing this wonderful secret about Dumbledore, I always had an inkling!

Avatar Image says:

M. Jones (just a question- not trying to attack) What in the last 2 books was so wonderful? They took such an adult, violent, and real turn it feels as though the wide eyed wonder has been gone for awhile. Why does this particular blow hurt so bad? I’m all for him being gay or whatever, but I’m trying to understand the opposition from someone rational.

Avatar Image says:

M Jones… wow. GJ… wow.

I’d be willing to bet that in front of thousands of people, when being asked a direct question about Dumbledore and love, that she came up with his sexual orientation on the spot to get more attention. I guess she did the same with the info about Neville and Hannah getting married.

And I fail to see how this interview makes Leaky a mouthpiece for gay rights. I guess I missed the hot button issues in the interview… gay marriage, right to adopt, the legality of intimate acts between same sex couples…

Oh, wait. They weren’t there. The article was about handling this information in a mature and non-hateful way. And that point seems to have been missed entirely.

If the fact that Jo had “always pictured [Dumbledore] as gay” honestly makes you distrust the series and a site that is promoting a mature approach to the material, then you really should re-evaluate your outlook on the entire world. If you honestly think you live a 100% gay-free lifestyle, you’re fooling yourself. You are severely fooling yourself. The oldest statistics say that Dumbledore is within 10% of the male population. That’s one out of every ten. We sell you clothes, we write you tickets, we act on your TV shows, we serve you food in restaurants, we do your taxes, we write your paychecks, we make your cars, we build your homes, we teach your kids, we put out your fires… if the background information on a fictional character upsets you that much, then I can’t imagine what life will be like for you when you start counting people in groups of ten and wondering which of them is gay.

-Josh

Avatar Image says:

Thanks for the interview it was interesting to see how the gay community is reacting to the news. :]

Avatar Image says:

Rachel saidL “instead of only going to gay lobbying groups like GLAAD who have a clear political agenda.”

Everyone has an “agenda”. EVERYONE. This idea that interviewing a Christian group would give you a view on this revelation that has no “agenda” is ridiculous. And why should they interview a Christian group about this? They didn’t interview a gay group when Jo talked about the Christian themes on the book.

Avatar Image says:

well done guys, well done.

Avatar Image says:

always_a_sidekick, the 10% statistics are based on one questionable poll, 50-60 years ago.

Avatar Image says:

Also, M Jones, so you know. As JKR said the books are a lesson in tolerance. We don’t appreciate angry comments any more than you do. So even if you don’t like what we have to say, you are welcome here.

Avatar Image says:

Someone-

That’s precisely my point. Do you honestly think that the number would be any less 50 or 60 years later? If it were, homosexuals would not be a part of mainstream television, movies, music, magazines, politics or in any way in the public eye at all.

Avatar Image says:

Yeah Melissa, why don’t you ask Fred Phelps, valiant preacher of the gospel that he is, for an interview just to be “Fair and Balanced”.

NOT! Just kidding!! (ducks the flying veggies).

This was a wonderful interview. Thanks GLAAD for taking the time to talk to us and thanks Melissa for contacting them!

Avatar Image says:

Thanks for the GLAAD perspective. That was really wise of you guys and much appreciated.

I’ve said this in the forums, and I’ll say this again here. If you think I am evil, amoral or otherwise inferior for being a gay woman and run into me at a con or other event, I really do hope you’ll say so to my face, because I suspect when you realize I’m a person pretty much exactly like you (example: my day was consumed by a broken toilet, my mother recovering from surgery and a sick cat—very banal, very not evil), it might be harder than you think to say it, and, hopefully, it may well encourage you to rethink your worldview.

Avatar Image says:

I also want the thank TLC for setting such a great example. This weekend has been a whirlwind of emotion. I have let myself get worked up and write things I regret. I’m sure there are others who feel the same way. TLC, however, has responded to the issues with respect and maturity. So, thank you for bringing order to this chaos. Hugs all around. -Sarah

Avatar Image says:

I find it most amusing that the smartest, character, the most intelligent, the better educated of the series is a homosexual.

Knowing that JK herself is heterosexual makes me smile.

What a curve!

That was well placed JK. What a lesson.

Avatar Image says:

You know, I’d love to read an interview from an opposing group so long as its not a religious one. A real arguement and not one that claims, “Cause God said so.”

Avatar Image says:

Thank you for posting a great interview. I hope Melissa does get the opportunity to interview Jo again and find out more from her about this topic. I’m very surprised that Jo never mentions (via Rita Skeeter or others) any anti-gay bias in the wizarding world, even though the pureblood/mudblood issue is at the heart of the story.

Avatar Image says:

Wow! I must say this was an amazing article. A lot of people don’t understand what this means to the story and Dumbledore. Thanks Leaky for thinking about it enough to do this interview!

Avatar Image says:

I wish we would have opinions from canon – no one wants to be insensitive and bigoted. But Dumbledore was in the closet and remained in the closet through the entire book and looked upon his past same sex attraction as something he regretted. We’re projecting onto Dumbledore our own wishes – but is that what the story actually says? No – Dumbledore is a good example of a the traditional Christian view, that acting out on gay feelings is immoral and Christians have choices not to follow on their desires if Scripture teaches that they are immoral. If we look at what Book VII shows us, Dumbledore appears to have come to the same conclusion since his own infatuation (and that was what it was – like Harry’s infatuation of Cho, only with horrific results). It’s not the fact that Dumbledore may struggle with homosexual attractions, but what he did with it – and I have to say, Rowling treats it from a traditional Christian point of view. That’s why I raise whether those who advocate gay lifestyles have actually read the books (Melissa’s interview appears to illustrate that this particular person has not – but please, correct me I am mistaken). I don’t think that if some who may want to live an outed and active lifestyle – well, Dumbledore is NOT their guy. For what we know from the books, Dumbledore lead a chaste and celibate life. But this is from the stories themselves – I do wish we’d discuss it from the stories and not what we wish it might be. Do you see what I mean?

ZR

Avatar Image says:

Great article!

Melissa, so that wasn’t multiple people, just multiple personalities? LOL!

I actually liked the way we probably wouldn’t have guessed that Dd was gay. Like someone said, it was more realistic, and his sexual orientation wasn’t what he or the books were about. No where in the books is sex ever mentioned, or even sexual relationships, just various kinds of relationships. Budding romance and the feelings that go with it, but not sex. Even the mention about Dd’s relationship with Grindelwald was about feelings, not any ‘act’.

It can be seen as ‘how would we respond to the revelation that a loved one/relative was gay?’ There’s no reason to love or respect that person any less. They’re still the same wonderful person! Shouldn’t you love them for who they are, not who they bed? ...and when sex is in no way involved, what does it matter? In fact, when sex isn’t involved, doesn’t that make the love all the purer, albeit misplaced in this case.

I don’t get the argument that one can accept another as being gay, but not the ‘acting on it’. Can heteros act as who we are, but not allow homosexuals to do the same?

I’m with you, Bratpack, that’s what true Christianity should be about! You are a rare rose among an increasing number of thorns! You are the example others should see, not the vocal majority that scares them away! Kudos!

Avatar Image says:

I honestly think this whole subject is being blown out of proportion, and I don’t think Jo wanted it to be, judging by the way she told us Dumbledore was a homosexual, so honestly and matter-of-factly; then moved on. Remember people, this is a book, a work of fiction. It’s being taken too seriously, and I don’t think GLAAD should have gotten involved, either. It seems as though the gay rights groups are now going to think this is a huge victory for them.

I agree with what Rachel is saying here, about being “tolerant”. If Leaky wants to be tolerant, they should also interview a Christian who has read Harry Potter, and get their take on this whole thing. When it comes to Harry Potter and other such controversial issues, Christians are generally portrayed at hate-mongers and such because of what we beleive, but the truth of the matter is, Christianity is an “intolerant” faith. It is. We only have one God, and a certain lifestyle that does not tolerate certain things, homosexuality being one of them. I don’t want this to be a sermon, so I’ll stop here.

Anyway, I’m really confused as to why Jo told us about Dumbledore being a homosexual AFTER the book had been published. I honestly think she should have included it in Deathly Hallows or not at all. I don’t like or respect Jo - or Dumbledore, for that matter- any less because of it, but it is a bit saddening and dissapointing to me. It seems as though she was trying to diversify the characters even more, as if she though “Hey, why don’t I throw in a homosexual character too?”.

Also, I actually wonder if Dumbledore was really still a homosexual by the time Deathly Hallows came around, or if his infatuation with Grindlewald was just a one time thing. Like, did he have any more loves after Grindlewald? And also, did Grindlewald reciprocate the feelings? I doubt it.

Bratpack, what a great testimony!

Avatar Image says:

I would like to thank Rachel for her view-point, and wish to respond. I am a gay Chrstian, who is a HUGE HP fan. This was a victory for gays, straights, and everyone else. It proved that it doesn’t matter who you love, or what your orientation is, what matters is how much we can change the world for the better. JKR shows us that Dumbledore sacrificed a relationship with another man, in order to defeat evil. God Bless.

Avatar Image says:

I don’t know, Mary. Maybe we do have only one God, but if thats the case, he was the god of people long before Christianity came around and homosexuality has existed since man evolved- earlier if you count the fact that animals sometimes practice homosexuality as well. What happened to all those people before God sent Christianity to oppose it? Did they go to hell for acting on the only nature they knew? Why is it that God suddenly become so intolerant when Jesus came to earth. Jesus was supposed to promote love and understanding.

Avatar Image says:

I am a huge Harry Potter fan who has just heard the news of Jo Rowling’s announcement. How could she do this? It almost ruins the series for me and I wish I could turn back time and make it so I nevr heard this sad fact.

Avatar Image says:

Great work. Thanks, Melissa!

Avatar Image says:

Mary: “I agree with what Rachel is saying here, about being ‘tolerant’. If Leaky wants to be tolerant, they should also interview a Christian who has read Harry Potter, and get their take on this whole thing.”

Wh>? Why is a Christian’s viewpoint any more relevant than an Athiest’s, or a Muslim’s, or a Buddhist’s?

Avatar Image says:

For Jhon Granger’s thoughts on the issue, go here:

http://hogwartsprofessor.com/?p=198

It is a very good post.

Avatar Image says:

ZoeRose:

I hear ya, pal. To be blunt, I think the way Jo’s dealt with this whole issue is pretty crappy; from the months-later revelation to the fact that, when you get down to it, what’s actually IN the books is hardly a ringing endorsement of the positives of homosexuality…

Avatar Image says:

Joy, the Bible says that God created man. The first man, Adam. I really hate to bring up this cliche, but “God created Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve”. God gave the law to the Israelites (in Numbers and Dueteronomy, I beleive) and there was a law that said not to practice homosexuality. The Bible is explicitly clear on this, and this is what I beleive. Yes, Jesus promoted love and understanding, but he didn’t promote things against God’s law.

I don’t want to get into a debate with you on Christianity. This is what I believe, and it’s not my fault if you have a problem with it.

Avatar Image says:

Fenm, I’m not saying that a Muslim’s or Buddist’s viewpoint is less relavant, but as Christians seem to be the ones with the most complaints about Harry Potter, why not get their take? I haven’t heard any Muslims complaining…?

Avatar Image says:

Nice interview.

I don’t mind that he’s gay. Truth be told, I don’t care, although it kind of justifies his actions regarding Grindelwald a little more as well as his knowledge of love. I did wonder why he knew so much about love but had so little evidence of it.

(...you know, I actually wondered if Voldemort was gay… this based solely on the fact he didn’t ‘use’ Bellatrix.)

Avatar Image says:

Not trying to debate Mary just wondering what you thought. Oh and if you can clear this up: What does the bible say about dinosaurs? How does it explain creatures that existed 65mil years before man when the world was- according to the bible- created in a week?

Avatar Image says:

GLAD? Aren’t those the people attacked Jerry Lewis for making an innocent joke about a made-up gay person very late into a telethon? You know those telethons he has putting on for over 40 years to help kids with Muscular Dystrophy? Yep, he’s an evil one alright.

This was an opinion piece – Sean Lund’s opinion was that this was a great achievement for mankind. Now let’s hear from someone who is devastated by the decision.

The reason that will never happen is because EVERYTHING is taken as an insult by gay groups. Even if you simply disagree with them they you are a “bigot”, or “hateful”. Just read the comment boards and you can see that.

Avatar Image says:

ZoeRose: I think you make an interesting point. However, you call Dumbledore’s love of Grindelwald an “infatuation” but that’s not necessarily true, is it? Rowling said he “fell in love with Grindelwald” not that he “became infatuated.”

You also say that Rowling treats it from the traditional Christian standpoint, but I think here you’re guilty of the same thing you’re opposing. I could just as easily say Dumbledore refrained from discussing his sexuality, etc. because he was just too wounded from the situation with Grindelwald. That said, your viewpoint was eloquent and reasonable.

Avatar Image says:

Roger,

Jerry Lewis’ remarks would have been unacceptable if made in a racial or religious context. Why should they be acceptable in a context based on who one chooses to have romantic affection for?

If you wonder why any group is “sensitive,” it’s just generally because it hurts more to be kicked in the same place twice, than once. And I think we all know it’s a whole lot more than twice.

Avatar Image says:

God does not approve of the homosexual lifestyle. The cities of Sodom and Gomoarah are a testimony to that fact. I am a Harry Potter fan. I am no longer a Dumbledore fan.

Avatar Image says:

Clay,

Your God and my God, or at least your understanding of God and my understanding of God (and, as an aside, my understanding of the history of Biblical translation on that matter) have a difference of opinion there.

Avatar Image says:

Odd that everyone assumes Dumbledore was in the closet. We don’t know that he was. Perhaps he, like every other Professor except Lupin, did not discuss his home life with his students because it’s not something you generally discuss with your students.

Avatar Image says:

Beautiful article.

Thank you for posting this.

I hope everyone learns to be a little more tolerant.

Avatar Image says:

Great interview Leaky, I think this was very much needed! :)

Avatar Image says:

So all the jokes out there about a priest, a rabbi and a lawyer walking into a bar are insensitive and hurtful? Of course not. It’s the same think with the Jerry Lewis comment.

Sure, gay folks have every reason to be sensitive, and it is a sad truth that there are people in the world who would wish them harm. That is not an excuse for them to go on the offensive if the word ‘gay’ is used in anything but the most positive possible light.

How many people on these boards have had pages and pages of hate thrown at them from the gays simply because they stated a negative opinion of JKR outing Dumbledore? Worse, how many comments have been DELETED for simply stating an opinion?

And while I’m ranting, I’m really sick of all the religious talk here too. If you don’t agree with homosexuality then have the courage to say so on your own – there is no need to quote scripture to justify your opinion. As far as religion goes, everyone is entitled to their own.

Avatar Image says:

Was JK Rowling afraid to disclose this revelation early on. I say she was because you can bet that a lot of us would not have bought these books had we known she was going to do this. I certainly will not spend any more of my money on anything with her name on it.

Avatar Image says:

I don’t see why this has become such a big issue. It’s not that big of a deal. Dumbledore was a great character before we found out about this interesting detail about his past and he’s just an even more interesting character now that we know. It hasn’t changed anything for me.

Avatar Image says:

Little Me: Odd that everyone assumes Dumbledore was in the closet. We don’t know that he was. Perhaps he, like every other Professor except Lupin, did not discuss his home life with his students because it’s not something you generally discuss with your students.

That’s a good point. And the story is centered on Harry Potter. I don’t think he would’ve been that interested in those details of Dumbledore’s life.

Avatar Image says:

Mary said:

“Joy, the Bible says that God created man.”

Not everyone believes in the Bible.

“God gave the law to the Israelites (in Numbers and Dueteronomy, I beleive) and there was a law that said not to practice homosexuality.”

Leviticus, 18:22, and 20:13.

“The Bible is explicitly clear on this, and this is what I beleive. Yes, Jesus promoted love and understanding, but he didn’t promote things against God’s law.”

True. So why do some Christians eat shrimp and bacon?

Avatar Image says:

Well Cathy Smith, how about you go somewhere and tell people who actually care because we don’t. The people on this site actually like Harry Potter and respect JK Rowling. So that means you don’t belong here.

Avatar Image says:

i really think this is a typical narrowminded american discussion, im from the netherlands and on our forums it doesn’t even excist it’s just accepted and doesn’t change a thing!!the people who complain about gay people here don’t read that much if you know what i mean.

Avatar Image says:

Again, if this ‘devastated’ person has some special expertise on how to be responsible about accepting this fact, we’d be happy to interview them. We’re not asking for a referendum on whether it’s right or wrong, and neither is JKR. We have this fact, and have now to deal with it: how to do so responsibly is what’s at issue. The fact of one being devastated doesn’t make them an expert on that topic.

I am no expert on the Bible, by the way, but I believe it also says you can’t touch the skin of a dead pig or work on the Sabbath or wear threads with different fibers or a lot of other things that people, even religious ones, regularly do now. Interpretation is just that.

Thanks, all, for your respectful tone here as compared to some other places around the site in response to this issue. I appreciate it.

Avatar Image says:

In light of all the bashing of Dumbledore, I thought I would post this quote from JKR:

“It’s certainly never been news to me, that a brave and brilliant man could love another man.”

If you don’t like Dumbledore being gay, fine, you don’t have to like it, but don’t use Jesus to justify your hate and/or homophobia.

People were murdered throughout the series for not being pure-blood (normal), and yet so called fans are upset that Dumbledore is gay… Really, isn’t that just a detail? It does not define him as a person, and yet, he now lays before your judgment. A bit Hypocritical???

As a Christian, I implore the small minded poster’s, open your mind, and get a life.

Avatar Image says:

Mr. Lund was quite eloquent, wasn’t he? A little redundant, but still—eloquent. And what he had to say was especially interesting because he’s so familiar with the books.

Thanks, Leaky, for finding someone so well qualified to discuss this subject from one very relevant perspective.

Avatar Image says:

I find it unfortunate that there are HP readers who now appreciate these fantastic books less because of the recent mention by JKR that Dumbledore is gay. I would have hoped that with all of the lessons of acceptance and love that are wound through the series, fans of HP would react much better to this situation.

All that anyone is being asked to do here is to respect the opinions of others. If you feel that homosexuality is wrong, then don’t be homosexual yourself. If you feel Christian beliefs make no sense, don’t be a Christian and don’t subscribe to those beliefs. A person’s sexuality does not affect anyone else. Have some respect.

When I am older and read the HP books to my children, I will answer every question they have about anything in the story, including anything about the characters’ sexuality, and teach them to accept and celebrate the differences between themselves and others. I hope that my children will never know the intolerance that some of you have for other people and ideas.

Avatar Image says:

Some christians are just navis and Klu Klux Klan hiding behind the bible and pretending they love God, because deep down they know they’re horrible people and they know that they will go to hell if they pretend to be christians.

Avatar Image says:

Rachel and M Jones make extremely valid points regarding this issue and the interview Leaky did with GLAAD. It is one thing to present the “tolerant” side of the issue when reality suggests that those who call for tolerance do not want to tolerate or accept the opposing viewpoint.

The unfortunate problem is that some of the people who are posting here and feel homosexuality is not morally acceptable, are using hateful and hurtful language to try to make their point.

The opposing side is just as wrong to dismiss those views as “close-minded” or “homophobic” while maintaining they have more compassion.

Avatar Image says:

Whether or not Dumbledore was gay, played no obvious part in the stories. I think it’s great that Jo Rowling chose not to reveal it until now, as we all got used to him, just as himself, with no extraneous layer of “judgement”. Anyone who has a problem with it now, really needs to ask themselves why it’s important, what possible relevance could it have? Not a single word in the books has changed - Dumbledore is still as noble and flawed a person as ever. Apparently no one at Hogwarts has made an issue of it either - which is how things should be in our muggle world too.

Avatar Image says:

Some christians are just nazis and KKK hiding behind the bible and pretending they love God, because deep down they know they’re horrible people and they know that they will go to hell if they DON’T pretend to be christians.

Avatar Image says:

I am a woman, an African-American, a Christian, and a heterosexual. I say this so you will know where I’m coming from.

I have seen racism my entire life and I know how terribly hurtful it is. If you have ever had a slur hurled at you because of your gender, ethnicity, religion, or sexual preference, then you should understand just how insidious any sort of bigotry is.

Nowadays, it is acceptable in many circles to be a homophobe. Some people say that Gays have become the new “n__”. I understand the subjugation Gays have to deal with and I am enraged by it. I understand the subtle and not so subtle offenses heaped upon them every day.

Slave masters kept their slaves away from books and other society because they understood what knowledge could lead to. Slave masters feared their slaves just as many people now fear Gays. That kind of fear leads to bigotry and bigotry invariably leads to discrimination. It has happened throughout human history. The only thing required to sustain bigotry – ignorance.

I’ve never been a bible thumper, but I do believe in “do unto others as you would have them do unto you”. Homophobia should not be tolerated in any society which dares to call itself civil.

It is NOT OK to preach hate on Leaky or anywhere else. It is NOT OK to call homosexuality an abomination or immoral. It is NOT OK to call homosexuals child molesters. It is NOT OK to offer passages from the Bible as justification for one’s bigotry. It is NOT OK to tell people “God will judge you” when we all know what you mean to say is “God will judge you HARSHLY”.

Bigotry is NOT OK. IT HURTS.

Avatar Image says:

KB Prez, I completely agree.

Avatar Image says:

celia if you pretend to be a christian you don’t really believe so you wouldn’t believe in hell

Avatar Image says:

GO JO AND KB PREZ! Those were the two best pro-gay rants I have ever heard!

Avatar Image says:

Why do people always say Adam and Steven? why cant it be Adam and Jason or Eve and Veronica.

Avatar Image says:

KB Prez—

Amazing.

Avatar Image says:

I’m not sure why some people are reacting so negatively about Prof. Dumbledore’s sexual orientation.

There have been plenty of well-known, real people who have been lesbian, gay, and bisexual throughout history including: Alexander the Great, Jane Addams, St. Augustine, Susan B. Anthony, Katherine Lee Bates (who wrote America The Beautiful for her female partner of 25 years), Michelangelo Buonarroi, Leonardo Da Vinci, Emily Dickinson, David and Jonathon (from the Old Testament), King Edward II, King James I, Anna Freud, King Richard the Lionhearted, Florence Nightingale, Saints Serge and Bacchus (who were joined in a holy Union), Eleanor Roosevelt, William Shakespeare, Bessie Smith, Socrates, Gertrude Stein, Alice Walker, King William II and King William III just to name a few.

My partner and I learned about these people while doing research for our book “How To Be A Happy Lesbian: A Coming Out Guide.”

We have a very large website with over 1,000 free resources for lesbian and bisexual women worldwide—especially women who are coming out. Included in these resources is a free support group for women who are coming out as lesbian or bisexual.

This group has over 750 members, and we provide free support for any woman who needs it. If you are a woman who is coming out, and you need support please visit our website:

http://www.amazingdreamspublishing.com

Sincerely,

Tracey

Avatar Image says:

KB Prez, that was a really excellent response to many of the comments here. Thank you. Really, you can use the Bible to justify anything. It just takes out of context quotes, or verses from Leviticus that detailed archaic Jewish laws. I really don’t care about this piece of news at all. It didn’t change my perspective, and I think it is unfortunate that the HP series is ruined for some people.

Avatar Image says:

ivo, i’m not that religious, but i mean some of these people that pretend they are christians just annoy me.

Avatar Image says:

there doesn’t seem to be any viewpoints other than favorable. Either that or they are all being deleted so that that only one side shows. As for me, I feel betrayed by JKR. I will not read another word she prints. Gay and lesbianism is a deviant lifestyle, the practicing of which is unacceptable in any Christian society. For JKR to come out after all the books have been printed and sold and made this statement is unfair to the readers who have made her a millionaire many times over.

Avatar Image says:

KB Prez: I am touched by your humanity. The world is a better place when it is filled with people like you. All the best.

Avatar Image says:

@emerald:I’m christian and i have no problem with homosexuals or anyone else. so don’t speak for every christian that’s not your place.

Avatar Image says:

right you are celia!! i’m not religious at all and i don’t hope i insulted you but just wanted to say that they hide behind it but don’t believe at all.

Avatar Image says:

Okay, i got you. that’s what i meant when i said that. those people annoy me sooo much. but like umbridge said, “Deep down they know they deserve to be punished.” hehehe.

Avatar Image says:

I am a Roman Catholic, and the revelation that Dumbledore is gay has not fazed me at all. True, the OLD Testament of my Bible claims that it is wrong, and sinful, but the NEW Testament has the words, “Love one another as I have loved you”.

Sadly, sometimes prejudices are inherited with beliefs. It makes me feel extremely disappointed and frustrated that people focus on one little part of the Bible. If that is the case, my dear right-wing Christians, why on earth do you read Harry Potter? The Old Testament says, “thou shalt not suffer a witch to live”.

But again, this is all from the OLD TESTAMENT. Evolve your beliefs, learn some tolerance and realise that hatred and anger in this issue will not resolve anything, or make you feel any happier.

I think Dumbledore is all the more interesting now that I know he is/was gay, and as a previous, very insightful, poster mentioned, Dumbledore would have suffered for his orientation due to the time in which he lived. This has coloured his tolerance, influenced how he treats people and overall made him the person he was when we read the books and all thought he was completely brilliant. It shows just WHY the man was so compassionate, so resolute and indeed, so Machiavellian.

If Dumbledore were straight, would he be the great wizard he grew to be? Or would he have been stuck at home taking care of his poor sister all his life, married and never risen to be the greatest headmaster of Hogwarts?

Dumbledore never gave up, even on the people society turned their backs on. He never once stopped believing that love would be what would overcome the evil in Riddle’s soul, and it was love that made him trust Severus Snape.

This is similar to Christ, who helped Mary Magdalene, who healed the lepers, and never once judged people for what they’ve done, or what they are, but loved them for who they are!

You Christians, learn to be more like your Christ and treat people with dignity and tolerance!

I am proud to be a non-bigoted Catholic, proud to support Dumbledore, and proud to support JK Rowling for giving us Harry Potter, Dumbledore and all the others.

Avatar Image says:

Superb Leaky, really superb. It makes me very proud to be a Harry Potter fan when you guys conduct this kind of insightful, intelligent and sensitive interview. It’s journalism of an exceptionally high standard and I’m incredibly impressed. Thank you Sean, thank you Melissa.

Avatar Image says:

“To me there is ‘another side’ of the argument that has already been touched on, but I want to mention again and that is: once the book has been written and published it takes on a life of its own. It has grown up and moved away from home. Its parent, the author, needs to let go and move on.”

I’m with you, SeaJay. I see lots of evidence for Dumbledore being in love with Grindelwald in DH, but I think it was important that we knew that and that it should have been clear in the book. Dumbledore’s relationship with Grindelwald sheds light on a lot of his actions, just like Snape’s relationship with Lily sheds light on a lot of his actions. Did JKR leave the question of whether Snape loved Lily up for debate? No, because it was important. Dumbledore is as important as Snape and his past was a large part of DH, especially the whole summer with Grindelwald.

It really wouldn’t have been that hard to add one little thing that let us know that Dumbledore was in love with Grindelwald. I wrote up a little possible scenario. Dumbledore and Harry are in that afterlife train station:

“I was frustrated with my family responsibilities,” Dumbledore said. “I was desperate to feel as important as I had at school, I was taken with Grindelwald’s ideas, I was in love – “

“You were in love?” Harry said, confused.

Dumbledore looked at him and suddenly he understood.

“Oh,” he said, feeling stupid. “I didn’t know that you and Grindelwald – “

“It felt as though we were compatible in every way,” Dumbledore said. “Until the day that – that Ariana died…”

See? Not a huge deal, but now we get it. Or the letter to Grindelwald that Harry reads could have ended “I love you, [signed] Albus”.

On a different note, I think it’s important for us to acknowledge Dumbledore’s flaws as a person and not just emphasize all of his good qualities so we can show how he’s a positive gay character. Dumbledore is a great person in a lot of ways, but like JKR said he can be manipulative and Machiavellian. And I like that, in relation to his being gay, because he has flaws like everyone else.

Avatar Image says:

To those arguing for an interview with “an alternative viewpoint”: Should Leaky also interview someone who thinks HP leads to Satanism? Someone who opposes “race-mixing” (blood-purity is a big topic in the books, after all)? How about someone who would have problem with one of Harry’s friends being Black?

The books raise a lot of topics some people oppose, yet this is the first time I’ve seen anyone saying that that opposing view should be given a forum here.

Avatar Image says:

Morals are not universal.

Acceptable behavior is not universal.

What’s tolerated and what’s not is not universal.

So there’s not going to be consensus.

Depending on where you grew, what religion you profess or believe, and your own experiences you will have some set of values.

Tolerance is good, but ultimate tolerance is the same as indifference. You will only tolerate things that match your moral values and since those are not universal then there you go.

Homosexuals are the IN thing at the moment. Everyone is coming out and the gay-er the better. So it’s being accepted, it has happened before in other cultures and times until some new order/religion/culture has made it amoral again and then it’s not ok.

For most people in the world executing criminals is amoral/disgusting. Yet in some states it’s still the Law. Is it amoral?

Anyway. I think that to talk or discuss about morals, values, religion, is a moot point as different groups understand them differently. Who can say who has the moral high ground?.

Avatar Image says:

Dumbledore being gay should have been in the book. It makes the reason/motivation behind not going after G more understandable. It was important to that story just as snape’s love for lily was important in his motivation to protect harry. There were hints for snape loving lily in the books, and it was 100% clear in DH. Dumbledore’s love for G, and how that blinded him was not in the book. Why? I would still feel the same if G was a woman. This info was not some little extra info like what was jame’s job was, etc. So I’m left with the question why jo didn’t give little hints in the books, and didn’t make it clear in DH.

She was either was too coward to put the info in the book, or if she really thought it was not necessary, then she is not much of a good author.

Avatar Image says:

There was someone on here that was upset with the books because he or she thought that JKR was against interracial relationships because none of the interracial relationships in the book were successful. and i thought that was a load of bullcrap. i mean i think some people just like drama so they just try to make a problem where there isn’t one in the first place. they look to deeply into things or some of them are just ignorant and don’t look at all, they just jump to stupid conclusions.

Avatar Image says:

First, another thank you to Melissa, for her very patient effort to be gentle and to guide this discussion into a calmer tone.

Second, may I plead for perspective here, and for a call to reality?

I’ve just finished watching the nightly news, coming out of a major city here on the east coast of the US. Let’s see… ...the city I live near is suffering under a staggering surge in murders, violence (especially against women and children) and drugs. ...southern California is burning ...the US is involved in a war that appears to have no foreseeable end and at a staggering cost (note i am not saying anything about justified or not, simply stating what is now accepted by all political parties and opinions) ...Darfur is witnessing a continuing genocide, with women and children again bearing the brunt of the violence ...Pakistan appears to be on the verge of civil war (and there are nucleur weapons there folks!) ...the Congo has collapsed into civil war, again ...Bengla Desh is still reeling from half of the country being underwater because of monsoons, and tens of millions of people remain displaced

Should I go on? Oh, I forgot global warming, sorry…

Please put the “Dumbledore Revelation” into perspective, regardless of your position. He’s a fictional character folks, JKR’s tidbit is mildly interesting but really has very little to do with the story line. In fact, there has not been a single mention that I have noticed about how the relationship between Dumbledore and Grndelwald does play a role in the overall story (ie, at their 1945 duel)!

This isn’t The History Boys, there is no ambivalence toward Dumbledore because of his sexual orientation.

Again, I can think of a good dozen questions based on the books I would rather have JKR answer than go on with this discussion…

Has anyone asked JKR yet what the core of the Elder Wand is? What happened to Dung? What happened to Kreacher? Where did Harry and Ginny end up living? Were Lily and James hiding in the Dumbledore home in Godric’s Hollow? What happened to Fudge? (I like to think he escaped when Voldy took over, and was hiding with the Muggle Prime Minister, who looks like Tony Blair…) and many more….

In brief, to all of you have been online and involved all day, please take a break. Go spend time with your loved ones. Pet your dog, play with your cat. Savor a good meal. Stand outside and look at the sky, and appreciate how beautiful the world can be.

Avatar Image says:

Personally, I think it was totally unnecessary to “out” Dumbledore. It serves no useful purpose other than to be provacative, to pander to liberal thinking ‘secular progressives’ (who dominate Europe already, and are making devastating inroads in the U.S.) and to jump on the “politically correct” bandwagon. The announcement does not advance the HP series in anyway, and only serves to be a divisive point among fans. Jo should’ve (IMHO) taken the same tack as when she answered the question from the 8 year old girl about Aberforth’s ‘goat charms’, i.e., give a ‘non-answer’ that protects childrens’ innocence and yet leaves room for adult speculation. Seems that no one, not even JKR, and resist using the ‘bully pulpit’, having achieved fame and fortune, to make ‘politically correct’ statements and shove them down people’s throats. Pity. (YMMV)

Avatar Image says:

The main problem here is that there are too many people spewing words they have heard spoken about the Bible without having read the Bible and thereby understood what they were reading.

Sodom and Gomorrah were not destroyed because they were homosexual. They were destroyed because they were wicked. They wanted to have sex with the angels whether the angels wanted to have or not. That is considered rape.

Someone asked the question about those quote Leviticus and then still eat shrimp and pork. That is actually a very good question. I will tell you why. It’s because of New Testament scripture that unlearned Christians think they can eat the foods that the Old Testament once told them was wrong. This is incorrect. The Bible does not contradict itself they way many people believe. Those foods are still not supposed to be eaten. But because people WANT to eat them, they will use other scriptures to support what they want.

The same is true about the Sabbath. Keeping the Sabbath is actually one of the Commandments. But because Sabbath keeping marked one as a Jew, early Christians (Catholics) began to worship on Sunday instead of Saturday. Does this mean we no longer have to keep the Sabbath? No. But ask any Christian (Protestant) who worships on Sunday, and they will tell you that the New Testament did away with the Sabbath. This is not true. You can ask any Catholic about why they worship on Sunday and they will tell you.

The same is true about homosexuality. Yes, there are several verses that state that a man should not sleep with a man. But there is a reason and a context under which those statements were being made. The Bible also says that we should not fornicate – have sex without marriage; or commit adultery – have sex with someone else’s husband or wife; and yet those things are still done. There are support group out there for unmarried women with babies. Is this wrong? Divorce is rampant in the country; but is anyone out there trying to lynch divorce lawyers? No.

The point is that Jesus said to go forth and preach His kingdom; the one that is coming, not the corrupt one that is already here. This means walking His life and speaking in Love. Telling the world about the Love of Christ. I don’t care who you love; but I know the fact that you CAN love is paramount. Telling someone that the way they were born or that their sexual preference is wrong is NOT preaching the Love of Christ. This will not lead anyone to Christ. And it is NOT what He wanted those who love HIM to do! So stop worrying about who someone has sex with and start preaching about the LOVE of CHRIST like HE told you to do. Let HIM worry about the rest of it. Let HIM do the sorting out!

Avatar Image says:

When we read books, and that includes the Harry Potter novels, our own cultures and backgrounds affect how we interpret the characters and story. Whether the interpretations are right or wrong, I can’t say. I think, the passionate reactions this news has created says more about where the readers are coming from, then what JKR intended.

Avatar Image says:

I’d rather be a good person a good Christian any day.

Avatar Image says:

Ok…I didn’t want to post really long comments, so my two cents on Dumbledore are in my blog here: http://12amusings.wordpress.com/2007/10/20/dumbledore/

And my two cents on Christianity and Homosexuality are here: http://12amusings.wordpress.com/2007/10/24/neither-judge-nor-jury/

~Debbie

Avatar Image says:

To Bratpack: let me add my congratulations to you on being a REAL Christian. To Tracey: just to clarify one thing…It is my understanding that Alice Walker is bi, not gay. And to those of you who are saying you don’t want to be HP fans anymore: we don’t really need you, so buh-bye! :)

Avatar Image says:

The Leaky’s involvement in this development has been wonderful and I hope the relevation helps promote tolerance worldwide.

It was also nice to see Willow/Tara from Buffy mentioned, although I have to say that however she was eventually labeled, Willow’s actions showed her to be bisexual as opposed to unilaterally gay. She fell in love with at least two men and apparently experienced strong desire for them (although I agree Tara was her soulmate).

Anyway, good job, Melissa and crew!

Avatar Image says:

Go Dumbledore :)!

Avatar Image says:

to all the people telling those with other veiwpoints to leave the fandom-hows that tolerence?

Avatar Image says:

iamminerva – how are u an authority on what a real christian is? im a real christian even though i disagree with u.

Avatar Image says:

Excellent interview with clearcut questions and clearcut answers. I hope this interview helps those who are somewhat confused by the revelation and not sure what to think about gay people or indeed about Dumbledore.

I will admit in my younger days, I was more ignorant and oblivious to certain things – homosexuality was one of them. Having not met any gay people, I had a somewhat negative view of them. i felt it was just wrong. But then through gradual education, and meeting some, I realised my foolishishness. There are gay people, there are straight people. There are indians, there are africans. There are Californians, there are New yorkers. There are good gay people, there also bad ones. There are good hetrosexuals as well as bad ones. Everyone have their own characteristics. Being gay or not, is just one of them. Thats all.

So its articles like this which helps to educate and shed light on those who are uncertain. Perhaps if I read this while I was that ignorant young fella, I may have started to think sooner (which was not something I did frequesntly)

Leaky didnt need to take this kind of initiative but they have and kudos to them for doing so.

Avatar Image says:

Ya know, one thing i have come to dislike about US culture is the impossibility of having a reasoned, polite discussion. The solution, regardless of anyone’s position, is to state your piece, and don’t engage in angry conversations with those that disagree. sad, but true. and this discussion unfortunately has demonstrated the necessity of not engaging in meaningful conversations

for this to stop, those of you engaging in angry monologues must stop. please, stop

Avatar Image says:

Rev. Fred Phelps calls himself a Christian. He quotes the same scriptures as have been mentioned here. He holds the same beliefs, he’s just more vile and outspoken, HOPEFULLY, than most. But not getting as outright evil as Phelps doesn’t put anyone who shares his same beliefs in any better light in my book.

Here’s a link to the Anti-Defammation League website regarding the righteous Reverend:

http://www.adl.org/special_reports/wbc/default.asp

Avatar Image says:

I find it interesting that my comments were not posted. It shows where this forum is leaning too.

Avatar Image says:

Melissa, I hope this interview will help those HP fans who are struggling with the news of DD. I feel sad for those who can’t accept, who feel betrayed, who feel angry, who feel lost. It is a terrible place to be in to have all these strong emotions about something only to know that they, eventually, will lose their voice as more and more people see the simple truth that fiction is just a mere reflection of what is already present in the world. There will always be people who are gay and there will always be characters that are gay. It is an awful lot of wasted anger and rage at something that cannot be changed. So for all the hatefulness, outrage, etc. coming from these people, I think the responsibility of everyone else is to feel sorry for them because they only corner themselves in a box. These people will never live satisfied, well-rounded lives because their world is just to small to allow for differences.

Yes folks, even in fandom you will always have Malfoys. Even Dumbledore would feel sorry for them.

Avatar Image says:

To KB Prez, you have been a voice of reason in a very difficult world the last few days. Lord knows I’ve tried to get my point across, but I haven’t been able to do it as eloquently as you have.

Bratpack, thank you for represently the Christian faith with honesty and bravery. I think every Christian needs to study the history of their faith and figure out the context in which every rule and story is written in. Otherwise, you’re just blindly following. If God didn’t want you to think for yourself, he wouldn’t have given you free will and brain.

Avatar Image says:

well all I have to say is I love the news and am happy with the news that DD is gay.

This interview doesn’t tell me anything I need to know or don’t all ready know – not that I don’t have anything to learn about tolerance, everyone has room to grow in that area – but I all ready knew that it doesn’t change the most important stuff about Dumbledore – that he was a very talented Wizard who was also a good man, tolerant, kind, and giving, and a good mentor to Harry. For anyone who doesn’t know the issues touched on in this interview, or just wanted to see a supportive and tolerant response to the news that DD is gay in a way that fits with JK’s meaning for to book itself, well I’m proud of their decision to get put this interview out there. Maybe if society can change and grow a little more then every interview GLAAD has won’t have to start with “gay people are all different, they can be just like anyone else…most of us are frighteningly normal and even most of the ones that aren’t “normal” are great people and get criticized for things that wouldn’t even be questioned if they were straight” Prejudice against gay people is very much like prejudice against people of different races, very similar experiences. But so many people don’t know that, so they have to keep reiterating it in every circusmtance and never get the chance to go beyond it. The only way I see to go beyond it is to try and have that discussion with your gay friends and family and really try to get past the stereotypes with them.

I am sad that Dumbledore didn’t seem to have his romance work out, what seems to be his great love was also a cause of a lot of dissapointment. It does make for a compelling story but it’s very sad and even though DD was gay, and had a love, it was a tragic one and for all we know he lived a chaste life as a headmaster. Even if he had a relationship before or after Gridelwald, we don’t know how long any of them lasted and when, and so we’re left to believe that his only romantic love could’ve been a tragic one. People’s view of Dumbledore being so devoted to Hogwarts that he doesn’t have much room for a relationship could be very true – I always imagined he must have had a very colorful past to have learned all he learned but by the time Harry came around at least – indeed maybe even by the time he decides to duel his former love – he seems to be more devoted to being a teacher and for standing up against those who hate – even if he used to be in love with them – than anything else.

One thought is how that’s sad that the gay character has to have such a sad life. But it’s very honest. Even Romeo and Juliet died because of intolerance. While mixed-race couples are widely accepted in many areas in the US where I live, there are other areas in the US where people risk being violently attacked for dating someone of the opposite race. Or at the very least, the more subtle pain of not being accepted by racist members of the other race but also having their own race criticize them and say they don’t love their own race simply because they dated someone outside of it. Someone black, for example, having other black people criticize them for dating a white person is like a gay person coming out to their family and their family disowning them, not accepting them. At a vulnerable time when they are facing racism and need the support of other black folks they may find that they get criticism from there too. It can be very tragic and the challenges can end or destroy a very real love. I just read an article in Newsweek about an American soldier who fell in love with an Iraqi woman, even converted to Islam and learned to really love the Iraqi people. They had a kid. He was shot in the line of duty and now his kid says “Daddy” to her dad’s picture in the crib. That is a relationship, that like many gay relationships, was based on a very real, strong, and unselfish love and made the father more committed to fighting againt intolerance and spreading understanding but it was also fighting against many obstacles. Gay relationships are far from the only ones right now to be facing challenges, and far from the only ones in history to have faced challenges. So, sad but true, the tragic relationship isn’t an untrue representation, for many gay and non-gay relationships are doomed from the start due to intolerance, even in the most enlightened places in this day and age. The only hope is that more tolerance will make more loving relationships possible to last and more people will not only not be subjected to violence for their love, but have society be glad of any relationshp where the people are better, fuller, and happier people for it.

And before we say that the only tragic relationship she shows is gay – Snape’s only love was a tragic one, too.

And as mentioned, it is very positive that she created such an awesome character with so many great and interesting quaities and then said he was gay – THAT is at least very real and not stereotypical.

Finally, Dumbledore faced many temptations, including that he loved Grindelwald. Even before we knew he was gay we found out in the last book how human he was and how much he struggled. Some people disliked the book the last temptation of Christ because it showed Christ as very human, but others loved it because the fact a human could stuggle like that and still come out on top made the story of Jesus MORE remarkable to them. That he was more relateable because he actually DID experience some of the challenges all humans have face and it wasn’t easy for him just like it isn’t easy for us. They realized that it wasn’t simple or miraculous that Dumbledore or Jesus came out that way but a hard pressure cooker of challenges, lessons learned, hard work, and devotion along the way that turned a rock into a diamond. Harry may have had to accept Dumbledore was only human and wasn’t perfect, but I’m sure as he gets older he will grow to appreciate what DD did and how much DD sacrificed for those around him (even when it wasn’t easy) more and more.

Avatar Image says:

Yes folks, even in fandom you will always have Malfoys. Even Dumbledore would feel sorry for them.-yes we’re malfoys bc we disagee with u.

Avatar Image says:

Go Melissa! I love you!

A couple quick questions to those that believe J.K. Rowling should have included this information IN the books:

  • Can you imagine if she had “outed” Dumbledore in the books?
  • Had she included this information, would we all have debated Dumbledore’s sexuality rather than revel in the beauty of the last book? (Seeing all the comments posted here, I wouldn’t be surprised if that was the case!)
  • Given our present day-in-age, wouldn’t such information have disrupted the flow of the book? Even if the thought was, “Wow, I’m so impressed she did that” or “Awesome, Dumbledore’s gay!,” the thoughts would have disturbed the momentum of the story. Perhaps it would have set an amazing precedent, but in the world we live in, it would have been a bumpy diversion.
  • Would it have been appropriate for a teacher (even in death) to discuss his or her romantic life with a student? None of the other teachers ever did.
  • What about those readers who oppose all things gay – would they have quit reading the book midway through, even after having spent years with the series?

J.K. Rowling is a brilliant woman and had a lot to consider. She knows how to write a story. Give her some credit. She knew what she was doing.

Avatar Image says:

While I’m still not necessarily comfortable with things like timing or the purpose of a late revelation, I have a lot of appreciation for the tone that Sean used in his interview. He really stated his stance very diplomatically and respectfully. Nicely done.

Avatar Image says:

From Webster’s Dictionary to the person that said Sodom and Gamorah was not because of homosexula activity sodomy One entry found.

sodomy

Main Entry: sod·omy Pronunciation: \ˈsä-də-mē\ Function: noun Etymology: Middle English, from Anglo-French sodomie, from Late Latin Sodoma Sodom; from the homosexual proclivities of the men of the city in Genesis 19:1–11 Date: 13th century : anal or oral copulation with a member of the same or opposite sex; also : copulation with an animal — sod·om·it·ic \ˌsä-də-ˈmi-tik\ or sod·om·it·i·cal \-ti-kəl\ adjective

Avatar Image says:

Greg: “Would it have been appropriate for a teacher (even in death) to discuss his or her romantic life with a student? None of the other teachers ever did.”

“The Prince’s Tale” was ALL BOUT Snape’s love life. And since he intentionally gave those memories to Harry, it’s almost like “discussing it” with him. And there’s Lupin and Tonks. And, no these people weren’t Harry teacher’s anymore, but neither was DD at the time they met in King’s Cross.

Avatar Image says:

Thank you, Melissa and Sean! This was a great interview, and I hope many in the comment threads I have been visiting these past few days can learn from them.

KB Prez, Professor Potter and many others, your positive contributions are respected and treasured. I also want to thank all those on the comments who have different positions but have managed to keep a kind tone to their arguments. Debate should never be discouraged, but I really hope that the fandom can eventually come together, whether to agree to disagree or to fully accept Dumbledore for what he is, a great, gay character.

Avatar Image says:

I am really glad Leaky took the time to do this interview (esp. Melissa who I know is busy with her own book writing!). I would’ve liked the question about how to approach children about homosexuality to have been better answered. A part of me wishes that Jo would’ve revealed Dumbledore was gay in book 7 so we could’ve understood him better and so there would be proof of this fact for future generations who read the book. But, a part of me thinks Jo was right to not write Dumbledore’s orientation into the story because some parents don’t feel comfortable introducing their young children to homosexuality. So, I would’ve liked GLAAD’s take on how to tell children about homosexuality, how much to tell them and how young should you tell them? I think it’s best to be completely honest (without being explicit, just like you would be with heterosexuality) but then again that brings us back to why didn’t JKR just give us this fact in the actual book to begin with?

Avatar Image says:

“From Webster’s Dictionary to the person that said Sodom and Gamorah was not because of homosexula activity sodomy One entry found.

sodomy”

WILL you PLEASE just HUSH!!!!

Avatar Image says:

Greg, you make some very logical points. I think I tend to agree with what you had to say.

Avatar Image says:

Alaine: Ok, I’ll bite: Where in what you quoted does it say that the residents of Sodom where destroyed for their homosexual proclivities?

Avatar Image says:

Everyone is entitled to say what they feel. Just because I don’t share the same view point I should hush. No I think not. I do not agree with JKR and the outting of DD. I think it was wrong. I am entitled to that opinion. I am disappointed not angry, or mad just totally disappointed in JKR and the whole thing. This forum can do what they want and say what they want because we have freedome of speech just like us Christians have freedom of speech.

Avatar Image says:

Very illuminating and respectful interview, and while it does address the issue thoroughly, I really can’t believe the hoopla about this revelation. Yes, the books (and films) are deservedly popular and some of the die-hard fans just can’t accept this fact that Dumbledore is out of the closet (or are either abandoning the series because of this news). I mean, I was pretty shocked when I first heard the news, but now I’m all right with the news.

J.K.R. did a great thing by taking another step against ignorance, bigotry and intolerance with this news, but some fans treat the series as if it was their read and butter or the Holy Bible/significant religious text—come on, it’s fiction and people should make a distinction between that and actual reality. I’m not saying disregard the values the books represent (nor the fact that DD is gay), but that some people need to look at it from a different perspective and think before they speak.

Avatar Image says:
  • Sorry about the last post, I meant “their bread and butter”, not “read and butter”!
Avatar Image says:

I didn’t know if this had already been mentioned or not, but did any of you see Oprah today? Her show was about being gay all over the world. Different views about being gay and how it affected people in different countries. India and Jamaica. Wow some of those countries are very unaccepting of homosexuals.

In the very beginning of the show she did say something abouit DD being gay and a few people in the audience clapped.

Basically I just don’t get how it affects anyone else, why people feel the need to slam others for what they are. Live and let live I say. And I have to laugh at those who use the Bible as reason for their hatred. Ya that makes sense. I don’t know the Bible by heart but I can’t remember any passages that says to hate, make fun of or anything like that to ANY people.

Avatar Image says:

Carly-u r clearly ignoring what some of us are saying. we aren’t saying to hate or make fun of anyone. u miss the whole point

Avatar Image says:

Kendra I wasn’t speaking directly to this board, but what I saw happening on Oprah today. I haven’t read this board today, but have read some of the past few days and some of it is just as hateful as what they say happens in other countries.

Avatar Image says:

This is a great article, and thanks so much for sharing this information with the public. There have been so many hurtful and downright stupid things said in the last few days, but as someone with gay and lesbian family members, it was a good thing to have this character “come out”. It was just another way that the world of Harry Potter reflects the reality of family life. Thanks so much again.

Avatar Image says:

In quoting Levitical or Mosaic Law the posters here show they know almost nothing about Christian doctrine. The old law as given to Moses was replaced with the new law upon Christ’s death for us. He gave himself up as the sacrificial lamb, blameless and without blemish. Christians now live under the new law as laid out in the New Testament. Part of that doctrine is Romans 1:27 and it reminds us of the immorality of homosexuality: “In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.” We were given free choice by God at birth and are free to choose the way we live understanding there are consequences when we choose to sin. Homosexuality is defined as a sin as the above text shows (there are others in New Testament, but I won’t fill pages here). God offers us forgiveness freely if we accept Christ’s sacrifice for our sins. I agree with those who have stated that Christ taught us to love. He also taught us to flee from sin and to not consort with sinners. I have always defended this series and have repeatedly stated that if Rowling had chosen to call them all wizards instead of wizards and witches then the Christian community would have listed the books among the great Christian allegories of all time like Narnia and LOTR. There is no defense for including a homosexual character. Moreover there is no defense for releasing this information at the end after her millions were made. If the fact that she had created Dumbledore as a gay man had come out before the series end the sales of her books would have suffered and the series most likely would have ended with whatever book was out at the time.

Avatar Image says:

Fenm

According to Genesis, Sodom (Hebrew: סְדוֹם, Standard Sədom Tiberian Səḏôm, Greek Σόδομα) and Gomorrah (Hebrew: עֲמוֹרָה, Standard ʿAmora Tiberian Ġəmôrāh / ʿĂmôrāh, Greek Γόμορρα) were two cities destroyed by God.

For the sins of their inhabitants Sodom, Gomorrah, Admah, and Zeboim were destroyed by “brimstone and fire from the Lord out of heaven” (Genesis 19:24-25). Since then, their names are synonymous with impenitent sin, and their fall with a proverbial manifestation of God’s wrath (Jude 1:7).

Sodom and Gomorrah have been used as metaphors for sinfulness and sexual deviation. The story has therefore given rise to words in several languages, including English: the word “sodomy”, meaning acts (stigmatized as “unnatural vice”) such as homosexual sex and zoophilia, and the word “sodomite”, meaning one who practices such acts. However, the name Sodom is derived from a Hebrew word meaning “burnt”, and Gomorrah from a word meaning “buried”, which refer to their destruction[citation needed].

Avatar Image says:

Love and tolerance are the very core the series we all know and love. It is that you love, not who you love that matters. I for one often find myself looking to the books to remind me of what is truly important in life; love, tolerance, unity, loyalty, etc. The series teaches us the dangers of hate. Hate of all kinds, race, ethnicity, and now sexuality. At this time it would do us all good to learn from the books we have all enjoyed.

Avatar Image says:

Leaky, could you be any less objectionable?

I don’t get it. Why have you decided to take a part in shoving the secular humanist agenda down my throat, just like the rest of this rapidly degrading culture?

I trusted you guys.

Avatar Image says:

“Part of that doctrine is Romans 1:27 and it reminds us of the immorality of homosexuality: “In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.” We were given free choice by God at birth and are free to choose the way we live understanding there are consequences when we choose to sin. Homosexuality is defined as a sin as the above text shows (there are others in New Testament, but I won’t fill pages here).”

Romans in the New Testament was written by Paul after Jesus died, when he was touring Rome. It is the preaching of Paul not Jesus that you are choosing to defend your answer. Paul was trying to unit the different sects of Christianity that had sprouted up through out Rome and Israel.

Avatar Image says:

I would really like to see a copy of the “agenda” that people keep talking about. Because I have asked all my gay and liberal friends, and they haven’t heard of it.

Avatar Image says:

Remember that agenda that everyone is talking about…hmmmmmmm this interview is fishy.

Of course leaky and mugglenet are going to defend JK Rowling. Are you nuts Leaky/Mugglnet have defined the community and created it. Which of course they deserve it because they have done an awesome job.

But we need to take this in account is how much this has split our community, our fandom, the kids,the parents,the teachers, this has affected many people. For me it hasn’t be JK Rowling is still not rational on her judgement, she opened up a can of worms and basically the community is now going downhill.

Avatar Image says:

By the way I am liberal and vary open minded, but JK Rowling did screw this up. You got look more into this than the whole issue and what it has it done to us. Look at the hate,controversy and worried parents now.

Avatar Image says:

This GLADD thing is very admirable and all, but please don’t use Dumbledore as your mascot. Let’s not let Dumbledore be known only as a homosexual, when he’s discovered the 12 uses of dragon blood, he’s the only one that Voldemort feared, etc etc.

Avatar Image says:

This is not going to end well….

Avatar Image says:

Human rights groups rarely use people as mascots. Let alone fictional people. I don’t think you have anything to fear.

Avatar Image says:

It is an agenda that they basically set in the late 1980s, in a book called ‘After the Ball’[10], where they laid out a six-point plan for how they could transform the beliefs of ordinary Americans with regard to homosexual behavior — in a decade-long time frame…. They admit it privately, but they will not say that publicly. In their private publications, homosexual activists make it very clear that there is an agenda. The six-point agenda that they laid out in 1989 was explicit: Talk about gays and gayness as loudly and as often as possible… Portray gays as victims, not as aggressive challengers… Give homosexual protectors a just cause… Make gays look good… Make the victimizers look bad… Get funds from corporate America.[1]

Avatar Image says:

Sarah—actually no, Paul was unable to visit Rome at the time (We’re not told why, some think he was ill, others that he was in prison. However, he usually mentions being in prison when he writes if that’s the case.) and his purpose was to give the churches the teachings of Christ that he had learned since his conversion. Paul was an apostle (to be an apostle, one must be directly called by Jesus as the original 12 were; Paul was the only one called after Jesus’ death) and thus his writings were divinely inspired.

Avatar Image says:

Speaking of BtVS…

GODS, I miss Willow and Tara now. I didn’t like them when they first came out, because I wanted Buffy/Faith, I wanted Faith to renounce evil for /Buffy/, and for Buffy to accept that, thus undoing all the major gay evil cliche of “Bad Girls”.

...but then Wilow and Tara got dark in a realistic way, I’ve always knew that Willow was a control freak, and then I got mad at Willow and sad for Tara, and then somehow, they got back together, WITHOUT wiping the slate, and then we lose them to the pattern again. The only other canon gay person in Buffy was Larry, who was summed up as 1. Gay, 2. Dead.

I liked the…turnout of this though. Grindelwald didn’t turn evil, he was the way he was, and his gay love interest, Dumbledore, was the /redeeming influence/ instead of a corrupting one. Dumbledore died, much older than everyone else, and in Harry Potter, death is but the next adventure.

...and I find the idea that Grindelwald is Dumbledore’s one tragic love, romantic, and I hope that there was no other, because URGH, remember ‘Kennedy’, the love-at-first-sight girlfriend they gave Willow? TOO SOON.

Avatar Image says:

Bravissimi for a well-thought-out interview and a different angle for our fandom. I hope that those who are upset by Jo’s “new” information will read what GLAAD had to say about looking at Dumbledore’s character and take it to heart!

Avatar Image says:

Main Entry: sod·omy Pronunciation: \ˈsä-də-mē\ Function: noun Etymology: Middle English, from Anglo-French sodomie, from Late Latin Sodoma Sodom; from the homosexual proclivities of the men of the city in Genesis 19:1–11 Date: 13th century : anal or oral copulation with a member of the same or opposite sex; also : copulation with an animal — sod·om·it·ic \ˌsä-də-ˈmi-tik\ or sod·om·it·i·cal \-ti-kəl\ adjective

Alaine, have you read this whole definition? I don’t know how old you are, but you realize that you are condemming a great deal of heterosexual couples for commiting sodomy by posting this definition?? If not, i’m sure you can find many heterosexual couples (married ones too) who can enlighten you.

I find the debate about homosexual acts not natural kind of strange. What is natural? Sex only for procreation? What about couples who use birth control or couples that are infertile but still have an active sex life? Do married couples really only when they want to have children? Just something to think about.

Also, using phrases like “sin” or “acts against God” to me makes them on par with acts of murder, rape, cruelty where their offenders quite frankly deserve an eternity in Hell. This is probably why such comments are seen as hurtful, insulting, and hateful. You can say all you want that you hate the act, but by condeming the “act” in such a way, many people will see this as condeming them. This is probably why emotions run so high on this topic.

Avatar Image says:

Well, in that case all activists of any type have a “goal” or “agenda”, no matter their political or social association. They way the term is used though, it makes it seem as though gays want to dominate the world. Seems a bit ridiculous. Last time I checked, they just wanted the same rights and heterosexuals.

Avatar Image says:

“Can you imagine if she had “outed” Dumbledore in the books?”

Yeah, I can. ;)

“Had she included this information, would we all have debated Dumbledore’s sexuality rather than revel in the beauty of the last book? (Seeing all the comments posted here, I wouldn’t be surprised if that was the case!)”

If it had, I think that would be our problem and not JKR’s problem or the book’s problem. DH was where we found out Dumbledore’s past. This is a pretty influential part of Dumbledore’s past and should have been in the book.

“Given our present day-in-age, wouldn’t such information have disrupted the flow of the book? Even if the thought was, “Wow, I’m so impressed she did that” or “Awesome, Dumbledore’s gay!,” the thoughts would have disturbed the momentum of the story. Perhaps it would have set an amazing precedent, but in the world we live in, it would have been a bumpy diversion.”

So you put it at a non-momentous moment. (Would have been more interesting of all those weeks camping in the woods!)

Besides, how do you change a world you live in? By always doing what was done in the past?

“Would it have been appropriate for a teacher (even in death) to discuss his or her romantic life with a student? None of the other teachers ever did.”

I’m with whoever said that Snape purposefully gave Harry his memories about Lily and that constitues discussing it with him. We knew about Lupin/Tonks as well, so this whole “Harry never heard about another teacher’s love life” thing isn’t true.

“What about those readers who oppose all things gay – would they have quit reading the book midway through, even after having spent years with the series?”

Oh, you could use that argument for anything. You could say that Harry shouldn’t have dated Cho in OotP because what about those readers who oppose all things interracial – would they have quit reading the book midway through, et cetera. No one should have to cater to an attitude they don’t share when they write.

Aberforth and the goat is probably more of a morally debatable topic (how can the goat consent?), but JKR wrote it in such a way that we accepted it. She could have done the same with Dumbledore/Grindelwald. Could finding out Dumbledore was gay have been worse than wondering whether he kept his sister locked in the cellar? Could it have been worse than finding out he was willing to let Harry die? For some people, yes, but if JKR knew Dumbledore was gay and was introducing his ex-boyfriend as a character, she should have been willing to address that.

Avatar Image says:

Ariel

Yes I read the whole article not just a portion of it. I believe you can love the person but hate the sin in itself. In my faith I have been taught that this is a sin and I beleive it is. After looking at all sides of the issue and also praying on it. For me the confirmation has always been shown to me. But I accept this is my opinion and not necessarily the worlds opinion. Scripture also tells us to be of the world not in the world. I hope I quoted that correct. As someone else said God gave us free will to decide we can decide to sin or not to sin it is up to us. It is the same for any type of sin a person commits. You can love the person and hate the sin that they commit. Scripture gives to us what is natural verses unnatural.

Avatar Image says:

Alaine, I meant did you read the whole definition of sodomy that you posted (not the article), especially what I emphasized. You can apply that definition of sodomy to heterosexuals

Avatar Image says:

jedi2814 – Your right. I confused Paul and Peter. Peter was in Rome. Paul was the one who had the “vision” of Jesus. Never the less, he wasn’t Jesus. And from what I understand from my Ethics professor a much more unpleasant man. He was human after all, and he seems to associate homosexuality with the Roman pagan religion. I don’t know why that is, but it doesn’t seem to be something to take too seriously. There are much more important messages that can be interpreted from that book.

Avatar Image says:

Bravo on this well-thought-out interview! As soon as the revelation was announced, I KNEW there would be the inevitable backlash. The reactions I’ve seen have ranged from “Whoohoo!!” to “What?” to “Because ‘gay’ = bad (in some people’s minds), now the entire series/character/author is ruined/unreadable/diminished.” It’s the latter reaction that needs to be addressed, because Ms. Rowling’s entire thesis in writing the Harry Potter saga is “Tolerance/Acceptance and Love are the greatest virtues.” For those asking for a balanced counterpoint to the stated thesis, just HOW is one supposed to offer a convincing argument against “Tolerance/Acceptance and Love” without sounding intolerant/non-accepting and hateful?

I applaud the hard work that the Leaky Cauldron staff and volunteers are doing to help facilitate this discussion in a mature and sensitive way!

Avatar Image says:

As insane as the idea is, I would like to discuss what relevance the Dumbledore Revelation has to the novels. Crazy, yeah, I know, but that’s me

So, up until DH, we can agree there is absolutely no relevance to the idea that Dumbledore is gay. I think we can agree on that? Or are we back to analyzing the flamboyant purple velvet suit?

What do we learn in DH?

1. During a brief two month period in his youth, Dumbledore is infatuated with Grindelwald. Whether the feelings are reciprocal, we don’t know. Whether there is any physical expression of Dumbledore’s feelings, we don’t know.

2. Because of his brief relationship and infatuation with Grindelwald, Dumbledore expresses some regrettable anti-Muggle ideas, and, in an argument involving Aberforth, Ariana is accidentally killed.

3. In 1945, after many hesitations, Dumbledore confronts Grindelwald and defeats him. I think its implied that Dumbledore wins because Grindelwald feels remorse—for Ariana’s death, or from the memory of how close Dumbledore and he once was, we don’t know.

4. The fact that Grindelwald felt remorse would fit well with Dumbledore’s belief throughout the books about the power of love to overcome evil.

and last, 5. The Dumbledore/Grindelwald confrontation is mirrored in the final battle between Harry and Voldemort, in which Harry purposefully calls him Riddle, and calls upon him to feel remorse as his last chance.

Other than that, Dumbledore is simple an asexual mentor. As Sam and others have noted, there is a long tradition of such characters in fantasy literature.

I would add that “love” and “sex” are very very different things, and its rather exhausting to see the distinction constantly ignored in this thread.

I am also going to express the strong personal opinion that many who are jumping into the recent discussions and claim to be overwhelmed by the news that Dumbledore is gay are not the Harry Potter fans who regularly visit this site and share ideas. Sure, HP fans are known for strong opions and even strong language, but not to this level. And frankly I do not recognize many of the screen names appearing in recent threads. I note that those specific contributers never seem to refer to any of the novels, do not appear to know scenes and dialogue, and frankly appear to be here just to yank other people’s chains and get a reaction. Indeed, many individuals I know who express some of the outrage and disappointment, even the word disgust has been used—well, those individuals simply wouldn’t be reading the Potter novels at all, since after all they have “magic” in them.

Solution: don’t react, don’t engage in meaningless arguments.

Avatar Image says:

Yes Ariel I did read the whole definition and understand what you are saying and yes it can apply to hetrosexuals as well. What I was replying to was the fact someone pointed out that Sodom and was not destroyed because of homosexual activity it was one of the reasons it was destroyed it took in all kinds of sexual sins. But homosexuality was one of them. That is the point I was getting accross.

This whole situation is a no win situation on both sides. And it will cause a deep division in the people who had enjoyed the books.

I disagree with JKR that DD was outted I think it was unnecessary. I have seen in the many many years that I have lived women having close loving relationships with best friends that was not a homosexual union and the same with men. I was content to believe that that was the case with DD until JSK said what she did. It just was not necessary in any way.

Avatar Image says:

Budb

You are wrong I have read and reread the books prior to this at least fives times. In Fact when this all blew up I reread the passages with the recounting of DD and Grinwald. The flambouncy of DD never struck me as being gay for the fact that all the characters in some way were out of the ordinary looking. Knowing his age and the type of dress when he would of been young seemed to fit his outfit. As far as the name you are correct I have changed it for the posts here. I do not want to get harresses by pm’s because of my stance on the issues.

Avatar Image says:

HA, HA, HA Rowling is such a joker; and the media actually bought it!

Avatar Image says:

Dumbledore dieing as a gay charecter in my mind is made irrelevant to his sexuality in that he choose the way he wanted to die. for people who have read book7, we got confirmation that dumbledore told snape that snape had to kill him in the end, because he was dieing already and once he had done everything he needed to do with harry and the horcruxes and laying the clues to the deathly hallows, snape would put him out of his cursed suffering owing to the curse placed on the peverell ring.

Avatar Image says:

As for as my reaction to this whole debate, I believe that if Dumbledore’s sexuality was so important, JK Rowling could have put it some where in the books. It is strange that she would tell us this after the books have all come out. I know that from the q&a session that she did, that she was answering a question honestly from someone in the audience. I don’t have a problem with Dumbledore being gay per se. I believe that this adds another layer to a complex character and should be of some interest in discussions about the character’s actions and motives as it relates to the books. What my objection has been on this disscusion board was going to GLAAD for an opinion of this “revelation”. Some others have pointed out here that they do have a particular political agenda. They are a lobbying group and therefore they probably shouldn’t have been asked. However, if LC was to have asked an editorialist, author, anyone else..who may have some expertise in how the media uses such revelations like the subject under discussion, it would have been better because it would not have been “percieved” as endorsing a particular political viewpoint. I don’t believe that GLAAD has a monopoly on the expertise on how gays are portrayed in the media, etc. That has been my objection. I don’t hate gays. I still respect JK Rowling as an author of a wonderful series that I have grown to love. I have read the books many times and I could quote any of the passages in the books, specifically DH, to prove that this may have been just an infatuation (which JK Rowling has said in another interview) with Grindelwald and nothing more. This doesn’t change Dumbledore’s character. We found out many “unpleasant” things about him in DH..specifically his notions of wizard domination by force when he was in his late teens and his seemingly cold plan to keep Harry alive only to make sure that he goes to his death to destroy the horcrux that he was carrying and getting rid of Voldemort. Even Snape wasn’t happy about that. As for as my opinion about homosexual acts (not people..I do not presume to judge anyone’s souls since I don’t have the authority to do so), that among many other sins are found in the Bible and in the tenets of my Faith (Catholic). However, I am not going to quote the Bible because I know that quoting scripture in a debate like this one doesn’t work since not everyone accepts the Bible as an authority on these issues. I am only saying that in the spirit of tolerance, there probably should have been someone else interviewed who doesn’t have a stake in making sure that gays are only seen in the best, positive light in the media, schools, churches, government, military, medical field, and every where else they wish for people to see them at. If the hypothetical interviewee were to be found…they do not have to be necessarily a Christian but in fairness and for the sake of tolerance, I think it would have probably been more prudent to have found someone else to speak to about this. That is my only “beef”. As for as those who are saying that people like myself and others should leave a forum such as this because our beliefs are different from yours…how is that tolerant? The facts are: it isn’t at all. That is very disturbing that people in this time can’t disagree without calling them names, defaming their character, calling them bigots, telling them that they are “fit to be punished”, etc. Thats not being tolerant at all, that is being bigoted and hateful. So, lets get back to discussing this wonderful series in all of its facets instead of dwelling on what is a marginal issue to the series and it would also help if people would be civil to each other and elevate the level of discourse above defaming character, calling names, etc.

Avatar Image says:

Alain, you surely noted I did not mention you by name, and carefully avoided mentioning specific names. Please do not attribute to me things I did not write. And I certainly am not harrassing you, nor anyone else.

Avatar Image says:

I’m so pleased that Jo’s revelation will affect the current and next generation of Harry Potter readers. My 7-year-old son has been coming home from the playground spouting the same homophobic put-downs (“That’s so gay!” “You’re so gay!”) that Sean Lund mentioned.

The next time I hear those poisonous remarks, I’m going to quietly inform my son that his hero Dumbledore is gay, and ask him what he means by the term. Does being gay make whomever he’s insulting equally wise, courageous, tolerant, and bighearted? We should all be so gay.

What a stereotype-breaking role model—bravo Albus and Jo!

Avatar Image says:

Sarah – before his conversion Paul was a persecutor and killer of Christians. Jesus confronted him on the road and asked him, “Why do you persecute me?” Paul was struck blind, healed by Ananias (who was told by Jesus to go to the house where Paul was and heal him) and spent weeks learning from the remaining apostles and from divine inspiration. As an apostle Paul’s writings and teachings are divinely inspired. Jesus says before his ascension that all will be made plain to the apostles at the coming of the Holy Spirit and that we (Christians) are to take their teachings as if they come from Christ himself. Upon his calling Paul was made an apostle and received the Holy Spirit. Paul’s story shows us God’s grace knows no bounds and He is willing to forgive all sin upon repentance. Of course there is a great deal more to glean from the book of Romans regarding the path to salvation. I don’t know where you get “he seems to associate homosexuality with the Roman pagan religion”. He is quite clear in Romans chapter 1 that he is speaking about all men who live wickedly and godlessly.

I think we are way off topic at this point so I’ll stop there. My point was that many were making fun of the requirements of Mosaic Law and using those perceived riculous rules to refute the fact that, biblically, homosexuality is immoral. I was pointing out that New Testament doctrine is what Christ would have us follow and it too shows the immorality of homosexuality.

Avatar Image says:

Thank you, Mr. Lund. I learned a bit more about the world and myself.

Avatar Image says:

Budb

I did not say that you were sending haressing p.m.s you read that into the post which was not there. I was adressing to you the fact that you accused people who you did not recognise there names as basically being trolls who had never read the Harry Potter series. You made assuptions on something you did not know about. All I did was point out that I was a member on this forum as well had read all the books several times and still had a different opinion from you. You were casting stones at posts and posters without verifying if they were really trolls or honest members of the forum. Now you know not everyne posting here are trolls but good standing members here that for personal reasons do not want to post what their name is. I have seen more intolerance and name calling and calls to kick posters from the forum from those that are supporting the gay community than from the ones that do not.

Avatar Image says:

ZR, No…I do not know what you mean, can you define for me EXACTLY what is a “gay lifestyle?”

Susan

Avatar Image says:

Bratpack (in regards to your first post): Well said. _

Avatar Image says:

Thank you Melissa and GLAAD for this interview. It pretty much says what I had said earlier, that these books are about love, tolerance, and against bigotry.

When I was in high school, I had two teachers that I knew were gay. One was male, one was female. Both of them intelligent, skilled in their love for what they taught, and both of them won accolades both locally and nationally for their profession. The female teacher died suddenly in my junior year, committed suicide, not for her sexuality, but because her parents had died a few months before in a car crash. The male teacher taught Theater and Drama. He was banned for a while because his students would win the SETC every year. He taught for over 20 years before a stroke limited his abilities. He taught all of his students about life outside the theater, and in the world. Some of his former students took him to dinner to celebrate all that he taught us, soon after his stroke. For me, his sexuality never bothered me or really occured to me as a teenager until later in life. Even then, it was just a fact. It never changed the fact that he was a great man who inspired hundreds of students, some going on to act in movies, Broadway, and television, and others to who went on to help make them.

My point is this: It changes nothing. It is only the perceptions of the reader that has changed. So you have to ask yourself now: Can I be tolerant by knowing that Dumbledore was in love with Grindelwald? Can I accept the fact that love knows no gender, as depicted here? If the answer is no, then it is your beliefs, not the author’s beliefs, that is causing the pain. Because love is not only a cetral theme of the Harry Potter books, but in Jesus Christ’s teachings as well. If the Bible really did teach to stay away from sinners, then why were most of the apostles sinners? Isn’t everyone a sinner? I know noone that is not. “He that is without sin, shall cast the first stone.”?

Dumbledore admitted that he was not perfect, as we all are not. We saw more of his flaws in Deathly Hallows. Still as a teacher and mentor, despite his motivations early on, Dumbledore was a great, intelligent, wise character in the books.

Avatar Image says:

Sarah-

I found a link to the Gay Agenda. I think it will open your eyes to what exactly those gays have planned.

http://www.bettybowers.com/homoagenda.html

I admit that the opening paragraphs may be a little harsh, but please, read on! I think you’ll be shocked and appalled.

Avatar Image says:

Alaine, you simply wish to pick an argument, and I will not play along. Apologies tho for mis-typing your name earlier…

Avatar Image says:

haha, i love parody sites.

Avatar Image says:

Chuckle, good observation hospital! Should we attribute this sudden outburst of divisive shouting to the return of Voldy, and his ability to spread discord and disunity, setting us to fighting among ourselves? In which case we should all go back and re-read the Sorting Hat’s advice in OotP!

Avatar Image says:

You know what, some people just don’t accept that lifestyle. We already have hollywood shoving it down our throats. There’s a difference between “acceptance” and “tolerance.” I can tolerate just fine and treat gays like any other person (we are all sinners, no sinner worse than another)but the moment you try to change our religious beliefs, you sound just as “hateful” as those who do not accept sinful lifestyles. Learn to tolerate orthodox religions just as well as tolerating lifestyle choices.

Avatar Image says:

homosexualism is not moral, and opposes gay-marriage, is legitimate?

http://www.findbilover.com

Avatar Image says:

Hopefully, this will end further arguments :)

Avatar Image says:

Thank you for this interview.

I’ve certainly learned this week that there are a few fellow Potter-fans of which I will never be able to have lunch with, yet through it all, we are growing and learning about one-another.

Avatar Image says:

Alaine said: “Fenm The Biblical text Sodom was one of a group of five towns,”

I know what Sodom is. Did you get the point I was trying to make?

Avatar Image says:

Aliane: “Sodom and Gomorrah have been used as metaphors for sinfulness and sexual deviation.”

Yeah, no kidding, I do live in this culture, and understand it, thank you. I asked you a simple, direct question, btw which you have yet to answer.

“The story has therefore given rise to words in several languages, including English: the word ‘sodomy’, meaning acts (stigmatized as ‘unnatural vice’) such as homosexual sex and zoophilia”

Anything aside from penile-vaginal sex is sodomy. So straights can also commit sodomy. In fact, they do it a lot, I’d imagine.

Avatar Image says:

Aliane said: “It is an agenda that they basically set in the late 1980s, in a book called ‘After the Ball’10, where they laid out a six-point plan for how they could transform the beliefs of ordinary Americans with regard to homosexual behavior”

Some you’re saying they wanted to change the way Americans look at homosexuality? Well, DUH. How is that shocking or surprising?

Avatar Image says:

“I don’t think that people who express prejudice against other people for being just what they are – for example, african american, female, lithuanian, or anything at all – can be said to have an opposing “viewpoint”. It’s not a point of view, it’s a negation of what another person is. To try to distinguish between a moral objection to homosexuality and a bigoted objection to homosexuals is contortionist pseudo-PC blather. In my opinion.”

Well said Velse, and I completely agree with you.

I really don’t have a problem with those who have moral objections to Dumbledore’s ‘outing’ leaving HP fandom, because to me, HP Fandom was always filled with people who understood and PRACTICED JK’s message of tolerance of people’s differences. So if people are going to be selective about their tolerance then they are under no obligation to hang around.

Avatar Image says:

(I haven’t read all the comments and this may not be the right place for my thoughts…)

I see Dumbledore being gay and his relationship to Grindewald as two different things.

That Dumbledore is gay adds sparkle to his character, but it doesn’t fundamentally change it.

He’s a very, very old man when we meet him and I like to imagine he’s found love (true love) during his long life.

His bond with Grindewald is more complicated than that. In this immature narcisistic exercise in power, everything the other does is a reflection of ones self. The two of them together are like the single Voldemort. There is no humanity.

It is only with the sacrifice of his sister that Dumbledore becomes human again. Everything that he does for the rest of his long life is anchored in this terrible knowledge.

What a lonely life. I hope he’s found love.

Avatar Image says:

PS – Wonderful interview, Melissa.

Avatar Image says:

excellent interview!

Avatar Image says:

PPS – Darn! My October 25, 2007 @ 06:21 AM post doesn’t sound like what I meant. In a nutshell:

He’s gay! That just makes him more fabulous. I like to think he found true love many, many times in his long life.

His relationship to Grindewald is a separate issue. Although G was his most important relationship, it was not love.

Avatar Image says:

Thanks for posting this, TLC, as I hope it will answer some questions and hopefully end some misconceptions. To your earlier point, nothing made me angrier than reading comments like “Well, it’s good he didn’t come onto Harry”, as if the words “homosexual” and “pedophile” were interchangeable.

Jo’s revelation, while interesting, really didn’t change anything in my mind. Dumbledore was and is still a brilliant and beloved headmaster, and one of my favorite characters in the series. Finding out that he had fallen in love with someone who would ultimately betray his heart just made the story of his earlier years that much more heartbreaking.

Now finding out that Dawlish carried a secret burning passion for McGonagall – THAT would be shocking.

Avatar Image says:

always_a_sidekick – thanks for the link! That was great.

Avatar Image says:

The kind of shock I was waiting for was to find out Ron isn’t the father of one of ‘his’ children – that Hermione had a secret fling with Victor Krum, and she named her son ‘Hugo’ after Victor Hugo (she had visited the South of France one summer) just so she’d have a connection to Krum’s name.

A bit elaborate perhaps but it would have been a great way to stir things up so that the GOLDEN TRIO are not seen as having a Happy Ever After. Dumbledore being gay wasn’t a shock to me at all (the negative reaction to it was though).

Avatar Image says:

As a Christian, I want to make it clear that there are many Christians who do not have a problem with Dumbledore being gay. I don’t appreciate people claiming that “Christians” oppose homosexuality. They certainly do not speak for me. In fact, I know a number of Christians who are gay, some “out,” some not.

As to what impact Jo’s revelation had on me, it explained so much. I disagree that Dumbledore’s being gay doesn’t change anything. It did for me. I had always thought of Dumbledore as kind of an asexual wizard. Now, I think of him as having an unrequited love, much as Snape’s unrequited love for Lily. In both situations, that love resulted in serious choices, with long-lasting consequences. Defining love for another person in totally sexual terms does not do justice to the deep feelings that go beyond a physical relationship. It is incredibly touching to think of young Dumbledore in love with a macho-type wizard who goes to the dark side. Dumbledore had to suppress that love so that he could stand against evil. I don’t mean that his being gay was wrong. Heterosexual people fall in love with the “wrong people,” too. It’s not all about sex, sex, sex.

So, why did Jo not reveal that Dumbledore was gay in the books? Well, probably because Dumbledore didn’t reveal it. He had one great love of his life (unrequited as I see it), and it would have been painful to talk about, not to mention that he may have been ashamed that he fell for that type of wizard. He didn’t have to convey that information to Harry, so he didn’t.

I do sympathize with those who say that this revelation will make it more difficult for teachers to “sell” Harry Potter books to anti-Harry Potter parents. It will. For most of us who love the Harry Potter series, though, this new information will add a poignant new dimension to the books.

Avatar Image says:

desertwind, I don’t think I could have summed it up better. Dumbledore had only one chance at love in his very long life and that love was tied to the death of his sister. The tremendous guilt he carried made him back away from a personal intimate love and his feelings were channeled into the love and welfare of others.

So the question remains-did Dumbledore and Grindewald consummate that love or was this a chaste romantic love? I think that JKR makes it very clear-Dumbledore was in love with the thoughts, ideas, power and in Grindewald he found a kindred spirit. Do I think they consummated that love? Nope. Not in the books. This was an affair of the heart and mind, not lustfully. After Arianna’s death, Dumbledore had the rose-coloured glasses taken off and saw Grindewald for what he really was. Don’t we all do that when we fall in and out of love? See the very best in people at the beginning and when it’s over you see them for how they truly are? Dumbledore deserves our comfort and understanding. It’s like finding out about your best friend’s 2 timing boyfriend..everyone knows some ice cream, a box of tissues, and a comforting ear goes a long way to help. Poor Dumbledore had no one to console him, even his own brother turned on him and punched him out at Arianna’s funeral. Dumbledore spent his life eaten alive by guilt. When it was time to stop Grindewald he knew it was the only way to appease part of the pain of his sister’s death and of his own grieving spirit.

JMO, other opinions on that welcome :)

Avatar Image says:

oops sorry for the strike outs

Avatar Image says:

Nice interview. Thanks leaky!

Avatar Image says:

I see your point of view Martha. And I agree about Dumbledore’s reasons for not revealing his sexuality. Apart from the time he was born into and grew up in, for the vast majority of his life he put others before himself. There were always far more important things for him to do than get bogged down by a love he would never have.

I’m not convinced that Dumbledore’s sexuality needed to be revealed in the books anyway. Jo herself explained that Dumbledore’s love for Grindewald was similar to Bellatrix’s love for Voldemort – unrequited. But we as fans never felt the need to know of Bella’s love for Voldemort because no one has a problem with heterosexual love/attraction (and lest we forget, toward the end Voldemort had very little that was human about him). It is only the ‘gay’ word that sets people off.

Avatar Image says:

Whats odd my parents who are Christians, don’t really care…it is more of something that is just awkward. But we disscussed Harry Potter like we normally do and nothing really changed. My parents are liberal and they don’t know it. LOL

Avatar Image says:

Nice interview. Thanks Melissa.

I think it is important for many of us to stand by our gay friends and relatives right now. Even if one of them is only a character in a book.

Avatar Image says:

“If Dumbledore were straight, would he be the great wizard he grew to be? Or would he have been stuck at home taking care of his poor sister all his life, married and never risen to be the greatest headmaster of Hogwarts?” posted by MissLuLu last night.

Straight or Gay what Dd did to his family was wrong. He regretted the rest of his life. His greatness was not due to having the “burden” lifted of caring for his sister.

Avatar Image says:

That’s so awesome that you thought to go to GLAAD for an article! Good for you! I’m thrilled that Dumbledore’s out of the closet…this is one more positive influence for our newer generations to grab onto in progress toward tolerance and mutual respect! WWDD: What Would Dumbledore Do? THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU!!

Avatar Image says:

@ celia, racheline, Haydn, Randy, mollywobble, and SuperAurorGirl

Thank you for your kind words.

I’ve spent way too much time these past few days commenting on the Dumbledore news and I was concerned because my posts were getting angrier and angrier. I know I am not the kind of intolerant person I’ve been railing against on these boards. I feel very deeply against bigotry of any kind and I wanted to tell people why. I’ve always been reluctant to reveal much about myself on the internet, but I thought it was necessary to help people understand my feelings. Bigotry is so pernicious. It really does hurt.

I doubt I’ve changed any minds, but it was a very cathartic experience for me. I‘m beginning to feel like my old, tolerant self again!—:) BIG SMILE!

P.S. mollywobble, I absolutely ADORE your user name!

Avatar Image says:

Here is the perfect counter article to the GLAAD interview:

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/ent/stories/DN-rowlingcolumn_1024gl.State.Edition1.2292bdc.html

I encourage Leaky to be fair and feature it.

Avatar Image says:

Why do the gays speak always in the name of tolerance, while they are expressing hate and intolerance toward every opinion that does not support their marriages/parades/lifestyle?

Avatar Image says:

Me, you want gay people to be tolerant of those who de-humanise them? Who negate their basic human right to ‘be’? Are you surprised some of them will be on the defensive, given some of the spiteful and hateful comments people have been making about them?

Avatar Image says:

de-humanise?! opposing to provocative parades is de-humanising?

Avatar Image says:

There’s a lot of acts on both sides that are tolerant and intolerant. When attacking sides, though, people attack everything. What’s dehumanizing is saying that a heterosexual is a sinner. Heterosexuals are born, not made like murderers and adulterers. Saying people are sinners because they are attracted to the same gender, which they can control as much as any heterosexual can, is dehumanizing.

Opposing gay-pride parades? I don’t see that a ton of people in very little dress is acceptable. So that’s not dehumanizing. But I never saw anyone mention the parades before, so why would you assume that’s what he’s saying is.

The lifestyle is very much the same as as heterosexual lifestyle, so I don’t see what is to be opposed in the lifestyle. Are there people that oppose heterosexual lifestyles? No, just people that oppose actions and behaviors. Nobody anywhere should assume all actions and behaviors are representative of a whole group.

Avatar Image says:

1. Not all gay people attend parades but those who do have the same right to have parades as any other group of people. 2. Why do you think they had these parades in the first place? It’s an affirmation of who they are, and it’s a message that they will not hide away because people are intolerant of them. 3. Provocative? That depends on your definition of the word, but here in the UK most of those at the parade just enjoy themselves, and many straight people attend too. 4. Lastly, by de-humanising I meant this insistence that they should not ‘be’. They ARE, and that isn’t going to change no matter how much people hate on them.

Avatar Image says:

I read the article at: http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/ent/stories/DN-rowlingcolumn_1024gl.State.Edition1.2292bdc.html

I gotta say, the author is a tad out of touch with the readership of Harry Potter in that he does not seem to know that the vast majority of us DO want to know more and don’t want JKR to “shut up”.

He seems a tad angry too, bless him;-).

Brian:-)

Avatar Image says:

Leaky, you’ve got real class. Thank you for staying true to the spirit of the Harry Potter series. Tolerance, acceptence, being able to look at things through others eyes, not jumping to quick judgements and fighting prejustice are some of the main lessons of the series. You have obviously taken those lessons to heart and I can only applaud and support you all the more.

As a Harry Potter fan who happens to be be gay too, I’m humbled by your strength of conviction. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

Avatar Image says:

@ Zee, U R AWESOME!!!!!

Avatar Image says:

Zee#,

First, I got a huge grin when I read your suggestion “The kind of shock I was waiting for was to find out Ron isn’t the father of one of ‘his’ children – that Hermione had a secret fling with Victor Krum, and she named her son ‘Hugo’ after Victor Hugo (she had visited the South of France one summer) just so she’d have a connection to Krum’s name.” (see above on page 7 of this thread)

Actually, we do know that Ron is simply not the best at Disapparation, and we might surmise that during an inattentive moment he managed to Splinch himself rather painfully, leaving behind…. Hermoine, desperate to have children, finds comfort with Krum. Ok, I admit it, I have an awful sense of humor!

But, second, and more seriously: please, don’t respond to those just seeking an argument. The back and forth coming from both directions is just not at the level of reasoned discussion or polite debate that any of us want Leaky to be. For whatever reason, its become acceptable in US culture for people to just shout at one another, and try to silence the apparently opposing viewpoint…can we try to be more civilized please?

And I again ask of all, let’s focus on discussing what relevance JKR’s relevation has for the books and characters? Or, how about how the Dumbledore Revelation will impact the making of the last two films, and in particular on Michael Gambon’s performance?

Avatar Image says:

Sorry about the oversize print, I was just trying for bold, and was not intentionally shouting.

Avatar Image says:

What impact will this have on the movies? None, I’d say. The movies include what’s in the books (with slight editing). Gambon will play the same character he has the whole time. He’s got an image in his head of how to be Dumbledore, (it’s how actors become a role) and he’ll stick with that same character, traits, behavior, and loving.

Avatar Image says:

The viewpoint that Jo shouldn’t reveal these details is being well represented by our readers. That article has a place as part of a roundup but nothing more. It does not represent an opposing viewpoint to this article, which does not talk at all about whether she should or should not have revealed this information. Again, we are not seeking a referendum on opinion about that – it will be presented in a roundup and not more (and incidentally, the Salon piece expressed the same sentiment in a much better and non-angry fashion. This is much more a cause for discussion than anger which the writer got, in my opinion). Stain, find someone with an opposing viewpoint on how to handle this news responsibly, and that’s the other side. Not everyone who simply doesn’t agree with it.) I also find it interesting that only now when the revelations include dumbledore as gay, and not after the huge chat she gave just after the book was published, are people so impassioned about thinking Jo should stop talking about it. :) it’s curious!

Avatar Image says:

Ya know, Alex, given some of Gambon’s ungracious comments about JKR, I wonder if her decision to out Albus wasn’t in part an intentional yank on his chain?

Avatar Image says:

Roger—

Well, I’ll admit, that little rant was pretty amusing. Unfortunately it does NOTHING for the fact that Rowling is the one who created this world – NOT US, remember. And as such, they most certainly ARE her characters to cling to or let go of as she pleases. And children seem to want to know about some details before she lets go.

Why did she reveal it? Oh, wait. Because a child ASKED her to. And she elaborated – because if Dumbles had a love life, people are sure as heck going to want to know about it.

And honestly, if she had said otherwise, do you think that it would have stopped all that fanfic out there that features Dumbledore as having a relationship with Gellert? Heck no. Just like it doesn’t stop the fact that Remus and Sirius AREN’T gay. Except now when people peg us as obnoxious fantards who get turned on by gay guys and claim there’s NO evidence that Dumbledore was gay, we can say, “Um, no.”

Avatar Image says:

While I can see this as possible, I think it would be in very poor taste. Too poor for me to believe with what I know. JKR is about tolerance, so I doubt she’d intentionally make his character gay/ expose DD simply as a jab.

I agree Melissa, it seems that if people REALLY didn’t want to hear more about the Harry Potter universe, they wouldn’t be on Leaky, or listen to her, just read the books. This is my first time on leaky, because I was interested in what people’s comments to this news (I heard on the radio) would be. After people accept that this doesn’t change anything, I’ll go back to the books.

I still have to read six and seven, so I’m choosing to ignore a lot of comments that don’t make sense to me. :) Just as anyone else can choose to ignore comments that don’t make sense in your vision of the HP world. But telling someone else that she doesn’t have a right to make comments? That is wrong.

Avatar Image says:

I have to chuckle at the comments that say something along the lines of “I don’t dislike homosexuals – I just don’t approve of homosexual acts.” Why do these people feel they are in a position to judge anyone else’s “acts” in the first place? I figure that what two consenting adults do in privacy is no concern of mine. Dumbledore is gay? So what? Let’s have some more new info about HP now.

Avatar Image says:

Sodom was destroyed for inhospitality please read the bible in its original language if you want the real reasons. Also if you have a Myspace they have a religion forum where you can find out all you need to know.

Avatar Image says:

“Why do the gays speak always in the name of tolerance, while they are expressing hate and intolerance toward every opinion that does not support their marriages/parades/lifestyle?”

Well, “Me”. That’s because you are intolerant of someone elses way of life. They are not intolerant to your way of life, just to your views on their way of life. Which is none of your bloody business.

DO YOU UNDERSTAND THE DIFFERENCE?

You seem to think you have the right to judge, you seem to be under the delusion that you can tell right from wrong. Just you go on leading a heterosexual life if that’s pleasing you. Noone is intolerant of that. HOW ON EARTH IS THIS DIFFICULT TO UNDERSTAND?!

Avatar Image says:

Oh, Alex, sorry, hadn’t realized you were still reading! But, by now you know most of the major plot lines and events anyway…. I think you are right, btw, Gambon has made it clear he is going to “be” Dumbledore the way he wants, and without regard for how DD is portrayed in the books. Has Gambon made any comment yet on this topic?

Melissa, noticed you had checked in, so what about the idea of a good in-depth interview involving you, Emerson and JKR in the near future? And please to solicite our questions!

Avatar Image says:

Perhaps my personal experience will help someone understand how the revelation can be a surprise but not shocking.

My older brother is gay and when he came out (30 years ago) our family’s reaction was primarily, “Oh. THAT makes sense.” My brother was worried about how our father would react, but Dad said something wonderfully wise and kind (if not a little awkward!). “We’ll still play guitar together and go hiking and work in the garden.” In other words: This is important news, but it doesn’t change how I feel about you or how much I enjoy our time together.

If you are having difficulty accepting Dumbledore, then you are going to have an awfully hard time accepting real life homosexuals who touch your life. I hope you’ll use this opportunity Jo has given you to come to terms with the fact of homosexuality, because what will you do when someone you love comes out?

Avatar Image says:

Thanks for doing that interview. I was really surprised when I found out the Dumbledore was gay, and I wasn’t sure how I felt about it. But this interview made me realise that it really doesn’t matter. Dumbledore is really great character whatever.

Avatar Image says:

Melissa said -

I also find it interesting that only now when the revelations include dumbledore as gay, and not after the huge chat she gave just after the book was published, are people so impassioned about thinking Jo should stop talking about it. :) it’s curious!

Well -no -its not really curious at all and it shows, if I may say, that you still have not understood why the Potter world is split on this issue. You seems to rank this revelation as being on the same level as say -that Harry became head of the Auror department 27 days ago (which he did, by the way)

It is so, so different. Its rather tragic to see an editor so far out of step with a large part of her readership. I am afraid as much as I admire and respect so much of what you have done over the years -you -who have helped me enjoy so much of” the world of Potter” over the past 5 years -have had a really bad week ! (Now that’s not too harsh!)

Avatar Image says:

“Why do the gays speak always in the name of tolerance, while they are expressing hate and intolerance toward every opinion that does not support their marriages/parades/lifestyle?”

“Well, “Me”. That’s because you are intolerant of someone elses way of life. They are not intolerant to your way of life, just to your views on their way of life. Which is none of your bloody business.

DO YOU UNDERSTAND THE DIFFERENCE?”

Well Elvine, Me has proved their point. You and the rest who get very upset if someone expresses the view that homosexual acts are not right get very, very defensive. It isn’t enough for us to accept gays as people, is it? No, you want to make sure that we accept and support their “marriages”, their “parades” where they mock our beliefs (the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence, etc)and dress very indecently in a public place in view of other people who probably don’t want to be exposed to it (see the pictures of the folsom street fair in San Francisco to see what I am talking about), and everything else about their lifestyle because although many of them do not wish to flaunt themselves in public..there is a group of them that do and they are very loud and very vocal. These are the ones who get very, very defensive when we express the view that their actions are wrong. Me has proved their point well because look at your reaction. Instead of respecting their beliefs and speaking to them civilly..you have to yell at them and tell them that their view is so intolerant and terrible because they don’t see homosexualilty as a good thing and doesn’t wish to see it shoved down their throats at every turn (especially if they have children). So, it works both ways, doesn’t it? The only ones who are “tolerant” in your eyes are the ones who fully support everything that gays do. Even though you don’t like to hear it but….in the eyes of many gays..their whole identity is tied up…everything about themselves is tied up to the method and with who they have sex with. Again..just look at “gay pride” parades and tell me that it isn’t a “celebration” of the methods and who they have “sex” with..complete with bondage, s&m and every other kind of thing that I won’t get into because this is a family site.

Avatar Image says:

This is unbelievable ! IMO anyone who liked Dumbledore when they thought he was straight, and now hate him because he is gay, is a hypocrite. I have a question for these hateful, intolerant people, now that Voldemort is gone I would imagine that your darkmark no longer burns, but does it itch? :) Also to Martha, I wholeheartedly agree with your comments.

Avatar Image says:

Rachel -

Well said.

Leaky used to be a family site -not any more !

But until this thing blows over -my children are not allowed to access it.

Avatar Image says:

Um, Linette….I haven’t seen anyone on here say that they hate Dumbledore. I am definitely not a Dumbledore hater at all. I think he is an intriguing and complex character, especially in light of Deathly Hallows and I love the Harry Potter series and continue to. I am just upset that a very controversial political issue has been thrown into this. The revelation that he has an attraction to the same sex does not change his character. I am not hateful nor am I intolerant. One can be respectful of a person for their humanity without supporting every belief they have and every action that they commit. Perhaps this is a case of different languages being spoken and as a result no honest and civil discourse can continue since one side is shrilling telling the other side that they are “hateful”, “intolerant”, “bigoted”, deserved to be kicked off, etc. Who is honestly being tolerant? Have I demeaned and “dehumanized” any of the people here who have disagreed with me? No,I don’t believe that I have (saying that I believe that certain actions are wrong IS NOT intolerant and yes I am entitled to believe that without being branded hateful and bigoted). The ones that I have seen on here that are bigoted are the ones who have been defensively saying, “hateful”, “intolerant”, “bigoted”, “you have no right to say that”, etc, etc. Who is being intolerant now?

Avatar Image says:

Rachel. You are very right in a lot of respects, and I don’t approve of Elvine and people who fight for a side because they picked a side. But you are wrong in some respects:

“In the eyes of many gays..their whole identity is tied up…everything about themselves is tied up to the method and with who they have sex with. Again..just look at “gay pride” parades and tell me that it isn’t a “celebration” of the methods and who they have “sex” with..complete with bondage, s&m and every other kind of thing that I won’t get into because this is a family site.”

MOST gays identity is not completely tied up with who they are [attracted] to, and I don’t know why you should assume this from the group of them that are very loud and vocal. Pride parade is first and foremost a celebration of freedom. There are gays who are proud of all the sexual things you describe, just as there are heterosexuals who are publicly as well, and most of the gays are restricted to pride parades because of the intolerance of few. I don’t appreciate the need to be overly sexual in public, no matter your gender or attraction, but that is NOT what pride is all about, so fight for what you think is right, not fight against what is associated with what you think is wrong.

Avatar Image says:

Alex, I should have mentioned that I do agree, JKR does not strike me as mean-spirited or petty in the least, and therefore wouldn’t have intentionally jabbed at Gambon.

Curiously, JKR strikes me (from the interviews on tv I’ve seen) as someone who is fundementally shy and private, and trying to cope with the tremendous amount of attention that has centered on her since the appearance of HP and the SS/PS. Clearly too she is sometimes torn between protecting her privacy (and that of her family members) while feeling a sense of—well, shall we call it responsibility or duty? (in the sense of John Calvin I would suggest!)—toward both her fans and her characters? The impression is of someone trying to balance and resolve all those factors…while facing a chrushing demand to meet publishers deadlines and the demands of her fans for more books, more interviews and more appearances…. I particularly applaud her decision to go to New Orleans during this tour, and to make an effort to reach out to those children who needed attention most.

I wonder if she will adopt a psuedonym to ensure her ‘adult’ works are seen as separate from her Harry Potter writings?

On a positive note, filming on HBP has started, and we have only 12 and 1/2 months to wait!

Avatar Image says:

“Leaky used to be a family site -not any more!”

It’s very hard for people with little knowledge in the subject to separate gay emotion and intimacy. Heterosexuality has no problem separating emotion and intimacy, and most people show emotion in public and intimacy at home. And children recognize the emotion in their parents and individuals, but not the intimacy. The initial people who brought up intimacy as inseparable from emotion, and thus taking this away from a family site theme, were ignorant people. We’ve always known Dumbledore to be an emotional human being, not intimate. This revelation doesn’t change that, so it’s upsetting to see people think that it’s right to condemn him for his intimacy. And sad to think that children can’t make a distinction.

Avatar Image says:

Alex,

I agree that there are gay people who do not identify soley with who and how they have sex with, but I do know of those who do (I have known some myself) and I also know that there are gay groups out there who go out of their way to mock my beliefs and descrate churches.ACT UP went into St. Patrick’s Cathedral in the 90’s, descrated it by throwing around condoms, spraying graffitti, etc. They were not charged with vandalism at all. The “sisters of perpetual indulgence” mockingly dress up as priests and nuns. They have disrupted Masses. In fact, some from ACT UP and the “sisters” have disrupted Masses just so they can spew some hatred toward Catholics. We get it all the time (in the media, schools, etc). Granted…granted….we have our own internal problems with sex abuse scandals, etc etc and a whole host of other things but it is a known fact that at these parades there is some terrible mockery of the Catholic faith. Have you seen the latest “poster” advertising these parades? Its a mockery of the Last Supper. Why is it that these “pride” parades must have open and terrible mockery of Catholic beliefs and practices? Is this what “gay pride” is all about? Ridiculing other people’s beliefs, mocking their customs, etc because they do not support every single thing that gays want everyone to support (gay marriage, their lifestyle, gay sex, etc)? Descrating their churches, disrupting their Masses? I can find links to stories validating all these stories I have said here but I don’t know if that will do any good since it seems that many on here will see absolutely nothing wrong with mocking religious beliefs..especially Catholics. It is perfectly acceptable in society today to ridicule and mock us. It gets very tiring..especially when we also have to deal with it within our own Church as well :( :(.

Avatar Image says:

Poll on how you feel about the whole “Dumbledore is gay” thing. http://gloomygus.org/foruma/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=93

Avatar Image says:

Alex,

I know the difference between emotion and intimacy and I do not condemn Dumbledore for this at all. I am however concerned the intolerance on this site and others for those who beliefs are different and who do not reflect society’s norms. That has been my point all along and some of the comments have proven that to me because they have been very, very defensive since I and some others on here do not support the gay lifestyle, etc. That does not make me intolerant. That does not make me bigoted, etc. I respect gay people as human beings. I can’t accept their lifestyle. You are proving my point that the lifestyle of homosexuals can not be separated from them as people. Hence the stupid comments I saw earlier from another poster saying that I and others are “de-humanizing” gays.

Avatar Image says:

Rachel, I understand and I do think it is tiring to. As a Christian, I find it unfair to think it’s okay to mock and condemn christianity and christians because they have mocked and condemned people in the past/present. Leading by example is what I believe in.

As i said, this isn’t what gay pride is all about. But pride parades don’t have to have mockery of catholic beliefs and practices, that’s not what it is all about. I’m assuming you are very limited in your exposure of gay pride, but most of the flickr collections I have seen are fine, wonderful loving people not pushing any boundaries. This latest poster is advertising ONE parade, and you’ve only heard about it likely because a conservative-bias news group has pointed it out to you. I implore you, don’t get your information from conservative bias or from liberal bias. Get it from experiencing it and doing some research yourself.

Saying gay pride is all about mocking Catholicism is akin to saying Christianity is all about repressed homophobia and pedophiliac priest… Some people believe it, but it is flat wrong.

Avatar Image says:

Alex,

I saw the poster on another site and I don’t see how it can be defensible. You must know that the SF parades have been notorious for this kind of thing. Again, we are mocked often by those who are into “gay pride” parades. I don’t believe everything I see in the press, etc..regardless of who I get it from. One reason why one of my favorite characters of the series is Luna Lovegood…lol…she thinks for herself which is what we all should do and get the facts right. I am not saying that all “gay pride” is about mocking Catholicism but…you have to admit that there is an element to it..at least in the parades….that does mock Catholicism. Otherwise, how do you explain the “sisters”?

Avatar Image says:

Ok, again… There is a difference between intolerance of someone’s way of life, and intolerance of someone’s views on anyone elses way of life.

I know that many people can’t understand the difference, and I know I can’t change that. It really is very frustrating. Just remember that the world is larger than your own neighburhood. There is a whole continent looking at this debate in disbelief.

Get a grip, judgemental people.

Live your life the way you want, and let others do the same. Don’t ask them to hide just because it makes you unconfortable, though. That’s when you cross the line.

Avatar Image says:

“Get a grip, judgemental people.”

Elvine, that does mean you too. No one is telling anyone to “hide”. And I believe you have crossed the line far to often on this site by attributing words to people who think differently than you that aren’t true. So, look in the mirror too. You have said some very judgemental things on here toward Christians, etc. Who is being intolerant now?

Avatar Image says:

I just “love” being de-humanized as a “judgemental” person so that you can shut me up and anyone who has an opposing view to what you say. This is a very common and VERY tiring tactic.

Avatar Image says:

Rachel, I don’t know where you think I have said this poster is defensible. I did not say so. Pride is.

I have to admit there is an element to pride that is mocking Catholicism. I don’t like it, I don’t approve. But if I have to admit it, you have to admit that there is an element to religion that believes in the elimination of atheists and ethnic cleansing and slavery. But I’m not attacking Catholicism based on those beliefs, so please don’t attack Pride based on mockery.

Avatar Image says:

Ya know folks, of all viewponts:

I visit to site to discuss Harry Potter. There are numerous other sites to discuss sexuality, religion, tolerance or the lack of, civil liberties and a variety of other topics that do not include Harry Potter. May I respectfully request that either you all start talking about Harry Potter, or go elsewhere to discuss the issues which concern you?

My request has nothing to do with any viewpoints being expressed, simply with the lack of relevance of those viewpoints to the purpose of this site.

Avatar Image says:

Alex,

point taken. I am a student of history and I do not have rose colored glasses on what my church has done in the past. We have been around for 2,000 years and unfortunately, bad stuff has happened in the past. This is not the forum to debate all those details though. I have attacked the gay pride parades because it is a very open form of expression that not everyone..especially families, etc don’t want their kids exposed to. Also, as a Catholic..I do have some specific beliefs about sexuality, etc (we are not against sex..just leting everyone know that because I know how that can bring up another can of worms). I am expressing them. I am deeply disturbed by the mockery of Catholicism. This mockery doesn’t help the discourse at all and I believe that you agree on this point too. So, what is to be done? What to do with the “sisters” on one side and..those who hate gays at every turn on the other? Both represent extremes on both sides. Perhaps its best to ignore them but unfortunately they scream loudly :(.

Avatar Image says:

Budb,

your point is well taken. This is why I didn’t think it was necessarily prudent for LC to have interviewed GLAAD (remember, that was my original disagreement) to get their “take” on Dumbledore’s outing. As to this revelation, it would be interesting to explore how this obsessive infatuation with Grindelwald effected him as as character and on the plot as it is in the series.

Avatar Image says:

Why do people oppose hearing what GLAAD have to say?

we can read/ see what the rest of the world thinks anywhere on the internet.

At least GLAAD are not breeding prejudice. Cuz well, you can’t even say you oppose the matter without sounding intolerant (because, actually it is intolerance (on principle))

Avatar Image says:

Rachel, What is to be done is to take a position that is not so extremist. If it’s pride parades that concern you, go and volunteer and make your voice heard that you’d love to help them express their emotion, but have a problem with public intimacy. If they offer mocking catholicism, substitute something else less offensive. It’s something everyone should look at. Are my actions representative of everything I think is right and everything I think is wrong? Or am I cherry picking issues that show an untrue bias?

I’ve entered into these forums to try and present a medium point of view, to condemn far right and far left views and tactics. Because humanity IS the middleground.

Are people upset with Dumbledore because he is gay and celibate? Or are they more upset because the floodgates may open? Everyone should state their cases clearly, carefully, honestly and politely.

Avatar Image says:

Rachel, your concluding line “As to this revelation, it would be interesting to explore how this obsessive infatuation with Grindelwald effected him as as character and on the plot as it is in the series” is relevant. So, can we shift the conversation to explore the issues you raise?

May I politely ask everyone we stick to the relevant stuff? I do not wish to appear to be addressing Rachel only, I really do mean everyone. Otherwise, we could just as easily be discussing the fiery collapse of the Mets and Yankees, or the silliness surrounding Britney Spears, or countless other topics that have nothing to do with this site’s purpose.

Avatar Image says:

Rachel I respect your opinion, but I have seen many posts where people have used the word “hate” regarding Dumbledore and this revelation. I do not believe that anyone should be kicked off this site for giving their opinion, they are allowed to. I do however have the right to disagree and give my own opinion of their comments. If you believe this makes me intolerant so be it.

Avatar Image says:

People argue that the gay issue is different than race, gender or ethinicity, because one can’t help one’s race, gender or ethnicity. This implies one chooses to be gay.

I believe most condemnation of homosexuality comes from this belief that gays have a choice and as long as they stubbornly persist in “being” gay or engaging in romantic/sexual activity with others of the same gender, they cannot expect to enjoy equal civil rights (e.g., right to marry, freedom from employment discrimination, etc.) or to be regarded with the same respect/acceptance they would if they were straight.

I know that one cannot choose their orientation, straight people do not experience their orinetation as “choosing” to be straight, they just are. Same with gays. So let’s discuss behavior. Straight people engage in straight behavior, from crushes, dating, making out, getting married, having sex, openly presenting themselves to society as straight, etc. with no problem. This is a choice, a behavior. So, fair enough, it is the same for gays. Gays choose to have crushes, date, make out with, build a life with, have sex with, etc. who they are drawn to—a persons of the same gender.

So in this light, yes, engaging in gay behavior or embracing a gay identity IS a choice. The gay “choice” involves a small minority population, is condemned by some denominations of Christianity and is generally out of the societal norm in America (as an American, I will confine myself to speaking about the U.S.).

Since when do U.S. laws or society protect people based on a chosen behavior, rather than an inborn trait like race? I’ll tell you when—since the adoption of the Constitution, which guarantees freedom of religion, which is even more of a choice than orientation.

Every Catholic, Baptist, Jew, Muslim, Methodist, etc. chooses fully and freely to be that religion. They may be born to it and adhere to it all their life; they may become full mmebers as young adults, they may convert in middle age, but they attend sevices, observe holidays and fasts, and often marry within the faith. Now say you have an individual bigot who believes sincerely in his heart that all Jews are Christ-killers, stubbornly resisting the true Gospel and headed straight for hell. Mr. Bigot is free to believe that, to teach it to his children, to teach it in his own church or to shout it on a street corner. He is free to not associate with or allow his children to associate with Jews. But in America, Mr. Bigot cannot deprive Jews of the right to legally marry in their faith or to be protected from discrimination. Mr. Bigot wil find his views shunned by most of polite society.

Wy should it be any different for gays? A lot of people are whining that their disapproving views of gays are not being tolerated. My patience has run out. If only it was merely “views.” You see, my disapproving view of narrow-minded, hypocritical bigots may hurt your feelings but they are not supported by laws making you a second class citizen. So, no-when I criticize you with words, it is not REMOTELY the same as when an anti-gay person “criticizes” me by voting to prevent me from getting married. NOT the same thing, not even close. (If anyone out there holds anti-gay views but votes to accord everyone the same equal rights, then I apologize-thank you and please disregard this; but I don’t think there are many.)

And as for the right to hold homophobic opinions, to think and believe a certain way and voice those opinions, you can hold/speak any opinion you want; and some people will disagee with you, and may want nothing to do with you. I personally believe, like many of you do, that not everything is good, not everthing should be free from judgment, not everything should be accepted and tolerated. I harshly judge and condemn bigotry. I refuse to accept or tolerate prejudiced views—I can have compassion for the person, but I don’t have to accept their lifestyle choice as healthy or acceptable or something I would want to expose my children to.

I do not ask for acceptance or tolerance from homophobes; but I demand and deserve to be treated equally under the law, just as you are treated equally despite my lack of acceptance or tolerance for you.

Avatar Image says:

I’d like to state my opinion: I’m not upset about any part of this news. Its all fine with me fangirls new angst!ship

I have a few quibbles:

Does anyone have any ideas about how soon Grindlewald began to regret starting the whole “war”?

when faced with Voldemort he lied about the elder wand (to protect Dumbledores grave?) and then said “there’s so much you do not understand” and he also didn’t seem to fear being killed (like Dumbledore). What changed him? You’d think being in prison would make a person more bitter. or maybe he was intellectual enough to understand that he did wrong??? How did he know Voldemort was the new dark lord? How did he even know Dumbledore was dead?

Do you think DD ever visited and told him he was planning to die?

Avatar Image says:

Minisha, Going by the very very little we can glean from Deathly Hallows, my personal best guess is that Grindelwald felt remorse during his duel with Dumbledore in 1945. Dumbledore told Harry that he (DD) thought he was a bit more skillful. But, Grindelwald did have the Elder wand, supposedly unbeatable. Therefore, my guess is that Grindelwald felt remorse, and chose not to fight. (This interpretation, incidentally, might fit well with another Dumbledore-ism, from Chamber of Secrets, chapter 18, Dobby’s Reward [page 333 of the US hardcover edition to be exact]; “It is our choices, Harry, that show what we truly are, far more than our abilities.”

Rachel, Alex, what do you think?

Avatar Image says:

budb, i don’t thing he felt remorse in 1945, because if he felt, why did he wait for dumbledore to beat him? maybe the 53 years i nurmengard made him remorse…

Avatar Image says:

Beautiful interview.

Avatar Image says:

If he felt remorse then, maybe he thought he deserved that punishment??? after all, lives won’t come back from him just saying “sorry”

Avatar Image says:

Perhaps, and as Me noted, he had over a half century to reflect. I am at the age when I know that all the little regrets, those tiny bits of remorse that concern long ago and very minor things seem to pop up unbidden out of nowhere. Its part of human aging apparently, but still disconcerting. Imagine Grindelwald being imprisoned in the worst confinement of all, his own memories?

Avatar Image says:

I agree with “Me”. Gridlewald spent half a decade in a prison he built. Man, that had to have an affect. All those years, alone, maybe he finally understood how it felt to be one of his own victims.

Avatar Image says:

That would fit too. If Grindlewald was as smart as Dumbledore said, I guess he could be objective enough… after other more violent emotions got out of the way.

What about him seeming to know who Voldemort was? and what he was after?? and if he was trying to “protect Dumbledores grave” as Harry suggested, how did he know Dumbledore was dead?

the answer could be something as simple as prisoners getting the daily prophet at Nurmengard…

Avatar Image says:

I have a feeling, that given their history, Dumbledore and Grindlewald would have been hyper-sensitive to news of each other. Grindlewald would have found out eventually about Dumbledore’s death. If not through the news paper, then maybe through his jailers.

Avatar Image says:

Posted by Melissa: “I also find it interesting that only now when the revelations include dumbledore as gay, and not after the huge chat she gave just after the book was published, are people so impassioned about thinking Jo should stop talking about it. :) it’s curious!”

@Melissa, Had she revealed this news before DH, this whole controversy would just have happened sooner, but I think the arguments would be the same.

But what if she had said something like “he just never seemed to find the right woman”? We all know the answer to that.

I think those who would like to silence Jo now are angry because they don’t like what she said. She actually chose to make one of her characters gay. I don’t think it even matters that it’s an important character like Dumbledore. It could have been Dawlish and the reaction would have been the same in my opinion. But I doubt she gets many questions about Dawlish’s love life.

Avatar Image says:

I think everyone needs to remember that the books basically take place from Harry’s perspective. And from that perspective, a revelation about Dumbledore’s orientation wouldn’t have made sense.

It’s clear that there was a LOT Harry didn’t know about Dumbledore (or Snape, or his own parents)....but that’s the way life is. It takes time and maturity to discover the truth (good and bad and unexpected) about people we love and admire.

Dumbledore wasn’t perfect-as JKR said, he could be a bit Machiavellian-but I don’t think that his orientation mattered at all except to the extent that it influenced his thinking about Grindelwald, and even then it wasn’t really any of Harry’s business, any more than McGonagall’s personal life, or Hagrid’s personal life would be. So why spell it out in the books?

Overall, however, I think the information about Dumbledore’s orientation makes his character more sympathetic after the revelations in Book 7—it takes a lot of the sting out of the whole Grindelwald episode, because I for one would FAR rather believe that Dumbledore was acting idiotically out of adolescent infatuation than that he was really, truly intrigued by the philosophy of wizarding supremacy to that extent.

Avatar Image says:

As a Catholic, I just want to say that Rachel does not speak for all Catholics. I believe that a person’s sexual orientation is determined by birth, not by choice. I believe that any loving relationship between two consenting adults is a wonderful thing. I also believe that gays and lesbians ought to have the legal right to marry and enjoy all the political and societal benefits of marriage.

But most of all, I believe that it is abhorrent to use religion to justify bigotry. (And I might add that it is hard to view Catholicism as any kind of moral authority on issues of sexuality these days.)

If people think that something like gay marriage is morally wrong, they shouldn’t do it themselves….but unless they can prove a direct harm to themselves (or anyone else) resulting from two men or two women getting married, they should shut up about it because it’s none of their business.

And they should also remember that when they try to legislate their religious beliefs for other people, they’re setting a precedent that could come back to bite them in a big, big way if someone else ended up in charge….they wouldn’t like it so much then. In other words, treat other people the way you would want to be treated…wow, that sounds kind of familiar, doesn’t it? Hmmmmm….........

Avatar Image says:

M Jones, I understand it rather well. Agreeing with it is a much differnt issue, and thinking we should bend or kow tow to a piece of public opinion that fosters the idea that we should treat a portion of our population as inferior because of their sexuality, is, again, much different – and not even up for discussion on this site.

Avatar Image says:

IndigoMisfit, Minisha, Me and others interested in discussing HP (sorry, I’m just going to ignore anyone who wants to talk about anything besides Harry Potter…)

Interesting questions…but, if we consider the experiences Sirius had in Azkaban, its doubtful the Owl Post went to Grindelwald! ;-) Tho that is a great image, isn’t it, an owl squeezing in to the cell through the narrow slit of a window, delivering the paper so Grindelwald can do the crossword…

On the other hand, remember that Sirius talked about overhearing conversations—presumably Grindelwald could overhear as well? That would give him the general idea of what was going on in the outside world. And Minisha’s idea of occasional visits from Dumbledore does have merit, actually: think of all the examples of “the two friends who became enemies yet on some level remain friends” one can find in literature and film (the X-Men come to mind…).

I think Grindelwald would have recognized who Voldemort was not because he knew him previously, but because who but Voldemort could get in to that cell, and who else would have a motive to do so? As Me first indicated, Grindelwald had a lot of time to think, and as Indigo and Minisha noted G was intelligent: its likely that he could have figure out the V would learn of and want the Elder Wand, sooner or later.

Incidentally, that’s another prediction I had gotten wrong: I thought there was probably some previous direct connection between Voldemort and Grindelwald, and clearly there was not…

And, I really want to check tonight the film version of HP and SS, specifically the scene when Ron and Harry meet on the Hogwarts Express and are eating. The Chocolate Frog Card we (as readers) knew would provide important clues, and that brief reference to Grindelwald would become obviously important somewhere in the story line sooner or later. But…was the reference to the defeat of Grindelwald found on the card actually made in the film version? If not, that will be yet another oooppps in the film making/screen writing that needs to be cleverly dealt with!

Avatar Image says:

After the Ball reveals our agenda? Really? Haven’t read it in years…I’ll go back and look at it (if I can find it)....hmmmmmmm it’s somewhere here with the other 10,000 books…. Oh yes, that agenda! The one that when you are recruited you swear in blood never to reveal to anyone who themselves is not lesbian or gay….. Or the part where you come out to everyone…so that people begin, slowly, to understand that if they have family members/friends/neighbors and colleagues who are lesbians or gays. I agree that the Act-Up action at the Cathedral was wrong. Not all lesbians and gays are members of Act-UP, just as the previous poster said that you do not speak for all Catholics. Vis a vis the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence – they have a long history of philanthropy and good works, raise money for charity, etc. They did not disrupt the Mass, they themselves are Catholic and went in and took Communion. Anyone wanting to hear their side of the story should google their website. Our little Pride parade here in our community is very family friendly, probably because of the proliferating numbers of parents with kids around.

Avatar Image says:

Bravo Leaky! Wonderful and insightful interview.

Avatar Image says:

Hmm, regarding Grindelwald. I’m not sure if we have enough evidence from the text to state weather or not he was feeling any sort of remorse for his actions in 1945 (the tradegy of Ariana). However, after many, many years in prison, he did have a lot of time to think about what he had done, what his intentions had been, etc. In the end, he had remorse and died heroically, resisting Voldemort. At that point, what more could he have done? He knew that Voldemort was coming for him and he probably regretted all the murders he had committed and how his ideas found their way into the Death eater’s rhetoric, leading to more death and destruction. Its a tragic end to a character who had many brilliant talents but used them for evil instead of for good :(.

As for Jenn, if you wish to discuss the differences in our views concerning what constitutes Catholic teaching on these issues and more…please feel free to e-mail me.

Susan: Alex has also acknowledged the anti-Catholic mockery of the “sisters” and if you were to see how they present themselves it is clear that they love to deride Catholic beliefs. I am not refering to the incident at Most Holy Redeemer parish but specifically the names that they give themselves, how they have presented themselves in parades, etc. But it seems that I can’t convince anyone of that small fact on here. However, if you want to discuss this further…e-mail me too.

Alex: I would like to continue our conversation (I don’t consider it a debate per se) and if you would like..e-mail me too. I welcome good discourse :)

Melissa and LC: I think you are doing a good job on this site reporting on everything Harry Potter. There is so much to “unpack” in this series and because the themes are about love, death, sacrifice, tolerance, etc…discussions such as these will come up. It is a mark of good art that it encourages the reader to think about these great issues and prompts discussions about them..even if they are heated at times. So, keep up the good work :)

Avatar Image says:

I had an interesting conversation with my 8 year old daughter tonight about Dumbledore and who he loved. I told her that something new was revealed a couple of days ago about Dumbledore that we didn’t know before. I told her that JKR gave a reading and one person asked a question about who Dumbledore loved.. and I told her it was Grindewald. She looked at me for a moment and said—but Mom, he’s a boy. I said yes he is. And then she said but Dumbledore is a boy. And I said yes he is. And then she said that’s neat, did they love each other a lot? And I said I guess so because it broke Dumbledore’s heart. And then I told her that’s OK to love whoever you want to love and Dumbledore chose someone that made his heart happy even though he got hurt later. And she smiled the biggest smile and then asked me if I could read her that part again in the book.

And that is how you tell your children about Dumbledore being gay :) :)

Avatar Image says:

Actually, KB, if it was Dawlish that she said was gay I really wouldn’t care because Dawlish doesn’t mean anything to me as a character (Sorry John).

Dumbledore does. He is a fascinating character and a key one. He is a guy you root for and can sometimes identify with. As you read the book you pause sometimes and think “This guy is awesome.” Being gay takes the magic away from the character for me. (No pun intended).

Now, when I read about some incredibly crafty plan Dumbledore has brought to fruition I am going pause and thing “This guy is awesome!” but the next thought is going to be “but he’s gay, gross.” It’s not the same effect.

My objection to this news is because of religious reasons, or some ridiculous sense of moral superiority, it’s simply the ‘yuck’ factor will forever change how I read the story. The story hasn’t changed, but sadly my perception of it does. I’ll never again be able to see Dumbledore the way Harry does.

GLADD gets no respect from me because of the ridiculous way they act in the media spotlight. Attacking every famous person who dares to not agree with homosexuality and demanding public apology is petty and childish. Forcing their chosen way of life onto a public that does not want to hear about it is WRONG.

Bringing GLADD to the front page of Leaky just strikes a sour note for me. It sort of politicizes the whole thing which is something I have never seen here.

Avatar Image says:

D’oh! I meant to say it IS NOT because of religious reasons, or some ridiculous sense of moral superiority.

Avatar Image says:

For the final time, because the first six times weren’t enough:

“This is why I didn’t think it was necessarily prudent for LC to have interviewed GLAAD (remember, that was my original disagreement) to get their “take” on Dumbledore’s outing.”

We did not interview GLAAD to get its “take,” I repeat. No one’s wondering whether GLAAD is happy with this news or not. That’s fairly obvious that they are. We interviewed an organization experienced in dealing with homosexual images and words in media, on how to handle the revelation responsibly.

We are not interviewing someone who is against the outing because this wasn’t an interview arguing FOR the outing. The outing happened. We are not trying to determine whether it was right or not to do – that’s not our job. J.K. Rowling said he was gay, and we’re not arguing whether it was OK for her to do that. It’s the view of this site (and JKR) that they’re her characters, and she has the right to nkow what she knows and say what she says about them. To argue whether it was OK for her to reveal this in any place other than the comments (and notice it’s off topic but we’re still allowing it to go on), please go elsewhere. It’s not being featured on this site.

I hope that clears it up and beg you to refer to this post the next time someone asks for an opposing viewpoint. YET again: If you can find an opposing viewpoint to Mr. Lund’s that is still about how to handle this information responsibly, and NOT about whether it was OK to reveal or whether it’s OK that Dumbledore is gay, do let us know.

Thanks guys :)

Melissa

Avatar Image says:

Wizengamut—Awww…bless her little heart and yours. Thank you for sharing! :)

Avatar Image says:

Melissa,

I concede your point. I know it was not your intention to present a pro or con viewpoint on information revealed about Dumbledore’s sexual identity. Myself and some others have expressed that they wished you had gone to someone else other than GLAAD. I don’t know if there is someone else..perhaps one could be found but that has been my only complaint about this. As to how to handle this information responsibly…these are fictional characters with many motivations for their actions. What is going to be thrilling, I hope, is that since all 7 books have come out, we can now dig deep into the depth that is in the Harry Potter series. There has been a lot of literary interpretation for over 10 years now but it has been lacking due to the obvious fact that we didn’t have all the information. Much of the discussion was more about speculation, predictions (who is going to die? who is going to be shipped with who…and so on), etc and not rigorous literary interpretation. Athough there are those in the academic world who see this series as fluff and not worthy of deep insights, myself and I’m sure there are tons of other fans out there who believe that the Harry Potter series is worthy of deep, thoughtful, and rigorous academic or just plain thought provoking interpretations and discussions. JK Rowling deals with many serious issues involving every facet of human life and society on a physical, emotional, psychological, and spiritual level. I look forward to some thoughtful discussion about the series itself and hopefully the level of discourse will be lively, civil, and thought provoking. Afterall, LOTR has been out for over 40 years and fans of that series still discuss the books, exploring every possible facet of the triology and the other books associated with it. I believe that the HP series can very well endure many years into the future. Only time will see :)

Avatar Image says:

I need to address Rachel… something she has talked about over and over… and I’m sorry that it’s not about the books… but I have to set this clear for anyone that might read (even if it IS 2 pages away.

First off. That poster you saw wasn’t for a gay pride parade. It was for a leather / fetish gathering. And although the poster did feature some gay people… and even though the gathering does have quite a few gay attendees, it is not a “gay” organized event.

In addition, both Act Up and “the sisters” are not a very good representation of gay people either. And if you read the interview, it specifically talks about peoples perceptions and stereotypes. These are perfect examples of bad stereotypes and things that give us gay people a bad image. I can tell you this. If you added up all the people ever involved with both groups, it wouldn’t even begin to be 0.001% of the current, living, gay population…

You may not see us… but there are average gay men and women living, working, playing, and most likely even worshipping around you every day! The reason you don’t see us, well, see us as “gay” is because you have this image in your head of what we are. But I can assure you… you deal with at least 1 gay person (whether you see them as gay or not) in your life on a daily basis. Most likely someone you love dearly is gay.

I’m not putting your beliefs or anything about you down. I’m not being negative. I just needed to correct some of the things you have been told and some of the things you have seen and believed to be a reputable example.

I’m sorry that this revelation may have destroyed some of your love for either the character or the books… but as the interview said… this is a very good example of what happens in real life…. and what can happen when someone comes out.

And we wonder why the suicide rate is so high among gay people…

And just to make this post valid for this site… and this may have already been discussed… but… How do you think the wizarding world, as imagined by JKR, would deal with such a known celebrity (as Dumbledore would be the equiv to one on their world) coming out? Do you think it would even be an issue?

Avatar Image says:

Michael,

I believe that if you had read all of my posts you would have seen that I have said that not all gay people are like the “sisters”, etc. I know that there are gay people all around. I have worked with them and I have been friends with them. I do not hate gays. Thank you for your corrections though (especially in regards to the “sisters”). The revelation that Dumbledore is gay did not diminish his character nor the series in my eyes. I thought that this added another layer to his motivations and his past actions (especially as a young man). As for as how would the wizarding world react to this revelation…to be honest..I don’t think they would have taken it any better than many have now. What has been disturbing to me is the media’s reaction. As usual, they have to act like the Rita Skeeters that they are. Geesh, this isn’t a huge story and yet they had it all over the news, etc. The headline was right up there with the SoCal fires. Ugh, I’m more disgusted with the media and their reaction but then again..when are we not disgusted with them. They blow things out of proportion everytime and can’t get simple facts right. I agree on JK Rowling about distrusting the media and refusing to believe more than 90% of what they tell you. Chances are..they will get it wrong.

Avatar Image says:

Roger writes: “My objection to this news is because of religious reasons, or some ridiculous sense of moral superiority, it’s simply the ‘yuck’ factor will forever change how I read the story. The story hasn’t changed, but sadly my perception of it does. I’ll never again be able to see Dumbledore the way Harry does.” I know, right? Old people having sex… that’s just so yuck! I was never able to see my grandparents in the same light after I figured out THEY had sex. Ew.

“Now, when I read about some incredibly crafty plan Dumbledore has brought to fruition I am going pause and thing “This guy is awesome!” but the next thought is going to be “but he’s gay, gross.” It’s not the same effect.” Wow, it’s not that big of a deal. I challenge you to reorganize what you think is important if someone’s sexuality is always popping into your head when you think of them. I hope for your friends sake that none of them are gay because of how you would consider them. Many of the people in these forums have quickly looked past Dumbledore’s sexuality, and hopefully one day you will too for EVERYONE on this planet.

Avatar Image says:

Roger said -

GLADD gets no respect from me because of the ridiculous way they act in the media spotlight. Attacking every famous person who dares to not agree with homosexuality and demanding public apology is petty and childish. Forcing their chosen way of life onto a public that does not want to hear about it is WRONG. Bringing GLADD to the front page of Leaky just strikes a sour note for me. It sort of politicizes the whole thing which is something I have never seen here.

Melissa’s reply attempts to neatly avoid the point of your post. Simply look at the conclusion of the GLAAD interview. If thats not propoganda -what is.

And they got the chance to do it on the pages of The Leaky Cauldron !

Avatar Image says:

To be honest, this has saddened our family and we don’t agree. It’s ruined the books for us because as Christian’s this is against our belief system. I certainly won’t be seeing any of the rest of the movies or encouraging my own children to read these novels. It’s sad really that it was spoiled like this. I tried quite hard to ignore the Church’s teaching on these books and their insinuations that they promoted such behavior. So sad, really.

Avatar Image says:

It is sad that you will not encourage your children to read these novels because of this, but I understand that you must do what you think is right for your kids. On the bright side I guess there will be one less person to stand inline behind when the next movie comes out, lol.

Avatar Image says:

Former Potter Fan, I’m sad for you too, especially since the books have EXACTLY THE SAME CONTENT that they had before Jo answered that particular question.

Apparently, witchcraft is considered at least as sinful in that same Bible you refer to as homosexuality but for some reason, people with those beliefs were willing to overlook that MAJOR part of it…and a few other things that SAME Bible teaches. I would appreciate it if someone could explain this to me so that I can understand why it is not hypocrisy.

Avatar Image says:

I am a Christian so it’s safe to say that I’m not happy at the revelation that Dumbledore was gay, but Truely and Honestly that does not make him a bad person. He still holds all the wonderful loving pure qualities he held before. I still love and admire him and he will Always be my favourite character. My mum is a homosexual and that is something our family has had to come to terms with but what i always remember is that God is LOVE not hate! I still believe that being gay is wrong but the people who are gay aren’t sick or evil, they are just like you and me. Love is what’s important :) So be kind, be wise and spread some!

Avatar Image says:

Yes, it is the same content except that I believe that Homosexuality is a SIN. Witchcraft and MAGIC are NOT REAL. No one can cast spells and such. It’s to me a fantasy world and therefore I see no issue with it.

On the other hand, I believe that Homosexuality is not something that I want to expose to my children. There is no hypocrisy unless you believe that there truly are people who can cast spells - then you need a psychiatrist.

Avatar Image says:

Incidentally Zee, I’m curious why you feel that I MUST for some reason accept that it is okay for a child’s book to contain references to homosexuality. I have a right to an opinion as do you. In an adult work that is your choice.

To be quite honest, I would have preferred long ago to know this fact. Why? Because it is our belief that this alternate life style is not acceptable. I have a right to that opinion and a right to shield my YOUNG children from such information. There is no reason for anyone, JK included, to force their own agenda down our throats. I would not do so to hers or your children about my own beliefs. To each their own. That is OUR choice.

Avatar Image says:

Thanks Melissa and TLC for this interview!

I agree with Sean when he says that “treating other people with dignity and respect really is one of the most important values that we all can share”.

We don’t have to like everybody or agree with everybody but we should treat them with respect. I think that’s one of the biggest and most present values in the HP series and this “revelation” only stress that message.

And thanks to Jo!!

Avatar Image says:

Apart from the fact that these books are not strictly children’s books, AND the fact that they DON’T infact contain homosexuality, it could just as easily be argued ‘why should a children’s book contain references to ANY sexuality?’

The answer would be that the world is full of heterosexual, homosexual, bi-sexual and asexual people – so why would they not also exist in the literary world?

By all means have an opinion, no one here said you couldn’t. But why should any author write their books according to YOUR specific beliefs? Why is it that your beliefs are your opinion, but JK Rowling’s beliefs are an ‘agenda’ that’s she supposedly trying to force down your throat?

JK Rowling’s Fantasy is not a fantasy for those with right-wing ideals about whose existence can be acknowledged and whose can’t.

Btw, if witchcraft and magic are not real, what are they doing in the bible? Why would there be specific passages in the bible calling them sinful if they weren’t even real? You’re not saying that ‘God’s word’ contains elements of things that don’t exist, are you?

Let me tell you, witchcraft is very much real, and is practiced in many parts of the world to varying degrees. But then that depends on how much of the rest of the world you’re familar with, as opposed to remaining insular, ergo oblivious to other cultures and belief systems.

Maybe the main problem here is that what is written in the bible can be interpreted in so many different ways that people have began to pick and choose which bits they hold dear, and which bits they can dismiss as “not real”.

Lastly,

Avatar Image says:

The answer would be that the world is full of heterosexual, homosexual, bi-sexual and asexual people – so why would they not also exist in the literary world? Exactly Zee!

And that, I think, is the best discussion you could have with your children—a time to open the discussion in your house so children have an opportunity to hear your viewpoint and not hear things on the street and getting wrong information from others. (See my post at top of this page)

anotherweasley, thanks, I’m VERY proud of her too!

Avatar Image says:

Witchcraft is NOT REAL. People may “practice it” but honey it does NOT WORK. If I could learn to cast a spell, you’d better believe things would be a lot different. There are a lot of delusional people out there….

As far as the Bible, yes there are things in there that aren’t strictly real. There was no Ark, etc.

And these have been parlayed as CHILDREN’S BOOKS! I would have preferred that I not be lied to or “mislead.” I do NOT choose to allow my children to discuss these topics at this point just because the likes or you or JK Rowling want to promote a certain agenda. I do not HAVE to accept this “alternate” life style and neither does anyone else!

Avatar Image says:

From Rachel: “I am a Christian so it’s safe to say that I’m not happy at the revelation that Dumbledore was gay…”.

Rachel, I don’t think your viewpoint is necessarily representative of a majority of Christians. I am a Christian also and I am not at all unhappy about Dumbledore’s sexuality.

Avatar Image says:

I’m astonished

Avatar Image says:

KB,

I think you’re going to find that your mistaken. Recent polls indicate that a wide majority of christians disagree with the homosexual lifestyle and vote against gay marriage by a wide margin.

Avatar Image says:

@ Wizengamut, thanks for that. I loved you post at the top there. My little broter is 9 and he is totally comfortable with the idea of different sexualities. He’s still the happy-go-lucky little git he’s always been.

Former Harry Potter Fan, please look up the definitions of witchcraft and then do an internet search for cultures that practice it. It IS real. Voodoo priests and priestesses practice various types of witchcraft. It may not be the wand-waving that happens in the HP books, but then wand-waving isn’t the only witchcraft practiced in the books anyway.

You say that the Ark is not real, and yet many Christians would argue that it is. So you see, no author should have to edit their books and ideas based on the whims of different religious beliefs. They can only go on what their OWN beliefs are.

I don’t see how you have been lied to or misled. But if you believe that, fine. No one’s making you stay here.

Avatar Image says:

@Zee, once again I’ve gotta say YOU ROCK.

Avatar Image says:

“Recent polls indicate that a wide majority of christians disagree with the homosexual lifestyle and vote against gay marriage by a wide margin.”

@ Former Harry Potter Fan,

Were these “recent polls” reported by the FOX Noise Channel by any chance???

Avatar Image says:

“So you see, no author should have to edit their books and ideas based on the whims of different religious beliefs.”

Rowling has every right to alienate those who think homosexual acts are wrong. In turn, those who feel alienated have every right to complain and express their disappointment. BTW, apart from what will or not be featured in a story, an author always have the choice on how and when to present certain facts. The way Rowling outed DD, (after the last book was finished and sold), was seen as inappropriate by many.

Avatar Image says:

Note: I am not sure my statement above is grammatically correct. I’m not a native English speaker.

Avatar Image says:

TrustSnape, you’re right. And in turn, others of us have a right to disagree with those who we feel are expressing intolerant or bigotted opinions. So at least we’re clear that everyone can post opinions and counter arguments.

Not sure about your choice of words btw “Rowling has every right to alienate…”. Why would you assume she had enough time between the question being asked, and her answering it, to decide she would deliberately alienate people?

Are there not people here who actually think it’s ok to alienate people that don’t fit their ‘ideal’ of what a person should be?

Homosexual acts? Are you naive enough to think that heterosexuals do not also practice those same ‘acts’?

Avatar Image says:

Since it has become thuddingly obvious that this painful and heated discussion will never get around to discussing the world of Harry Potter in any meaningful sense, I followed my own advice and re-read The Sorting Hat’s New Song, from the Order of the Phoenix. The most relevant lines are below.

...

But then discord crept among us Feeding on our faults and fears. The Houses that, like pillars four, Had once held up our school, Now turned upon one another and, Divided, sought to rule. And for a while it seemed the school Must meet an early end, What with dueling and with fighting And the clash of friend on friend.

... Oh, know the perils, read the signs, The warning history shows, For our Hogwarts is in danger From external, deadly foes. And we must unite inside her Or we’ll crumble from within.

The heated and even acidic discussions of the past week did not belong on this site at all. This site is NOT the place to discuss gay rights or gay bashing, or delve into the true meanings of religious texts, or discuss the policies of various churches. Repeatedly, you have been reminded that those discussions should be held more appropriately elsewhere…and you simply have proven so impolite and so self-centered that you droned on. I’m addressing all of you, regardless of your individual opinions, since _all_of you who ignored the purpose of this site are at fault.

This site is for those who wish to discuss the world of Hogwarts, the books written by JKR and the films inspired by those books.

Those of you who have—despite repeated pleas to stay focused and polite—insisted in grinding on in your irrelevant droning monologues. You have driven out those of us who have tried to focus on a discussion relevant to the purpose of this site.

Your rudeness and your stunning conceits are staggering, your hypocrisies glaring to everyone (except yourselves), and terribly saddening as a collective statement on the contempory cultural life in the US.

I would like to think YOU might feel some remorse at your own behaviors, yet I know that would be foolish beyond belief.

Avatar Image says:

budb, I agree with you but think most people here have posted respectfully but it is the nature of any debate that it will get heated at times because people have very strong opinions on subjects like this. Most people here are posting ‘on topic’ though.

“This site is for those who wish to discuss the world of Hogwarts, the books written by JKR and the films inspired by those books.”

Yeah most of the time that’s what we’d be doing but I think we are allowed to comment on whatever news items TLC posts.

Avatar Image says:

Certainly the author has the right to do whatever she wants with her characters, but as others have indicated it is the way she did it that smells a little funny.

Now, I hate conspiracy theories so much that you could almost call me an anti-conspiracy theorist. So I have trouble believing that this was an attempt to grab headlines or increase profit.

Likewise, I don’t think this was a poorly thought out decision on her part. The one thing I’m sure we can all agree on here is that JKR is a BRILLIANT human being. She has to be to have steered this awesome story through 7 books. We know she has the foresight and ability to choose her replies to questions carefully – she avoided giving away the plot for all those years. So I don’t think it “slipped out”.

She KNEW it would cause an enormous rift in the fandom, and she put it out there anyway. Why? Was it ethical to do so after everyone had bought the last book? Why choose to hurt so many of the fans that have supported her though the series? She is not naive enough to think that this was on the same level as telling us what Hermione’s mother’s name is, or how time-turners work.

Avatar Image says:

I think most of the fandom does not care; in Europe it isn’t seen as that big of a deal, and hasn’t caused too much split. In the US, lots of people (reading from the comments) only stopped in to say “that’s great,” or “doesn’t really change anything.” For those who do care, there are those that seem to think this changes what is in the book. She knew it would upset some people, but there are gays in the world, and if that upsets you then maybe you’d rather find a different world. If someone you loved turns out to be gay, it’s not a stab at you! If one of your loved ones comes out as gay, why make it about you?

Avatar Image says:

Roger, as an adult fan who disagrees with her actions, I have to agree with you. I think this was quite deliberate. Why? Because some schools WOULD have banned the books knowing full well up front. Is it bigoted because I would have chosen not to read it? Not unless it’s bigoted for a gay man or woman to choose not to read a hetero harlequin novel.

Incidentally, I too have seen the polls about how Christians feel in several major papers over the years—some of the younger ones who may not read the real news should do a Lexus Nexus search to prove their points before they dismiss something by saying it’s from Faux News.

Avatar Image says:

“Why would you assume she had enough time between the question being asked, and her answering it, to decide she would deliberately alienate people?”

Well, Rowling wrote seven books knowing that, at least for her, DD was gay. We should all agree that she had more than enough time to consider the consequences of revealing this. And to argue that Rowling never anticipated that someday she would be asked about DD’s love life is to highly underestimate her intelligence. Do you honestly think Rowling didn’t know what she was doing? Stupid she is not.

Avatar Image says:

Everyone has the choice to read a book based on the topics it covers. You have a right to not read HP because a character is gay, although I have no idea why that fact makes any impact on your reading the book (It didn’t have any impact when people DID read the seven books). Gay men and women read many books with heterosexual characters, but they have the choice not to. It’s not bigoted for you to choose not to read gay themed novels (something that affects only you), but it is bigoted for people to choose what others should and should not read (schools, leaders, libraries).

The character’s sexuality has no impact on his message. He is gay, and there are gay people in the world, and perhaps you don’t like the fact that gay people can slip by your radar, and that’s why you don’t like this book. Is it easier for you if you can identify them on sight? I disagree with people who think less of Mark Foley and Ted Haggards messages based on who they are personally. Private lives should have no impact on public opinion. If someone has sexual relations before marriage, for example, I don’t think less of their opinion. They CAN still be a good role model. Everyone is a sinner. “Do as I say and not as I do” seems to be popular for a lot of people. And right.

Avatar Image says:

I can understand people saying “This revelation devastated me because it hurts to think Dumbledore was gay.” I don’t share that opinion, but it’s relevant to the topic. Wholescale diatribes against homosexuality aren’t relevant. Let me compare this to how I feel about drinking. I’m Baptist and from the South. I’m morally opposed to drinking alcohol. However, rather than railing on and on about the evils of drink, I can very reasonably say that characters I am very fond of drink alcohol, and I can rationally analyze how drinking affected Hagrid’s behavior and sometimes his choices. However, the fact that those characters drink doesn’t become a major rallying point for my anger, nor does it change everything about two (otherwise, to me!) wonderful wizards.

I understand that some people would go beyond moral opposition and equate homosexuality with evil. Quite frankly, I’m much more concerned about the epidemic problem of innocent children, girls and boys, targeted by sexual predators than loving couples who want to get married and live conventional, “upstanding citizen” lives. Anyone who would equate pedophilia with homosexuality is more or less saying that it is somehow worse to sexually abuse boys than girls.

What Jo’s revelation did for me is made me rethink some assumptions. Dumbledore - wasn’t he just an asexual God-like wizard? This information does shed light on his relationship with Grindelwald (spelling? - I’m not looking in the book). I guess after some thought I’ve concluded that he still was more or less an asexual wizard, one who had gay romantic feelings. Now, if it had been Sirius, I would not be thinking “asexual”!

Avatar Image says:

That’s supposed to be “a (otherwise, to me!) wonderful wizard”.

Avatar Image says:

“We know she has the foresight and ability to choose her replies to questions carefully – she avoided giving away the plot for all those years. So I don’t think it ‘slipped out’.”

Exactly.

Anyway, I’m going, goodbye to everyone.

Avatar Image says:

“She KNEW it would cause an enormous rift in the fandom, and she put it out there anyway. Why? Was it ethical to do so after everyone had bought the last book? Why choose to hurt so many of the fans that have supported her though the series?”

@Roger, of course JKR knew that some people would be upset by this news. But how does that translate into she should not have said it?

I’d hate to live in a world where the practice was to never speak about anything that could upset some people. What an eerily quiet world that would be.

Avatar Image says:

I for one am not at all bothered by the revelation, nor does it change in any way my opinion of DD or JKR.

I do disagree with those who feel that this was some kind of a “deliberate” act to wait until now to divulge this information. I personally saw the hints in book 7 about Dumbledore, so I feel it WAS in the book, others did not and saw that this was just a deep friendship. I honestly think if JKR did anything deliberatly it was to allow people to read what they would into that and make their own decisions about Gridnewald and Dumbledore themselves. I don’t think she felt it necessary to point it out to everyone at that point since in truth it did nothing to change who Dumbledore really was as a character.

I feel that up until she was asked a DIRECT question about whether Dumbledore had ever found love that she didn't feel that she needed to mention it.  Just like she didn't mention in the books a hint of Neville and Hannah, but discussed it at one of the open book events.  She answered honestly and if anything I would have thought less of her if she had not and skirted what she really felt.

There are alot of things that she hasn’t mentioned explicitly in the books, these are things that we ponder and come up with theories on. In the past Jo has been sketchy in her answeres, always being honest, but telling us that certain things she cannot answer. But since the release of Book 7, she has not had to worry about giving out too much information that would give away future plots, so she has been very free with us and has answered HONESTLY the questions she has been asked. Why would she have answered this one any differently?

I’m sorry that some fans feel betrayed that she didn’t mention it sooner, but I still don’t see how it changes anything in the stories. If you didn’t see it before, why should it matter now? That’s just something I don’t think I can ever understand.

Avatar Image says:

I guess this post is only for closure purposes because how deeply saddened this whole situation has made me. The fact that super HP fans are turning their backs on the series and JK because of this outing is outragous. It changes nothing! It only clarifies what we’ve already read. It has nothing to do with JK having courage or worrying about her bottom line. (Considering that the majority of fans really arent that narrow minded about the revalation she still would have made killer money) I can explain myself and my beliefs until I turn blue in the face and my words would still not penetrate the minds of highly ignorant people.

Some say their reason is because of Religion (highly doubt it, when slavery was around they said it was in the bible also to do so, not to mention not cutting your hair and if you do so you have to wear a veil, not getting remarried/have sex/or even date after a divorce until after your spouse has past on because it is still considered adultry, ect). I have 2 questions and I would LOVE it if someone could answer them for me! (Seriously please answer them) 1.) What makes witchcraft less of a sin than homosexuality? Some say its spell casting and such is not real but on contrary if you are a TRUE Christian than you would know that ANYTHING to do with magic or witches is a sin. It is not a question of whether its real or not. That has already been answered in the Bible. I just want to know when it was less of a sin that made you read the series anyway until this all came out about DD?? 2.) Maybe it is just me but I would appreciate it if someone could give me the exact passage and tell me where exactly it is in the Bible that says that homosexuality is a sin.

Some have said that they dont like it just because they think its gross. That everytime they re-read the books they think “Ew, he’s gay”. All I have to say to you is, GROW UP. Just because you watch your wife give birth and see how gross that looks doesnt mean you think about it when your in bed with her 6 weeks later!! Its a matter of maturity. The only cause for this kind of homophobia is fear of liking it. (And I dont mean liking it as in accepting it, I mean like IT).

And to the ones who are saying they hate the books now because it shouldnt be in childrens book…. Be a better parent! You can do 1 of 2 things. 1.) You can keep them away from the books forever and let them learn from immature children what it means, so they can damage your childs thoughts and make them a bigot. They’ll grow up and never learn how to truely know how to deal with lifes reality. And eventually they’ll hate you for it. Or 2.) You can let them read the books like you normally would have before this outing and explain to them what Gay means with the fact of sex. like you normally would with explaining a heterosexual relationship anyway!I just hope that those that can come to reason with this can see past it and still love the books. The reality is that these are going to be around for years to come and no matter how you try to shelter your children they will find a way to read them. Whether at the local or school library, a more open minded friends house, ect. Please do not keep your children blind to the ways of the world, ignorance will end up being what will hurt your children later on in life.

Lets go back to believing in what the books promote. LOVE is what conquers all and with out LOVE we are worthless and futile. It is LOVE that helps through these things and helps us see past our differences and what brings us together. It is LOVE that is the only 1 thing we all as beings have in common and bond on.

Sincerly, Rosa P.

p.s. Sorry for all mis-punctuations, spelling errors, ect. I am at work and was typing fast and dont have time to proof read! Sorry ahead of time! Just wanted to post one last comment on this issue and i’m moving on from the subject. I dont feel the need to waste my breath with SOME people on this site. I hope my post might help others as well cope with all this information, whether with it or against it.

Avatar Image says:

On the contrary KB it wouldnt be eerily quite it would be peaceful.

Avatar Image says:

2.) You can let them read the books like you normally would have before this outing and explain to them what Gay means with the fact of sex. like you normally would with explaining a heterosexual relationship anyway!

Edit: I sorry I meant withOUT the fact of sex!!!!

Avatar Image says:

Considering that this is the country which virtually ceased to function after 2 seconds of exposed breast in 2004, I’m not at all surprised at the outrage.

A great many posts concern the fate of post-revelation children. I have had considerable experience with child care, and frequently heard outbursts along the lines of the following:

regarding a plethora of identical chairs “WHAAAAHHH!! He/she’s in the chair I* want!”

regarding a piece of fruit* “WHAAAAAHHH!! His/her apple/banana/orange is redder/yellower/oranger/bigger/prettier!”

And now I’m hearing:

“WHAAAAHHH!!! Even though virtually every children’s character since the advent of ‘children’s’ stories is asexual or heterosexual and we have hundreds upon hundreds of other books to choose from, we want this one to be heterosexual, even though there is NO MENTION WHATSOEVER OF ANY SORT OF SEXUAL ACTIVITY CONCERNING DUMBLEDORE IN THE BOOKS ONE WAY OR THE OTHER THAT MY CHILD MIGHT READ! WHAAAAAHHH!!!”

I have yet to hear what series outraged parents are replacing HP with. May I suggest a Time Out and a shopping excursion for “The Chronicles of Narnia”?

Avatar Image says:

Rosa,

Let’s say JKR had said that Dumbledore had the strange habit of eating a handful of live maggots after dinner.

I would find that a very disgusting thing to think about, and it would pop into my mind every time I thought about Dumbledore.

Rest assured I harbor no secret desire to eat live maggots.

Avatar Image says:

Roger,

There is nothing wrong with eating live maggots. At least no more than eating chocolate frogs. While you have a right to find it disgusting, Dumbledore has an equal right to eat live maggots. You don’t have to tell your kids he eats live maggots, and it is never mentioned in the books. If you’d rather kids not find out he eats live maggots, keep them away from people who think it IS a big deal and make a lot of fuss, because they are the ones who will tell them. People eat, it’s true. While some eat fruits and veggies, others eat animals. You don’t have to tell your kids how the animals get from the barn to the table, though. You can simply explain that some like meat.

Avatar Image says:

What so many people miss is that I don’t HAVE to or WANT to explain to my young children about homosexuality. Sadly, we’ve had to block the sites altogether.

As for witchcraft and christianity—THERE IS NO ONE ON THIS PLANET WHO CAN PRACTICE MAGIC. I can’t stress this enough. Someone may “cast a spell” but it ain’t doing anything for them because THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS MAGIC. IT’s a fantasy.

Homosexuality is a reality – and so many people feel like it is “okay” to shove it down the throats of people who do not believe it is an “okay” alternative lifestyle. Fine, be gay. Don’t force my children or my family into reading about it or trying to force your brand of “tolerance” down my throat.

I feel honestly like JK did this on purpose to further her own agenda. She will see when the next movie comes out (as many news organizations have predicted and no not Fox, but CNN) that most mainstream Christians are quite offended by this tactic.

Avatar Image says:

Former Potter Fan,

That is correct. You don’t have to explain to your kids about heterosexuality OR homosexuality. When they are old enough, they will learn about sexuality in schools if you do not want to teach them. You don’t have to teach them about what love is either, or why you love your husband, or why a man loves a man. But I suggest you do, if you haven’t already, because as Dumbledore believes, love is the most powerful thing on this planet. Not sex. Leave the sex part out of it until they are at that age, okay?

Avatar Image says:

“On the contrary KB it wouldn’t be eerily quiet it would be peaceful.”

@ Rosa P, I don’t think I made my point very well. I tried to say that I don’t want to live in a world where we must remain silent if what we want to say will offend anyone. I doubt any of us would have a whole lot to say. Maybe, in my case, that would be a good thing.

Avatar Image says:

On July 20,2007 the day before publication in the UK of The Deatly Hallows, JKR was asked this question -

ROSE: My question is did Albus Dumbledore ever fall in love?

JKR: Ummmm… Well, in the course of a long life, I think nearly everyone falls in love, but you probably shouldn’t read too much into that answer.

BBC “Blue Peter” Show Interview July 20, 2007

Its breatakingly obvious why she answered differently AFTER the book had sold its million of copies.

So -explain this little bit of obsfucation people who think that money was NOT behind her decision to keep quiet until well after publication.

Of course it was !

Avatar Image says:

Also, if you don’t encourage your kids to read about reality from reliable sources, they will get their information from unreliable sources. Homosexuality is a reality, and they will learn information about it from somewhere. If you’d rather teach them “gay is a sin, and that’s all you need to know,” that’s a limited point of view that could separate them from their fellow man. Christ taught to love people, in spite of their sins, because we are all sinners, but we are all people and children of God/humans.

Avatar Image says:

M Jones: That is something that a lot of people have missed in making their points. But what is your point? I think all this proves is that she wanted her books to be read for the messages they taught, not for the messages they didn’t teach.

Avatar Image says:

Never having had any romantic interest in DD, it doesn’t bother me if he’s gay or not. Snape, on the other hand…thank goodness! Whew!

The revelations about DD being kind of a puppet master and pulling the strings on both Tom Riddle and Harry for selfish motives were a lot more upsetting to me.

Avatar Image says:

Actuall Former Potter Fan if you had bothered to read my post correctly you would had seen that I clearly stated that in the Bible it is forbidden to worship or practice ANYTHING besides what is considered acceptable in the Bible. So even if you make up a religion where you worship Apples and concentrate all day long how to make it move on its own ITS STILL CONSIDERED A SIN!!! It doesnt matter where it came from, if it works or not, if its real or not, ect. And if you are Christian (guessing) then you should know that the whole point of that religion is to have faith and not just go by what you can see and touch. So on what basis are you saying witchcraft is not real or spellcasting is not real? Are you saying that Christ, miracles, and every other story in the Bible is not real either????

Avatar Image says:

I agree Iolanthe. I personally think that the news of Aberforth was WAY MORE DISTURBING! But maybe bestiality is less of a sin. What do I know right?! Or even the fact that kids would think living above a bar is “cool”! But maybe i’m just intolerant that way!! ;)

Avatar Image says:

Rosa P,

It is unfair of you to decide what makes a TRUE christian and what doesn’t. It is unfair for anyone to decide that, because Christianity is a religion, a belief system, that only exists in people’s minds. You either believe in Christ, or you do not. If you consider yourself a Christian, then you are. JKR considers herself one, and she is. The Bible is a work that many people refer to in their studies of what it means for some to be Christian, but it is not a rulebook for a club.

Former Potter Fan is expressing her opinion, (which she hasn’t referred to the Bible) and you are pointing out problems in a book. Don’t.

The bible promotes a lot of horrible acts, which most people dismiss. The same should be said for HP, which promotes witchcraft, but can be dismissed. HP however does NOT promote sex, or attraction to the same gender, and so overlooking it should be absolutely no problem.

Avatar Image says:

Actually, as a fanatic bibliophile myself, I’m a bit disturbed to realize that so many people only have seven books by one author in their homes. At least that’s the impression I’m getting from some of these letters.

Avatar Image says:

“Never having had any romantic interest in DD, it doesn’t bother me if he’s gay or not. Snape, on the other hand…thank goodness! Whew!”

Neville is my guy. I was hurt that he didn’t turn out to be the “chosen one”. But now, I’m VERY UPSET that he married Hannah Abbott!

If I had known this earlier, I would have forsaken the HP world a long time ago. How could JKR have done this to me? I’m sure she withheld this information because of the furor it would cause. I’ll never forgive her!

Avatar Image says:

“HP however does NOT promote sex, or attraction to the same gender, and so overlooking it should be absolutely no problem.”

Overall, I think HP is an excellent Christian story. Much of my future reaction to the novels will come from noticing if they will or not be transformed by some in a political weapon for the controversial homosexuality issue. (Howling certainly opened the door for it, and I think it was her intention to do so.)

BTW, I have no problem with people reading the story and saying: “See, there are intelligent, charismatic and essentially good people who happen to feel attraction for the same sex!”. However I do have a problem with the next step many will take: “See, It can only mean that gay sex is not wrong!”.

Avatar Image says:

@Raven: Then I certainly hope you have a problem with and have loged complaints against the many, many, MANY fanfic sites which have printed stories that have frankly tied a kite tail to the characters and their relations with other characters and taken off. Far from being a “next step”, this revelation may possibly rein some of these speculations in!

Avatar Image says:

“On July 20,2007 the day before publication in the UK of The Deatly Hallows, JKR was asked this question – ROSE: My question is did Albus Dumbledore ever fall in love? JKR: Ummmm… Well, in the course of a long life, I think nearly everyone falls in love, but you probably shouldn’t read too much into that answer. BBC “Blue Peter” Show Interview July 20, 2007 Its breatakingly obvious why she answered differently AFTER the book had sold its million of copies. So -explain this little bit of obsfucation people who think that money was NOT behind her decision to keep quiet until well after publication. Of course it was !”

— M Jones

ummmm lets think. Actually M Jones, if you even bothered to pay attention to what she actually said later in the Toronto press conference, is that she did not reveal this before as it was directly related to “Deathly Hallows.” To say anything about Grindlewald would have given away the plot. Perhaps it didn’t apply to you with your lofty disdain and apparent insight into JKR’s true motives, but to many of us Harry Potter fans, we were trying to AVOID spoilers, and this would have been a huge spoiler to say the least.

Avatar Image says:

obsfucation…..

gee a big long word for confusion Big words don’t healp a weak point!

Avatar Image says:

Oh, Two Headed Boy, you really are a freak. Why are you insulting Christians? Because yes, we care very much about that book that was written hundreds of years ago. I don’t see what’s wrong with that, but I do see that you are a stereotypical jerk.

Avatar Image says:

Rosa P, are you talking about real/fake magic like practicing magic, or magic like in HP?

Avatar Image says:

My first post and my last. I believed the HP books were nice and safe for young people. JKR has surrendered to the forces of political correctness and added a homosexual character. In spite of the views of those who defend it, homosexuality is still a sin, an evil, and against God and nature. It is abnormal. So long, JKR. You destroyed a good thing just so you could be liked by the left and by Hollywood.

Avatar Image says:

Or, here’s a thought, she did what she wanted? What she felt was right? And most of the Harry Potter fandom, whether they care or not, feel she hasn’t destroyed a good thing? Sinners can be good people too. I mean, DUH! We’re all sinners.

Avatar Image says:

Joy, religious arguments are real arguments to certain people.

Avatar Image says: I found this in an ancient archive of “The Daily Prophet”:
Esteemed children’s author and folklorist, Beedle the Bard, sent shockwaves through the wizarding community yesterday with his revelation that Hamish Happletop, the hero of the well-loved tale “Hamish and the Hopping Hammer” was, in fact, Muggle-born. While many greeted this announcement with applause, seeing it as a step forward in Muggle-rights, many groups have suggested that this move has been unnecessarily divisive, and may well alienate pure-blood fans of Beedle’s popular work.

“I am most upset,” said one Mr. Malfoy. “How am I supposed to explain to my children that one of their greatest heroes was in fact a mud-blood? I will never be able to read these stories in the same way again. If Muggles wish to ignore the rules layed out in our oldest wizarding texts, and pretend that they are the equals of wizards, they should not be surprised when people express their natural disgust.”

When it was suggested to Mr. Malfoy that Muggle-born wizards and witches had no choice in being born with magical ability, he responded by saying, “It is true, that some Muggles are born with the inclination to do magic, but all of our most holy texts make it quite clear that acting on this inclination is an abomination. Muggles born with this inclination should suppress it decently, rather than shoving it down our throats. Of course now Mr. Beedle is only assisting them, by giving in to the forces of political correctness. “The Tales of Beedle the Bard” will never again be an innocent children’s book.”

When asked for examples of times that Muggle-borns had “shoved it down our throats”, Mr. Malfoy said, “It happens all the time—you see them walking down Diagon Alley—last week a group of them turned up at our annual pure-blood cake sale, distributing pamphlets, suggesting that all people are equal! Some people are even suggesting that they should be allowed to marry, undermining all marriages between decent pure-blood folk. What will a marriage between two great and ancient houses mean if wizards are allowed to marry the offspring of Muggles? We must draw the line somewhere—next thing, people will be wanting to marry their pet Hippogriff! Honestly, it is pure-bloods who are oppressed in our society today—if I express my distaste for mudbloods attending Hogwarts, or setting up shop in Hogsmeade, I am called a bigot! I am only expressing my beliefs, which are based on the oldest and truest wizarding law we have.”

Mr. Malfoy then disapparated, leaving only the stench of bile in the air.
Avatar Image says:

@Beppie,

That’s the BEST fan fiction I’ve ever read!

It is fiction, isn’t it?

LOVED it…THANK YOU!!!

Avatar Image says:

The story by Beppie is based on the supposition that homosexual actions are not wrong, so he compared it with being a Muggle-born. Now let’s do a very quick comparison using something people generally think is wrong as the revealed fact about Beedle:


Esteemed children’s author and folklorist, Beedle the Bard, sent shockwaves through the wizarding community yesterday with his revelation that Hamish Happletop, the hero of the well-loved tale “Hamish and the Hopping Hammer” was, in fact, a pedophile. (...)

When it was suggested to Mr. Lupin that child-loving wizards and witches had no choice in being born with this tendency, he responded by saying, “It is true, that some are born with the inclination to have sex with children, but all of our most holy texts make it quite clear that acting on this inclination is an abomination. Wizards born with this inclination should suppress it decently. (...)

Just to be clear about this: to have homosexual tendencies is not equal to be a muggle-born, neither it is equal to be a pedophile.

Avatar Image says:

Oops, the huge letters in my previous post were not supposed to be formated that way. I don’t know why it happened.

Avatar Image says:

This forum has some strange formatting standards. Makes texts bigger, enclosing things in dashes make strikeouts i think.

While I always appreciate the comparison, a big difference between pedophilia acts that we are appalled by is that they are not between willing partners. Usually these acts have a form of coertion or aggresiveness. ]It is true that pedophilia is not something people choose, and should not make it okay to hate anyone. NAMBLA is a group that believes it is okay between willing partners (though it beyond my mind how willing people are to have sex at that young age) Curbing this behavior that can be destructive to a young psyche has been done with therapy.

Avatar Image says:

Eippeb, the point is that to Mr. Malfoy, being a Muggle-born IS wrong. You may not believe that it’s wrong, but Mr. Malfoy deeply believes that it threatens wizarding society. He believes it with the core of his being, and he is only trying to do what he believes is right. According to Mr. Malfoy, it is people like Harry Potter and Hermione Granger who promote intolerance, because they are the ones who are trying to force pure-bloods to accept Muggle-borns as normal. People like Potter want pure-bloods to stop using terms like “mud-blood”. Harry Potter, in fact, promotes intolerance against people who think they should be allowed to discriminate against actions and ways of being that don’t hurt anyone.

I’ve drawn the analogy here between being Muggle-born and being gay because they are both things that hurt nobody—even though some people do believe, very deeply and sincerely, that they are abominations. As many good people have pointed out, the issue of pedophelia does NOT work as an analogy as it involves the abuse of people who are too young to consent to sexual activity. So, I think it’s quite valid to point out similarities between discrimination against Muggle-borns in the Potterverse and discrimination against gay people in our world.

Avatar Image says:

Rachel wrote:

“I am a Christian so it’s safe to say that I’m not happy at the revelation that Dumbledore was gay”

Ugh, don’t say that! Many, many, many Christians-including JK Rowling!-have nothing against homosexuality.

And fwiw, I am utterly disinterested in discussing the Church’s POV on this issue with you or anyone else. I’m a well-educated, nearly-40-year-old woman (married, mother of three, in case you’re wondering) and I don’t need anyone, not even a church, to tell me how to think or how to apply Christian principles of tolerance to my life.

MJones wrote:

“Its breatakingly obvious why she answered differently AFTER the book had sold its million of copies.

So -explain this little bit of obsfucation people who think that money was NOT behind her decision to keep quiet until well after publication.”

Use your brain, MJ….by July 20, most of the books had been bought and paid for by pre-order, so money was not the issue. Giving away the plot was the issue….how could she POSSIBLY have answered that question without bringing up Grindelwald and thus giving away the biggest secret of Deathly Hallows? @@

Honestly, I wish the anti-gay faction would just quit reading HP and move on. Please. Anyone who could take such an intolerant view clearly didn’t understand the series to begin with.

Avatar Image says:

NAMBLA’s real? I thought that was a funny gag that South Park made up.

I bet there on the government watch list, right next to “KKK” and “Neo-Nazi”.

At least, I hope they are.

Avatar Image says:

To me, race (muggle-born) and homosexuality are not the same. One is amoral (race). The other has alot of moral issues. Its an act people do. So, to me someone who believes a race is inferior just has immoral stands to begin with. Someone who believes homosexuality is morally wrong has decent stand. I don’t thing either muggle-borns or gays should be discriminated against. I mean is not like hetersexuals are not living in sin. Most of them have sex before marriage which is morally wrong too, but no one treats them wrong because of it, or calls them names. That is why I think supporting laws against gays is being two-faced, but you can teach your child the morals you see fit, and to treat people right. So in another word live and let live (I think thats how the phrase goes). That is what I believe.

Avatar Image says:

“The story by Beppie is based on the supposition that homosexual actions are not wrong, so he compared it with being a Muggle-born. Now let’s do a very quick comparison using something people generally think is wrong as the revealed fact about Beedle:”

@Eippeb, I think your distortion of Beppie’s story is very sad.

I’m curious why you chose pedophiles. You could have substituted murderers or batterers for example. But then, your only purpose here is to rage against gay people. Murderers and batterers just wouldn’t have the effect you’re looking for, would they?

Anti-Gay Indoctrination Tool #1: Take every opportunity to equate homosexuals with child molesters. It gets all those non-thinking suckers out there every time.

VERY SAD.

Avatar Image says:

@Beppie: You said that ”...the issue of pedophelia does NOT work as an analogy as it involves the abuse of people who are too young to consent to sexual activity.”

I agree that there are differences between pedophilia and homosexuality (and I said so in my previous post). But your personalized version of the prejudice against muggle-borns is also different from the issue of homosexuality (and I also said so in my previous post).

One of the differences is that, in the real world, those who consider homosexual sex as something wrong think it is wrong regardless of who is doing it (_the problem is the act, not the person). In your personalized Potterverse, however, the usage of magic is only considered wrong when used by certain people. It is who is doing magic (and not really the act) that matters in your imagined example.

I am sure I could list other differences by further reflecting about your analogy. The bottom line is that if the issue of pedophilia does not work as an analogy because of some differences, then your Mudblood analogy does not work also.

Avatar Image says:

Actually, homosexuality is not an act, it’s an orientation. Of course, actually entering into a relationship with a person of the same sex is an act—just as Muggle-borns entering into the wizarding world is an act.

Of course, you may believe that a stance against homosexuality is “decent”- but Mr. Malfoy in my little news item also believes that his stance is “decent”, becuase it is based upon texts that he believes are 100% true. Mind you, dd, you seem to be a lot more accepting than the Mr. Malfoy of my little news article. It’s just that I don’t think you can say that the two stances are different simply due to your personal belief that being opposed to homosexuality is “decent”- because Mr. Malfoy believes that his stance is “decent” too.

KB Prez, I’ve really enjoyed all your comments in this discussion (I’ve been reading for far longer than I have been commenting).

Avatar Image says:

Beppie, I hope you will comment frequently. I think your story is absolutely awesome. I’d love to have your creative skills…I think I’m jealous. ):Smile.

Avatar Image says:

@ Beppie”: I assume you know that this “orientation” portion of homosexual behavior, (the romantic feelings or the desire some have for people of the same sex), is in no way considered a sin in the opinion of major Christian groups. Only gay “actions” are seen as wrong.

You said: “entering into a relationship with a person of the same sex is an act—just as Muggle-borns entering into the wizarding world is an act.”

I am not sure what you tried to say with the above statement, but it doesn’t change the difference I pointed in my last post. In your example, it is not really the “act of entering into the wizarding world” that is considered wrong, the real problem is who is doing so. I’d say your comparison doesn’t work for the same reason the old “racism comparison” does not work for today’s controversy over homosexuality.

Avatar Image says:

Beppie, I agree with KB Prez. You seem to be very creative. It is great that you are using this creativity to defend what you feel is right (even though I disagree with you in this specific issue).

Well, I need to go sleep. Goodbye.

Avatar Image says:
Eippeb said: In your example, it is not really the “act of entering into the wizarding world” that is considered wrong, the real problem is who is doing so.

Well, it is the same in my analogy. People who think that homosexuality is wrong believe that it is okay for heterosexuals to form romantic relationships (both in a physical and emotional sense) with people that they are attracted to. But they believe that it is wrong for people attracted to members of the same sex to form such relationships: it’s not that you have a problem with people forming relationships, you just have a problem with WHO is doing so.

Having said that, however, my analogy is between the basis of Mr. Malfoy’s feelings, and the basis for claiming that homosexuality is wrong—both believe that these things are wrong because it’s how they’ve been raised, because it’s written in their holy texts, etc. Both genuinely believe that they are doing the decent thing. Ultimately, however, both of them promote views that mean that allow certain individuals to be denigrated and discriminated against.

I hope you have a good sleep. :)

Avatar Image says:

Beppie: I admire you for trying. Your analogy is of course excellent, but sometimes people are just too blinded by their own irrationality to listen to reason.

And yes, I judge racists and homophobes. Even more so if the views are based on something as personal (and illogical) as religion.

Avatar Image says:

Leaky, I’ve been a fan of yours for many years now. I must commend you on your continued dedication to providing relevant, balanced information for your readers. I’ve come to believe that this commitment stems from an authentic interest in the Harry Potter community. The most trusted name in Potter, indeed.

Avatar Image says:

But surely the whole point is not one of discrimination or prejudice. It is a biological reality that when hetrosexual people have sex, they have the means to further their own race. That cannot happen with homosexual sex. Hence – the very real difference between the acts that no form of political correctness or liberal fashion can deny.

Avatar Image says:

M jones:

“According to the American Society for Reproductive Medicine, infertility affects about 6.1 million people in the U.S., equivalent to ten percent of the reproductive age population.” (Wikipedia.org)

And women over 45 should not have sex either. No form of political correctness or liberal fashion can deny that, right?

Avatar Image says:

I am completely surprised by the number of people who seem to think that a man can not love another man unless he is has sex with him or is gay. Some people are saying that this explains everything. Why DD would take five years to stop GG. I have three very good friends that I grew up with. I can honestly say that I love them, and I would do anything for them. Further it would take more than five years for me to come to the conclusion that I would have to kill one of them even if they were to do terrible things. I would tell myself that there were other authorities who are supposed to bring people to justice.

I know Jo has said that in her mind DD was gay, but it is up to each individual to interpret characters for themselves. Reading is one of those activities that allow you to believe anything you wish about a character. Jo may say that in her mind Harry is this way or that, but it’s how I read the character that is important. Now if Jo would have written love scenes between DD and GG it would be different. I can only conclude that she did not write such scenes into the books, because she wanted to leave it up to your interpretation as to why DD acted as he did. Again, I think she was careful to say that in HER mind DD was gay.

When I read the passages it did not even occur to me that DD acted this way, because he was gay. I just figured GG and DD had developed an intellectual relationship, and DD had bonded with him in the same way we all bond with boyhood or girlhood friends. The lack of a woman in DDs life was not curious to me. I just concluded that DD was above relationships, he had no equal with which to relate. That he had transcended sex in the same manner he had transcended the common view of death.

So I just say that if DD being gay upsets you, then let him not be gay in your mind. If DD being gay endears him more as a character to you, let him be gay. In the whole scheme of things sexual orientation is no more important to me than eye color or skin color. It is irrelevant.

Avatar Image says:

The overall trend of greater acceptance of gay men and women in the latter part of the 20th century was not limited to secular institutions; it was also seen in some religious institutions. Reform Judaism, the largest branch of Judaism outside Israel has begun to facilitate religious weddings for gay adherents in their synagogues. Jewish Theological Seminary, considered to be the flagship institution of Conservative Judaism, decided in March 2007 to begin accepting gay and lesbian applicants, after scholars who guide the movement lifted the ban on gay ordination.

In 2005, the United Church of Christ became the largest Christian denomination in the United States to formally endorse same-sex marriage.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexual

Gotta love wikipedia when you want to find something out!

Avatar Image says:

Beppie, you are mistaken. In the real world it doesn’t matter “WHO is doing so”, what matters is to see if the specific action is moral or not. It is not that forming relationships is right for A and wrong for B … forming certain kinds of relationship is considered wrong for ALL. Those thinking gay sex is wrong think it is wrong for everyone, regardless of any personal characteristic of the person. For instance, if it happens that a heterosexual becomes interested in having sex with a transvestite, this act will certainly still be considered wrong.

One thing is to twist the Potterverse so it can fit one’s story, another thing is to twist what actually happens in the real world debate. Your example is only comparable with race discrimination, but not with the opposition to homosexual actions.

Avatar Image says:

The Dumbledore is gay story is very controversial and there’s been a lot of shouting back and forth here.

But I read two really brilliant pieces on this board that I think everyone should take notice of. First is on page 4 at 7:04pm from kb prez and the other on page 10 at 7:07pm from beppie.

Very much worth reading.

Avatar Image says:

Rachel wrote:

“I am a Christian so it’s safe to say that I’m not happy at the revelation that Dumbledore was gay”

Jenn, This is not a quote from me. Apparently there are two Rachels on here.

“Ugh, don’t say that! Many, many, many Christians-including JK Rowling!-have nothing against homosexuality.”

I made it very clear that I am against homosexual acts, not gays themselves. This is what the Catechism teaches too…if you ever bother to have read it.

“And fwiw, I am utterly disinterested in discussing the Church’s POV on this issue with you or anyone else. I’m a well-educated, nearly-40-year-old woman (married, mother of three, in case you’re wondering) and I don’t need anyone, not even a church, to tell me how to think or how to apply Christian principles of tolerance to my life.”

Hmm, this is not the forum to discuss these issues but I would entreat you to read the Catechism and the Bible. Read what the Holy Father has spoken about this issue. You claim you are Catholic and yet you don’t believe what the Church teaches?

Also, don’t just assume that I am not well educated because I do believe what the Church teaches on this issue as well as everything else.

Jenn,

This is not a quote from me.

Avatar Image says:

hmm…I don’t know what is with these comments..I never put any text in bold.

Avatar Image says:

Beppie: I admire you for trying. Your analogy is of course excellent, but sometimes people are just too blinded by their own irrationality to listen to reason.

And yes, I judge racists and homophobes. Even more so if the views are based on something as personal (and illogical) as religion.

Posted by Elvine on October 27, 2007 @ 04:16 AM

Elvine,

I have said it before and I’ll say it again, No one on this forum has been more vitrolic and judgemental as you. None of your arguments have any sense in them. Instead, you attack others for their viewpoints because they are in your “oh-so” tolerant and enlightened eyes so illogical. This is drivel because as much as you HATE to say it…your views are just as personal and just as much a religion as mine and anyone else’s.

Avatar Image says:

disregard the last comment in the post to Jenn (Jenn, this is not from me). I forgot to delete it.

Avatar Image says:

I love how people are quoting from Wikipedia. At school, we’re often not supposed to use that as a source because it is not reliable. Just to put that out there.

Avatar Image says:

Eippeb, again, the only basis that you have for believing that certain types of relationships are immoral is the fact that you believe a certain book to be true. Likewise, Mr. Malfoy in my story believes that Muggle-borns entering the wizarding world is immoral because his books tell him so. My main point is about the BASIS for believing that certain acts are immoral.

Avatar Image says:

Rachel:

“No one on this forum has been more vitrolic and judgemental as you.”

Rachel, coming from you, that is a compliment. Thank you.

Avatar Image says:

It seems that Elvine just proved Rachel’s point.

Avatar Image says:

btw: Yes, I think Rachel and I have found one thing that we can agree on. She reads what I have to say, and that makes her angry. Things are, it appears, as they should be.

Now I will go shove my sexual orientation down the throats of the innocent public (possibly even children). I plan to kiss my spouse goodbye at the railway station. Something I think everyone has the right to do.

You see, religious believs only applies to those who believe. The rest of us need not follow them. And it is perfectly all right to be intolerant of people who wish to make others (such as authors) follow their own religious views. I can only imagine trying to live my life in a way that would please not only buddhists (of all subtypes), muslims (of all subtypes), christians (of all subtypes), hindus (of all subtypes), judaists (of all etc), confucianists, jainists, shintos, taoists, rastafarianists and neopaganists to name a few. Oh, and I nearly forgot, followers of that teapot that keeps circling the sun (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russels_Teapot).

Why, I’d hardly dare get out of bed in the morning! Of course, the Lutherans might have a thing or two to say about that.

Avatar Image says:

@Beppie: You wrote: “My main point is about the BASIS for believing that certain acts are immoral.”

In this point I think your criticism is fair. :) Just be aware that Mr. Malfoy is seen as the potterverse equivalent of a Nazi. Your text can be interpreted as saying that “those bigoted Christians are just like the Nazis”, (whether it was your intention or not). Unfortunately, some appear to think that if one believe gay sex is wrong, it needs to follow that this person “hate” homosexuals “just like the Death Eaters hate muggle-borns”. This is simply not true!! One can think gay actions are wrong and still be a friend of homosexuals, still be a friend of a gay couple, still defend homosexuals from mockery, etc… I say this not just in theory, but because I’ve seen these things happening.

Avatar Image says:

@Elvine: so you think there is nothing wrong in bashing those you disagree with? Religious people will need to act precisely in the way you stipulate so you can treat them with dignity? Then you are no better than those under the illusion they are allowed to treat gays badly just because they disagree with gay behavior.

Avatar Image says:

I am a christian, and I believe that the bible teaches that homosexuality is a sin. however, i also believe that it is not the only sin. I agree with Elvine that it is fruitless to try and impose my religious beliefs on anyone else. Just because i believe that a group of people, in this case homosexuals, are sinful i must admit that i myself am a sinful creature. i think the goal of GLAAD and this article is a noble one. just because i think that homosexuallity is wrong that does not give me the right to hurt anyone or call them names. I think that comparing christians to Mr. Malfoy is going a bit to far. Mr. Malfoy acted upon his beliefs in a negative and harmful way, he was willing to kill those who were different from him. While i recognize that there are christians in the world who are malicious and hateful i think that tolerance goes both ways. Cruelty, and hatred are wrong no matter the circumstances and every person deserves to be treated with dignity and respect.

Write a Reply or Comment

Finding Hogwarts

The Leaky Cauldron is not associated with J.K. Rowling, Warner Bros., or any of the individuals or companies associated with producing and publishing Harry Potter books and films.