chaoticwhim:

rereadingharry:

unkewlioso:

oppressionisyucky:

I feel like making Dumbledore THE ONLY GAY CHARACTER and also making him have to be super in the closet and live alone forever sends a horrid message if we’re all being frank here.

It was also the 90s; if JKR couldn’t write about magic without causing Americans to froth their loins in rage, I don’t think Openly Gay Dumbledore had any hope. 

Openly Gay would be out of character for Dumbledore, a painfully private man for whom homosexuality, with all of its own woes and confusions, was inextricably linked to his most shameful secret, his most acute regret. However, when we see him again in Deathly Hallows (and the 90’s are decidedly past) he opens up to Harry completely for the first time, and a slightly more overt mention of his lust for Grindelwald would not have been incongruous (though “how his ideas caught me, Harry, inflamed me” is plenty suggestive). 

When we look at Dumbledore’s life, we aren’t meant to think that he should have lived this way — this isn’t the fate that JKR would slate all gay people, that’s not the message she’s sending. Dumbledore’s story is tragic, he says it himself: “Do not pity the dead, Harry. Pity the living, and, above all, those who live without love.” 

It remains problematic that Dumbledore is the only known gay character. 1/200+ is not a true-to-life statistic. 

Yes, books with homosexual characters rank high on the APA’s Most Banned. I don’t know if that influenced JKR’s decisions as a writer, but it remains true that potential censorship is not an acceptable excuse to exclude gay characters. Many great writers deal with censorship. It is the writer’s job to write what needs to be written, not what easy to write.

That. Plus also something I thought of just recently, having read a book that discussed the gay community in the 40s, 50s, and 60s some: the generation Dumbledore is from (late Victorian, remember, people) would not have seen “coming out” as any sort of notion or option at all. It would be such a foreign notion. Especially in Britain which after Oscar Wilde had a huge sort of public shift, as far as I understand it. Maybe in Germany, which pre-Nazi era was the centre of a burgeoning gay rights movement but.

Mind you, that’s assuming JKR had put anything like that into consideration. I sort of doubt it, but. It is worth keeping in mind for head canon purposes. Add in the issues that RereadingHarry mentions and you have a man who would see “coming out” as basically a very foreign option. And the fact that he is part of a subculture which spends most of its time hiding from the majority of the world… that would psychologically affect one, as well, I’d think.

^All this.

I hadn’t thought about the parallel between the Statute of Secrecy and the Closet, but now it seems really obvious.

unkewlioso:

oppressionisyucky:

I feel like making Dumbledore THE ONLY GAY CHARACTER and also making him have to be super in the closet and live alone forever sends a horrid message if we’re all being frank here.

It was also the 90s; if JKR couldn’t write about magic without causing Americans to froth their loins in rage, I don’t think Openly Gay Dumbledore had any hope. 

Openly Gay would be out of character for Dumbledore, a painfully private man for whom homosexuality, with all of its own woes and confusions, was inextricably linked to his most shameful secret, his most acute regret. However, when we see him again in Deathly Hallows (and the 90’s are decidedly past) he opens up to Harry completely for the first time, and a slightly more overt mention of his lust for Grindelwald would not have been incongruous (though “how his ideas caught me, Harry, inflamed me” is plenty suggestive). 

When we look at Dumbledore’s life, we aren’t meant to think that he should have lived this way — this isn’t the fate that JKR would slate all gay people, that’s not the message she’s sending. Dumbledore’s story is tragic, he says it himself: “Do not pity the dead, Harry. Pity the living, and, above all, those who live without love.” 

It remains problematic that Dumbledore is the only known gay character. 1/200+ is not a true-to-life statistic. 

Yes, books with homosexual characters rank high on the APA’s Most Banned. I don’t know if that influenced JKR’s decisions as a writer, but it remains true that potential censorship is not an acceptable excuse to exclude gay characters. Many great writers deal with censorship. It is the writer’s job to write what needs to be written, not what easy to write.

(Source: rereadingharry)

I love how when we reblog something that shows a pairing we don’t ship, we have to say “I don’t ship them, but this is awesome…”

justmaibe:

rereadingharry:

Well, I try not to do that … from now on, know this: R/S is my OTP. I don’t precisely ship anyone else, and neither am I against any other ship that is sensible and does not conflict with R/S. And yes, I get pretty upset about ships that conflict with R/S. But that’s what OTPs do to you, isn’t it?

(this all flipped a switch in my head…)

I honestly can’t help when that happens, whether it’s a fic/vid/graphic. If it’s awesome, it’s awesome, and it’s even more awesome when I can appreciate that fact despite that the material isn’t exactly something I like or am passionate about. 

I also have a habit of doing that with a show/movie/book I don’t read too. It’s not just ships, sometimes it’s a whole port or country. 

The weird thing is… I don’t have an OTP for HP; I ship the hell out of every character. Hell I have a whole playlist on youtube titled “Weasley/Hermione” because I couldn’t decide what Weasley deserved to be with her (personal fav of that group is a tie between Hermione/Fred and Hermione/Charlie). You name a character from that fandom, and I can list at least 10 people other than who they are with canonically that I ship them with.

However, you drag me to a Liason (Liz/Jason, GH) video on youtube or a ff, it better be damn good if you expect me not to get angry and frustrated, and those are very few and far between.

Word to the wise, if you need to trash other characters the halves of the couple have been with just to make your couple work…you’re doing it wrong. Even with the most unthinkable couples… there is always potential to make something awesome out of nothing. 

I like people more when they can take off their rose colored glasses when it comes to their ships. It makes discussions all the more interesting. 

To clarify, when I initially said “do that” I mean state my non-allegiance. If it’s awesome, I’ll reblog it; I don’t want to have to say, “I don’t ship them, though.” I realize that was unclear.

The thing about R/S is, it mystifies even me how passionate I am when it comes to them. In a good way. I’ll be talking about HP with a new HP friend, and they won’t know about R/S, and I’ll get really excited, telling them everything. I don’t want to quash that, not any of it — not the upset, either, that might bubble up when someone decries R/S. It’s all part of the passion. It’s because of all those feelings that I call them my OTP in the first place.

There is a line between being upset and the trashing of a rival character — where we say, oh, s/he’s a bad person and doesn’t deserve so-and-so. I’ve seen Ron trashed to favor Draco, James trashed to favor Snape… I agree that it doesn’t need to happen. It’s not necessary. It’s like when politicians criticize the opposition instead of talking up their own campaigns.  

My sensitivity about the issue of canon/non-canon when it comes to R/S is not so much about needing to make them work — they work, really well. It’s about growing up gay with Harry Potter.