One reporter reacts to JKR's revelations

[Steve]

---  "sistermagpie" <sistermagpie at ...> wrote:
>
> > Tonks:
> > 
> > I don't think [sexuality] has any place in a children's book.
> > And even if adults are reading it and the reading level has
> > changed since book 3, it is still a book read by children of
> > age 8 and up. 
> 
> Magpie:
> Well, HP is pretty obviously YA at this point ..., but I 
> assume this part doesn't have to do with DD being gay and 
> instead you're disapproving of all the sexuality that's 
> actually in the books? 
> 
> -m
>

bboyminn:

Certainly Dumbledore's sexuality has no place in the books
because it's not really part of the story. The only thing
that matters in the story is the Dumbledore and Grindlewald
had an intense personal friendship that somewhat blinded
Dumbledore to Grindlewald's true nature. The details are 
irrelevant. 

And that is precisely why it is NOT in the books. You see 
no references to Dumbledore's sexuality in these books;
because it doesn't matter; it doesn't in anyway move the
story forward. 

For that matter, no sexuality really appears anywhere in
the books. Oh yes, attractions and potential relationships
to appear vaguely in the books, but not in any depth and
not in anyway other than comic relief. 

So Tonks, you seem to have gotten your wish, Sexuality is
not part of these books.

Sexuality only came up because a fan specifically asked JKR
about Dumbledore's love life. Some one asked, JKR answer.
This isn't a fact that she hid, no one every asked her
before. Though in all fairness, she might have had to 
fudge the answer a bit if she was asked before Deathly
Hallows came out. Certain details would have spoiled an
important plot point. So while I suspect she would have
answer, I suspect, to protect her plot, her answer would
have been vague. 

Once again, JKR is not spontaneously revealing anything.
Some one asked specifically, and she answered. That seems
fair enough to me.

Steve/bboyminn