One reporter reacts to JKR's revelations

[sistermagpie]

> > > 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? 

> 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. 

Magpie:
It doesn't move the story forward *because* it isn't there. It 
certainly does have something to do with the plot. As much as plenty 
of other romantic relationships. His relationship with Grindelwald 
was romantic, at least on his part, and that affected his 
motivations. Or would have, if it were part of the story and 
therefore canon. Just like Merope's feelings towards Tom Riddle and 
Hagrid's towards Maxime affect the plot. Because they're there. 
Dumbledore's love of Grindelwald isn't any less important than any 
other romantic relationship in canon, and considerably more so than 
many of them. Or would be, if it were included. As it is now it's 
about as important as Harry's romantic relationship with Luna--iow, 
non-existant afawk. Harry's attraction to Cho affects his behavior 
for two books. I can't say for sure, but it's very hard for me to 
imagine, if Grindelwald was a woman, that it wouldn't have been 
presented as romantic with no protest whatsoever.

Steve:
> 
> 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. 

Magpie:
Um...WHAT? Attractions and potential relationships aren't sexuality? 
And they're only "potential?" (Wonder where all those kids come 
from!) They only "appear vaguely?" The appear quite clearly ALL OVER 
the place and not only as relationships, sometimes just as 
expressions of purely physical attraction--good old fashion 
heterosexuality at work. And they are not always comic relief. And 
why would Dumbledore's sexuality need to appear in any more depth 
than the other ones are presented in? What do you mean by depth, 
exactly?

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

Magpie:
Only if she has a very odd view of sexuality that somehow doesn't 
include, you know, sex and sexual attraction. Heterosexuals have a 
sexuality too. As do married people.

Steve:> 
> 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. 

Magpie:
Actually, sexuality came up when JKR wrote people who had babies in 
her books, and people who fell in love and got crushes on other 
people, and had relationships and on and on. I gave a big list in my 
earlier post and that wasn't even everybody. 

People have been asking JKR shipping questions for *years.* How come 
it's only when the answer is m/m that sexuality has come up? She's 
been pretty broadly hinting about R/Hr for a long time, and happily 
talked about Neville potentially marrying Hannah Abbott and Luna 
marrying some guy and Harry and Ginny being soulmates. She's not 
saying they're golfing buddies here. How is she not introducing 
Neville's sexuality in saying he marries Hannah as much as 
Dumbledore's in saying he liked Grindelwald? 
-m