One reporter reacts to JKR's revelations

[delwynmarch]

Alla wrote:
> I am not Susan of course, but I was under 
> impression that she was defining real life 
> prejudice and accordingly this is obviously 
> has nothing to do with people complaining 
> about the books.

Del replies:
Except that the topic was not about real life 
general prejudice: it was about the use of the 
words "prejudice" and "bigotry" in a precise 
context and about precise people: those readers 
who have a big problem with DD being gay.

> I thought that Susan was saying that indeed 
> there is a **prejudice** period,

I don't see where the prejudice is in this case? 
No gay person is physically or legally harmed 
by some readers being upset that DD was outed. 
Emotionally maybe, yes, but that's a whole other 
can of worms, and I still don't think that this 
emotional harm could qualify as "prejudice".

> But of course this has nothing to do with 
> people complaining  about DD being gay. I 
> thought discussion switched, sort of to RL 
> issues.

No the discussion didn't switch, hence Random's 
question (which I also thought when I read 
Susan's post, but didn't bother posting, 
though frankly I found her remarks quite 
insulting: associating, out of the blue, 
people who have a problem with DD 
being outed after the books have all been 
published, with people who physically abuse gay 
people, that's just not right IMO. And giving 
examples of *physical* prejudice when asked 
who gets to decide that a personal *opinion* 
is prejudiced or bigoted, doesn't help either.)

Del