Gender balance/strong women

[Penny & Bryce Linsenmayer]

No: HPFGUIDX 14947

Hi --

joym999 at aol.com wrote:

> I just wanted to say, although the moderators will probably yell at
> me, that I think Susans analysis is right on-target.

Ahem.  *Why* would the Moderators yell at you for this?  *I* agree!
Susan's analysis is excellent, which is just what I told her last
October when she first posted it.  :--)  I don't necessarily agree in
full with all her conclusions, but I can't object to the logic of her
analysis.

Puzzled why this particular posting/thread would be viewed as something
the Moderator Group would disapprove of ... well-supported with canon &
logic, on-topic, well-written, not inflammatory ... hmm.... I must be
missing something.  <g>

> But before people start yelling I just want to emphasize that saying
> this does not in any way detract from the brillance and wonderfulness
> of the books.  To some degree, JKR is describing the world the way it
> is.  Men do still run the world, and women are still far more likely
> than men to not work and stay home and take care of the kids, etc.

I agree.  My own personal experience backs this up.  The legal field may
be largely 50/50 gender-wise, but the corporate transactional bar is
still 90% male in my judgment.  The executive-level clients are male ...
the senior lawyers are male .... the senior accountants are male ... the
investment bankers are more-often-than-not male.  A typical "working
group" for an IPO often (in my experience) involved about 20 males & 1-2
females.  Can't disagree too much on this score....

As I see it, Susan, Amy & Joy are all largely basing their arguments on
the numbers.  BTW, I agree with Amy's belief that perceptions can be
skewed (the notion that people perceive the numbers to be skewed to
females if it's actually equal).

My biggest complaint with the analysis Susan has adopted is that the
books are told from Harry's POV.  Yes, it would be great if Harry saw &
reported on some female/female bonding relationships.  But, his POV may
be preventing the readers from seeing some of this.  It is a limiting
factor that we should consider.

However, that said: JKR could let Harry see more strong female
characters in something other than supporting roles.  I agree!

I agree that Hermione is the exception rather than the rule.

I do give McGonagall more credit than Susan does.  I think she's alot
more than just an administrative type.  I've written reams about Minerva
before, and I'm certain that Neil has captured all of my brilliant
analysis in the McGonagall FAQ so I'll skip it for now.  <vbg>  Suffice
to say: I think McGonagall does qualify as a strong female character
(not as strong by any means as Hermione but then again, Harry interacts
with Hermione considerably more than he does with McGonagall so ...)

Most of the women are identified as partners/supporters of men -- I
agree with this.  But, I think Lily Potter will prove to be a very
strong female character separate & quite apart from her role as the
"mother who sacrified her life to save her son."  I think she was
probably a brilliant driven person who could hold her own in the fight
against Voldemort.  I think we'll learn all of this in one of the later
books.  So ... I add her to the column of strong female characters even
though we have little evidence of this at this point.

Like Susan, I'm also disturbed a bit by the fact that Rowena Ravenclaw &
Helga Hufflepuff are the founders of the 2 Houses that play such a
peripheral role in the series.  I think it's a point well-taken.  I
really do wish JKR would develop both these Houses more fully in the
later books.

Ginny Weasley -- there's potential.  But (:::cough:::), we've all been
saying that Ginny has "potential" since before GoF.  She was such a bit
player in the first 4 books (yeah ... yeah... yeah, she was "pivotal" to
the plot in Book 2, but really ... she was just a plot device in my mind
... definitely a victim with very few lines).  I know JKR said we'll see
more of Ginny, but I think she said that in the past and it didn't come
to pass with GoF so I'm not necessarily holding my breath.  OTOH, she is
a Weasley and will be older in OoP.  So ... maybe.  :--)

As I recall Susan -- you got mainly praise for this analysis last
October.  :::shrugs:::  Don't know why you feel the need to brace for a
"deluge" of criticism.  You've definitely made some great points.  My
main bone of contention is that you sell McGonagall short.  But, that's
minor really.  <g>

Penny


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]