Fred and George: The Bullies You Do Know

[darrin_burnett]

No: HPFGUIDX 43071

Cindy wrote:
> 
> > First, how can you be prejudiced against a single person? Their 
> > chilliness, and that's what it is, nothing more, toward Cedric in 
> >GoF is sour grapes. Is it perfect behavior? No, but it certainly 
> >doesn't make them bullies. 
> 
> Well, now.  Are the twins bullies?  I guess we have to define our 
> terms a bit.  I'll play it safe.  To me, a bully is someone who 
> engages in bullying behavior, including any form of victimizing 
> weaker individuals.
> 
> So are Fred and George bullies?  Well, I think so.  They play 
> practical jokes on people, including weaker individuals like 
> Neville.  They stomp on unconscious individuals, IIRC.  They hiss 
> newcomers.  They pick on a helpless muggle.  So yeah.  They engage 
> in bullying behavior, therefore making them bullies.  Amusing 
> bullies at times, granted.  But I don't think one can escape being 
> labeled a bully by being charming and witty every now and then.
> 


Let us break this down one-by-one.

1) The stomping -- Why do people refuse to acknowledge what Malfoy, 
Crabbe and Goyle were doing prior to this incident? It's like 
blinders, it really is.

These three were saying, essentially, that Arthur Weasley was due to 
be killed becuase of his love of Muggles. (Well, Draco said it, but 
the others are his sheep, so they agreed)

There is ONE incident of George stepping on Malfoy deliberately and 
Fred stepping on Goyle. Crabbe, apparently gets nothing. Then, they 
shove them into the hallway and if you read canon, are careful to 
step over the three Slyths on the way out.

It is not an unfair assumption to make that Malfoy and Crabbe and 
Goyle would have started a physical fight in that compartment, had 
Fred and George not arrived. And given the size of Crabbe and Goyle, 
is that a fair fight?

I've heard the argument go like this. Well, we like them because they 
are Harry's friends.

How about we like them because they don't go around advocating murder 
of people who they believe have inferior blood? How about we like 
them because they don't have a father who cowardly manipulates events 
so that an 11-year-old girl is in danger? How about we like them 
because they don't taunt someone for the scar on his head, fake 
injuries to get a teacher fired, make fun of someone's poverty or put 
weaker kids in leg-locker curses?

And how about we like them because they took a two-second opportunity 
to help slap down the ones that do all of the above.

2) the two-ton toffee incident with Dudley.

Much of the same argument. Again, I wish people would remember who 
the original bullying victim is. It's not Dudley and it's not Draco.
 
It's Harry.

3) Hiss newcomers. 

Again, I fail to see how this reaches the level of anything Draco has 
ever done. Considering the background of at least the majority 
Slytherins -- pureblood -- what makes anyone believe Braddock was so 
traumatized by this? Jeez, it might be a point of honor among the 
Slyth crowd. 

Please, do not believe I am defending Fred and George as saints. I 
can see their act getting old. But I believe that they are nowhere 
near the bullies Draco and his gang are and their motivations are 
much less dangerous.

4) Neville. I am assuming we're talking about the canary cream, which 
after all was a temporary thing. Again, compare this to the leg-
locker curse by Draco and I think you see vastly different behaviors.


> Darrin:
> 
> > To compare Fred and George being cold to Cedric in a small group 
> >to Draco's actions is unconscionable. 
> 
> I beg your pardon?  
> 
> "Unconscionable" means "Not restrained by conscience; unscrupulous; 
> beyond prudence or reason; excessive."  Surely we can disagree 
about a few scenes in a book series without anyone calling anyone 
else's 
> scruples into question.  
> 


My language was carefully chosen there. I sincerely believe that 
there is such bending and twisting to somehow attach the same level 
of severity to the actions of Gryffindors, any Gryffindors, as to 
Slytherins, that crucial elements -- such as the racism behind 
Draco's actions -- are being ignored. To do that is to place the goal 
of the argument above the substance of the material you are arguing, 
which I find beyond prudence and reason and excessive.

> As for me, I can see how reasonable people might differ on this 
> point.  There is some similarity between Draco's actions and Fred 
> and George's actions, I would say.  The difference in perception is 
> likely due to the fact that Harry considers himself an ally of Fred 
> and George and a foe of Draco.  


And as I said, the difference is that Fred and George do not espouse 
the same vile beliefs that Draco does. 

I guess one way to look at it is this: Why haven't Fred and George 
been left with their heads in a toilet somewhere? I mean, they are 
bigger than the younger kids, but certainly not bigger than the 
seventh-years. If their pranks are so intolerable to people, one 
would think the law of the playground would have stopped it.

Their family certainly isn't influential enough (like Draco's) to 
instill silence. They don't seem to have problems getting dates, but 
they aren't heartthrobs.

In short, there seems to be nothing external that prevents someone 
who really takes exception to their pranks from doing something about 
it. Yet, no one does.

That tells me that their personal charisma and the fact that people 
realize it's just a joke, all in fun, no harm done, are working in 
their favor. 

> 
> Draco:
> 
> > Now tell me that when Draco makes fun of the Weasleys' wealth, it 
> >is somehow on par with Fred and George's pranks. Anyone that says 
> >so is again, being unconscionable.
> 
> Again, I am not sure I agree with you, and I hope this doesn't 
> reflect poorly on my own conscience or morality.  ;-)
> 
> Anyway, I do see some parallels between Draco's conduct in 
> belittling the Weasleys for their poverty and Fred and George's 
> pranks.  Take the Canary Cream business, where the twins 
> deliberately steered a younger, less powerful student toward their 
> joke.  Take the Ton-Tongue Toffee, where the twins deliberately 
> victimized Dudley for being hungry, overweight, and not magical.  I 
> certainly think reasonable minds can differ on this point as well, 
> but I have to wonder whether the conduct of the twins is every bit 
> as hurtful to those on the receiving end as Draco's taunts about 
the 
> Weasleys' poverty.


Again, we are talking about pranks that are temporary, and with built 
in fixers - the canary creams wear off, and Mr. Weasley was there to 
help. I agree, the ton-tongue thing was pretty dangerous.

But I refuse to see Dudley as a victim. Or if he is a victim, it's a 
victim of his own gluttony and karmic payback for what he's done to 
Harry. 

  
> Darrin:
> 
> > 3) Draco is racist. I cannot put in any plainer than that. To 
> > apologize for Draco is to apologize for a stone-cold racist. 
> > Therefore, to credibly compare anyone to Draco is to necessarily 
> > prove that person or persons is also racist. Fred and George are 
> >not. They do not tinge their humor at anyone group in particular.
> 
> Hmmm.  Draco is a racist, but he is many other things as well.  For 
> instance, he is an elitist.  So it seems quite logical to reach the 
> question of whether Draco's elitism is similar to the elitism Fred 
> and George display in victimizing someone like Dudley.  

No, there is no evidence Fred and George go after Dudley simply 
because he is a Muggle or simply because he is fat. Again, they go 
after him because he is a bully himself and they know what Harry went 
through

We have plenty of evidence that Draco hates people simply because of 
the blood that flows through their veins or the amount of money in 
their vault at Gringotts.

So, the elitism is in no way similar. 


> Darrin:
>  
> > 4) Fred and George have never behaved with any kind of 
superiority 
> > complex, as Draco does. If anything, they are compensating for 
> > inferiority complexes, considering they have Percy, Bill and 
> >Charlie to live up to. <snip>  Thus endeth THAT argument.
> 
> Well, let's not spike the ball quite so quickly, as I don't see the 
> referee signaling a touchdown just yet.  I mean, you know what 
> happens to players who spike prematurely, don't you?  They call it 
a 
> *fumble.*  ;-)
> 


Well, if you're going to snip me prematurely, I have no choice, but 
to fumble, as you're cutting off my hands. Where I said "Thus endeth 
THAT argument" was in relation to the twins picking on Bill, not on 
the inferority complex.

> See, I think the twins have a superiority complex when it comes to 
> Muggle relations.  Maybe there are good reasons for this, but I 
> sense it nonetheless.  So is there some reason why the twins 
> superiority complex vis a vis muggles is different from some of the 
> elitism Draco has displayed?
> 


Again, I don't see their prank on Dudley as being an attack on 
Muggles for the sake of attacking Muggles, which is the direct 
parallel we're looking for to Draco's elitism.


> Yes, but what have F&G ever had to run *from?*  They get away with 
> *everything.*  Hey, who is to say that there isn't some bias in 
> favor of Fred and George and against Draco?  Fred and George sneak 
> all over the school, and nothing happens.  Draco is out of bounds 
in 
> PS/SS, and he is immediately trekked off to the Forbidden Forest, 
> where he meets up with the Dark Lord in Vapor Form.  Maybe Draco 
has 
> a *point* about disparate treatment after all.  ;-)


When have F&G been caught? You can't argue disparate treatment unless 
you have an example where they have been caught and let go.

> 
> Cindy -- who is wondering how on earth she wound up *defending* 
> Draco, and who is wondering whether her efforts to play Devil's 
> Advocate have led to a a proliferation of snowballs in Hades right 
> about now


Darrin
-- Really hopes my strident tone doesn't create Devil's advocacy for 
the sake of it. :) The Strident Tones would also be a GREAT name for 
a band.