sexism in the WW (Was I know Molly.....)

[hickengruendler]

No: HPFGUIDX 84487

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "elfundeb" <elfundeb at c...> 
wrote:
 
> Debbie:
> 
> 
> I see this as an example of JKR having become more conscious of her 
own gender biases in writing characters.  The first four novels had 
been criticized for their gender portrayals, most notably in a Salon 
article not long after GoF was published.  In GoF, there is 
absolutely no mention that Alice was an Auror.  >snip<
> 
> In OoP, on the other hand, they were both described as Aurors.  The 
difference is so striking, I'm left with the nagging feeling that 
Alice was promoted between books.

Hickengruendler:

Here I agree with you. That was the first what I thought when I read 
in OOTP that Alice was an Auror, too. But in a few other points, I 
disagree with you.  
  
> 
> Amelia Bones has the same position once held by Crouch Sr., but in 
her only scene, she allows Harry's hearing to be commandeered by 
Fudge in a dereliction of due process.

Especially here: First off all, it was Amelia Bones only scene up 
until now, but I highly doubt it will remain her only scene. I don't 
know if you wanted to implie this, I just want to mention it. She has 
a very important office, especially considering what's to come, so I 
am sure this is not the last we saw of Amelia Bones. I saw the whole 
trial mainly as foreshadowing to other, way more important similar 
scenes.

But more important: Fudge changed the law. There is nothing Amelia 
could do against this, and there is nothing Barty Crouch could have 
done against this. It is a sign that the Wizarding World is anything 
but a democracy, if Fudge can change the laws that easily, but I 
don't think you can blame Amelia Bones for it. Second, Crouch was a 
highly biased man, who threw people into Azkaban without a trial. 
Amelia Bones is a fair judge, who at once contradicted Fudge, when he 
said that Arabella Figg was an untrustworthy witness. It is not hard 
to judge, who is better, Bones or Crouch.  

>Thus, while she speaks her mind at the hearing, she appears 
ineffectual. 

She does not. If she were that ineffectual, the other Wizengamot 
members might have voted against Harry. Okay, this is speculation. 
But Bones has to be neutral. She can't tell the Wizengamot members 
that they have to vote for Harry. 
> 
> The other women we know that work for the MoM (Mafalda Hopkirk, 
Bertha Jorkins, Marietta's mother) don't appear to have high-ranking 
positions, and Marietta's mother, the our only WW example of mother 
with a paying job(Hermione's parents are muggles and don't count) 
fears for her position if her daughter was found to be associating 
with Harry Potter. 

About Mrs. Edgecombe: She might be the only working mother from the 
wizarding world we know. But how many mothers do we know, that stay 
at home? Molly Weasley and probably Narcissa Malfoy. If you don't 
count Hermione's mother, you also can't count Aunt Petunia. So I 
still say the verdict is open in this case.  
> 
>Morevover though I think JKR made a very specific effort in OOP to 
give McGonagall more spunk than she had in the past, her spunk 
manifests in catfights with other women professors, such as Trelawney 
and Umbridge, which is stereotypically female behavior.

But the "catfight" with Trelawney was in PoA, way before Rowling was 
critized about her characterisation of the female characters and not 
in OOtP. So the spunk was really there all along. Also, I really see 
no difference, between, for example, McGonagall's snarkiness and 
Phineas Niggelus' (with the exception, that Phineas is a bit meaner 
than McGonagall). So I don't think it is stereotypially female.

>Like Molly, McGonagall remains a shadowy figure as far as her 
contribution to the Order is concerned. 

More so than Remus Lupin or Mad-Eye Moody (not to mention Sirius, who 
was moody because of his uselessness)? I don't think so. Okay, they 
were around for the finale fight, but this was mainly by accident, 
because they were, when Snape alarmed Sirius. But otherwise we don't 
know what they have done all the year.
> 
> JKR has clearly moved forward in this book, but I think she's 
subconsciously, perhaps, drawn too much on her own background and 
experience in drawing the characters and selecting their gender.

I generally agree with you. There is still more that JKR can do, but 
I don't think it's that bad as it seemed to be in your post. *g*
> 
Hickengruendler