(CAUTION) Re: [HPforGrownups] Re: Stereotyping

[Iggy McSnurd]

No: HPFGUIDX 84983

Iggy here:

CAUTION    CAUTION    CAUTION

I am adding in this statement because I want to let people know in advance
that some of the statements I make in this letter, and some of the words I
use may be offensive to the more sensitive reader.  These things are said
for a reason, are in context, and are only used when appropriate... but they
are also the best way to state what needs to be said.

I would also like to apologize for this seeming to be a little late in
posting, but it had to undergo a few revisions before I could send it in...

>Laura:
>I'm staying far away from this one except to agree with Pippin that
>Anthony Goldstein made me smile too, and I hope JKR is planning to
>create a nice Jewish girl for him. *g*

Iggy here:

Personally, I'm just waiting for someone of Italian ancestry to show up
somewhere, since I'm half-Italian, but take after that side much more than
my other half...  (Blaise Zabini could possibly be of Italian ancestry, but
I don't think so.)


>Laura:
>The Molly controversy is a rather interesting one to me because I
>see it as something of an indicator of where we are in the feminist
>revolution.  Many women (and some men) have learned to be sensitive
>to portrayals of women and girls in fiction.  We know how profoundly
>the stories we read can affect the world in which we live, and we
>know that the literary past has often shortchanged, patronized or
>ignored female characters.  So we are hyper-alert.

Iggy here:

I grew up in central California, in Santa Cruz... which is quite close to
San Francisco and Berkeley.  Santa Cruz is often even more rabid about
"politically correct advocacy" than almost any other place I have been.  I
also spent a great deal of my childhood on the UCSC university campus... and
universities, as most of us know, are "hotbeds of social change"... I also
spent a good amount of time in the '90's visiting friends on that same
campus.

My reason for stating all of this is to say that I definitely know of where
I speak from when I say that there's too many people out there that are so
fanatical about making sure a certain gender, race, sexual orientation, etc,
gets treated equally and with full rights and objectivity, that they not
only tend to overlook other issues while blindly pursuing their own agendas,
but they also tend to perpetuate aspects of the political views that they
supposedly fight against.  (Golly... haven't I said this somewhere
before???)

I have made the mistake, on more than one occasion, of stating in front of a
group of college women and older feminists that there are some areas in
which women are still given preference.  (One of my more controversial
questions to pit-bull feminists who scream for total equality is "Ok.. So
are you willing to register for selective service and possibly get drafted
into a war that you might not agree with and have to fight on the front
line... to possibly die while supporting a cause that may belong to someone
else?"  Their usual answer is "No, I'm not willing to do that."  My reply:
"Ok, then when you're willing to be expected by society to take full and
equal risk, whether you want to or not, come and talk to me.")
Unfortunately, these are often the women who see someone holding the door
open for them (even by someone who would hold a door for anyone... male or
female..), even out of basic courtesy, as an insult.

This is not to say that I don't take women's equal rights seriously... I do.
What I try to ask people to keep in mind is that there are expectation often
placed on men in most cultures that are as unfair as those placed on
women... but they get overlooked because men (especially white Christian
men) are seen as having most of the power.  They also seem to overlook the
fact that only the upper class people seem to have any real advantages.  In
fact, white middle class men often find it harder to get into college
because there are many more programs (like affirmative action) that are seen
as leveling the playing field for everyone but actually, to my experiences
at least, tend to skew things away from white lower/middle class males
having much ability to get into school without great grades and tons of
scholarships.

A few major points I'll use as examples are as follows:

A:  I have heard homosexuals say that bi-sexuals were only gays who are too
afraid to come out of the closet.  This, to me, is a way of saying "I've
been prejudiced against so much, I'll make myself feel better by finding a
smaller sub-culture to be prejudiced against."  Along this same line, I had
a debate with a college student who claimed that he was bisexual as more of
a political statement than because that's what he was inside...

His would be much like if Harry and the other "half-bloods" decided to
crusade against Hermione and the "muggle-born" because they feel like they'
ve been persecuted by the "pure-bloods" like Draco.  Never mind that they
have "pure-blood" friends like the Weasleys and Neville.

People have also been writing on the OT-Chatter group about Seamus being
portrayed as a bisexual slut in some of the recent fan-fics.  Should this
matter in the long run?  If any character expresses love and affection for
someone in a manner that's reciprocated, regardless of gender, who is anyone
else to say whether it's right or not.


B:  I have seen women say that it's impossible for a man to be raped by a
woman.  Yet I have heard of a number of instances of this happening (and it
almost happened to me...), and if a man can't come forward with any
statement of being a rape victim...  If he was raped by a man, he is a wimp
or gay.  If he was raped by a woman, he is a wimp, or must be gay if he
didn't want it.  Just as there's more than one form of sex, almost every one
of those can be used as a form of rape.

When you think about it, this is similar to what the Dementors do to
someone.  They violate someone against their will.  When someone is
confronted by a Dementor, be they male or female, they are equal.
Biological function has nothing to do with your ability to resist, or your
ability to be violated.  A man who crumbles to their fear is no less than a
woman who does the same thing.  Nobody knows whether the Dementors are male,
female, or gender-less, yet nobody questions that what they do to their
victims are hideous acts of violation.



C:  I have heard blacks talk about the debt owed to them by the white man
for slavery, despite the fact that it was abolished here over 150 years ago
and couldn't have happened to anyone within about 3 generations of them
within their family.  These are the same black people who have said that
calling someone (the "N" word.) is hateful, and god help the non-black who
uses the word, yet they call each other the same thing...

Can you imagine the House Elves being freed from service en-masse and, three
centuries later, still declaring that the wizarding world owed them a
massive debt for what happened before any of the living wizards were ever
born?

How about Hermione and the other "muggle-born" and "half-blood" wizards and
witches calling each other "mudblood" in a friendly manner, but jumping all
over any "pure-blood" who dares even think of using the word?  Would this be
fair?


The reason for this long... well... tirade... if you wish to call it that...
is to point out that many people tend to become so sensitive about their
chosen cause, that they miss seeing where they actually hurt that cause by
becoming fanatical, where they actually end up hurting other people in their
over zealous pursuit of their cause, or when they actually only pursue their
cause when and how it suits them.. not when and how it suits their cause.

Hermione is questing for House Elf rights, but she tends to not think about
many factors.  Do they want to be freed of their service?  Or do they see it
as their accepted and honored purpose in life?  Does she respect their
wishes when they seem offended at the idea of pay and freedom?  If she
succeeds in getting all the House Elves feed, what then?  To what I can see,
she wants them freed from service, but hasn't even considered what they're
supposed to do with their lives later.  Has she thought about tacking on a
House Elf Placement Program onto her cause, in an effort to find gainful and
respected employment for freed House Elves?

No.  She feels that her perception of their situation is the right one, and
seeks to achieve what she feels is right. whether or not anyone else, the
House Elves included, agree with her at all.

When one seeks out a cause, it's best to learn not only about the entire
cause, but the reasons it began, whether it applies today, whether you
support all aspects of it, who it affects outside of that arena, and whether
pursuing your cause would hurt the rights of others.  (What I mean by that
last statement is that there is *always* a way to further your cause without
hurting someone else.  i.e.:  If you try to gain more rights and equality
for women, make sure your actions don't try to take away from the rights men
have.)

Granted, Hermione's cause doesn't hurt others, at least not yet.  But it
actually has the potential to hurt those she's trying to help.  Not only
that, but in her quest to promote SPEW, she's trying to not change the minds
of her friends, but instead impose her views on them.  She annoys everyone,
and instead of truly researching her cause and trying to diplomatically
enlighten people to her goals, she browbeats them.

I think she could do a lot more good for House Elves if she thought things
through a lot better.  For one thing, she can attempt to improve how the
House Elves are treated, without necessarily needing to have them freed or
given pay.  (Can you imagine the creation of HEWS - the House Elf Welfare
Squad?  Their job is to ensure that House Elves aren't being treated with
cruelty or unduly punished.  That they are being treated well and aren't
malnourished and dirty.  If they need to, they can relieve a family of their
House Elf, and place them in a better home.  Much like Child Welfare
Services.  *That's* what Hermione should be working on.  *grin*)


This narrow minded and overly focused type of attitude, unfortunately, often
carries over to affect strong works of literature, film, and music.  Even
when the creator of such a work isn't out to be an activist, or just wants
to create something that they (and hopefully others) will enjoy.  The
stronger or more popular the work is, the more controversial it becomes.
People pick it apart to find the flaws, and find flaws where they want to
see them.  This, inevitably, validates their viewpoints and further
increases their negative opinion of aspects of the work, or the entire work
itself.

Before I digress too far... (TOO LATE!!)  I offer this advice to sum it
up... (And I should probably take this pill more often myself when dealing
with my annoyance towards fanatics.. *grin*)  Be careful at becoming too
sensitive or zealous about a cause you support, lest you destroy that cause
through that narrowness of mind.


>Laura:
>My problem with Molly wasn't that she's an at-home mom or that she's
>loving and protective.  It's that she was cruel to someone who
>didn't deserve it at all (most uncharacteristically of her) and who
>could have benefited from some love and understanding himself.  I
>think she made a difficult situation worse, and she had every reason
>to know better, having had the benefit of over 20 years of happy
>family life and knowing how rare that is, in the WW or anywhere
>else.

Iggy here:

If you can find me one good and kind person who hasn't hurt someone
inadvertently in a highly emotional situation, then you are a better
observer of human nature than I.

Everyone is guilty of this a few times in their life, especially when it's a
conflict involving someone they care a great deal about.

Married couples should never hurt each other in any way... but it happens.
My wife and I have arguments all the time, but still love each other very
deeply.  Parents and children should never hurt each other either, yet that
happens as well.  My mom has said and done things that have hurt me to the
core, and I have done the same to her in my life, but if I ever heard that
someone had caused her true harm, god help them, because that's all that
will save them from me.

Molly and Sirius aren't married, or parent and child, so why expect her to
have more control over her actions with him than she probably does with her
own family?

Yes, people should know better... but that doesn't stop us from getting
overwhelmed by our emotions sometimes.

>Laura:
>Petunia doesn't get the same amount of flak for her
>overindulgence of Dudley because we don't think, judging from what
>JKR shows us, that she could do any better.  In terms of her
>mothering technique, she's a lost cause.

Iggy here:

I don't think she's a lost cause as a parent.  She still has the time, and I
feel the potential, to learn the error of what she's done and seek to make
amends.  I feel that something will happen within the next book that will
open her eyes to what's really important and to how petty she and her family
have been.  Hopefully, she'll learn from is and try to correct things... or
at least apologize to Harry.

>Laura:
>And let's face it, Dudley would have been better off if Petunia
>*had* gone to work and left the child-rearing to someone else.
>In this respect, JKR is utterly realistic-an at-home mom doesn't
>necessarily lead to emotionally well-balanced kids, and a mom
>with a paying job doesn't necessarily lead to love-deprived kids.

Iggy here:

I don't see anywhere where anyone has said that a stay-at-home parent leads
to a happy family and well adjusted children.

I've only seen that people feel a responsible and caring parent that can
lead to a happy family and good kids.  IMHO, having Petunia go to work
wouldn't have made much of a difference.  With the kind of parent she is at
home, she would most likely have made sure to hire a nanny that
molly-coddles Dudley, and dislikes Harry, as much as she does.  Then, if
things went wrong, she'd also have someone else to blame for any problems.
This would make things a good deal worse, IMHO.

A parent is who they are when raising their kids, regardless of whether they
stay at home or go to work.  Molly and Petunia would still act the same
towards their children.  In fact, when you look at it, once their kids are
in school, the parents still spend almost the same amount of time away from
them as they would if they went to work.  So it wouldn't really make much
difference, would it?


I think I'll end this right here, before I head off on too long of a
letter...  (*ducks as everyone yells "TOO LATE!!"*)


Iggy McSnurd