No Sex, Please, We're British

[grannybat84112]

No: HPFGUIDX 83686

Caipora replied to me:

>>> Recall too the mandrakes, and their marks of maturation: acne, 
wild
>>> parties, and finally moving into each other's pots. Surely there
> >> aren't two ways for an adult to read that
> >	
>>Well, yes, but the mandrakes are bit players rather than main 
>> characters. And their ultimate destiny is to be sliced, diced, and 
>> pureed into a restorative draught; hardly an encouraging omen for 
>> teens interested in learning about sex.
> 
> This thread started off on the topic of ethics. The treatment of  
> the mandrakes, who are anthropormorphized and then puréed, is one 
> of the ethically most troubling incidents in the books.

True. Animals and anthropormorphized plants don't fare well in the 
Magical world. (Well, the Whomping Willow can hold its own, and it 
does receive some medical care from Professor Sprout after the flying 
car crashes into it. And the kittens on which they practice vanishing 
spells don't seem to be harmed when they vanished, if Ron's wriggling 
mouse tail is any indication.) I felt particularly sorry for the 
hedgehogs transformed into pincushions in McGonagal's class. Maybe 
that's why Snape is never mentioned as having a pet: He's used to 
regarding animals as a raw potion ingredients. 

I take this attitude as a further extension of the Magical world's 
attitude toward "inferior" beings: Even if they are fully magical, 
they're not fully human, and therefore they are lesser creatures, to 
be used for whatever purposes Magicals see fit.

> > (Still, I can't help waiting for Malfoy to make some homophobic 
> > crack about Harry and Ron's friendship.
> 
> Dudley makes such a crack at the start of OotP, regarding Harry's 
> saying Cedric's name in his nightmares, so it's not beyond 
> Rowling's reach. 

I caught that, yes. But Harry was already so angry at the mere 
mention of the graveyard incident–and so fearful of what he might 
have let slip while yelling in his sleep–that the full impact of the 
jab went right by him. 
 
> One of the most puzzling aspects of romance if not sex in Rowling  
> is Hermione's cool explanations of how girls behave in OotP. Her 
> demeanor has an air of "been there, done that, got the T-shirt" but 
> her only romantic relationship we know of is with Viktor, and that 
> seem largely epistolary. How does she know so well how other girls 
> behave? 

I was particularly irritated by the passage in which she explains 
Cho's convoluted feelings to Harry after the Valentine's Day fiasco.  
Since when did superbrain Hermoine turn into a touchy-feely armchair 
psychologist? 

Oh, no, JKR has succumbed to Counselor Troi Syndrome: What's the real 
purpose of this female character? Why, to explain the boys' feelings 
to them! Next thing we know, Hermione will be subscribing to the 
Oprah Book Club–

Aha. Books.

She's quoting from self-help books she's absorbed for light reading. 
Books on romantic  relationships so she can deal with Viktor. Books 
on male adolescents acting out stress, because her best friend Harry 
is under so much pressure. Books on "Boys Who Love Quidditch and the 
Witches Who Love Them." She picks up the messy details from what she 
observes in the girls' dormitories, and she makes sense of it all 
through books.

I still don't like reading that passage, but now I can give her a 
rationale that's in character. ;)

Grannybat
PS - Thank you for the link to Tobermory. Quite amusing.