"M**blood" and handicap

[boyd_smythe]

No: HPFGUIDX 106403

> Del wrote:
> That's interesting. You say that the word is taboo because it 
relates
> to horrors that were done in the past (I got that much right, I hope
> ?). Then if we assume that indeed mudblood is the WW equivalent of
> nigger, wouldn't it indicate that it hides something else too ? 
Could
> it be that those purebloods who petition for Muggle-hunting to be 
made
> legal are actually the last representative of a much larger group in
> the past ?

> And Sherry G responded:
> I think you could very well be correct.  I don't have any illusions 
that the
> wizarding world has always been nice to muggles.  Perhaps, back in 
the days
> of the four founders, Gryffindor was very unusual in his support of 
muggle
> born students.  If the mud blood thing is supposed to represent 
racism, then
> I think there could very well be some not so pretty history behind 
it.


boyd:

I guess I assumed that muggle-borns were severely persecuted during 
the 11 year reign of terror I call Voldemort I. And possibly also 
during a similar reign of terror by Slytherin after he left Hogwarts. 
Those times alone would have given rise to the horror that is felt at 
the word "mudblood."

And it appears that Gryffindor was not the odd one out in 
supporting muggle-borns--according to Binns and the Sorting Hat, it 
was Slytherin who had different ideas from the other three Founders, 
Slytherin who created the Chamber and placed a basilisk there, and 
Slytherin who left Hogwarts.

So three of the four Founders were not anti-mudblood 1,000 ago. Just 
like the modern-day Hogwarts, that view seems to be in the minority. 
As for the rest of the modern-day WW, who can tell?

--boyd