Snape, Hagrid and Animals

[lagattalucianese]

No: HPFGUIDX 144080

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Ceridwen" <ceridwennight at h...> 
wrote:
>
> Nora:
> > But I ask *you* this question: was 
> > Dumbledore unaware of sex offender Sirius at Hogwarts, and would 
he 
> > have let him off lightly solely to protect Remus Lupin? 
> 
> Ceridwen:
> EEK!  I mean, EEEEEEEK!  Yes, I know that's what La Gatta was 
> apparently saying.  But, still.  Eek?
> 
O.K., La Gatta understands your feelings. But part of the reason kids 
like Sirius get away with the things they do (and Sirius has made a 
career of getting away with things ever since he came to Hogwarts) is 
that far too many adults have this EEK! reaction, and go and stick 
their heads under the covers. (No, not *those* covers, you gubbins!)
> 
> La Gatta: 
> > > Upset, yes, but not to the point that it obsesses you for life. 
> As 
> > > it clearly does with Snape. I think what we are seeing in the 
> > > Pensieve is just the tip of the iceberg, one of many similar 
> > > assaults on young Severus' physical and emotional space. 
> 
> Ceridwen:
> Okay.  That's possible.  Pantsing someone is a form of humiliation 
> that has been done on schoolyards for... well, since before my 
time.  
> And, it is exactly what you say: harassment, an invasion of space, 
> humiliation.  And, once a gang of bullies gets hold of a particular 
> punching bag, they don't let him go all that easily.  When that 
> punching bag is possibly a match for any one of them on their own, 
as 
> Snape may well be, it's just more of a challenge.  I never did buy 
my 
> mother's bit about standing up to people who bullied me making them 
> leave me alone.  It just doesn't work that way.
> 
The problem here is the difference between "pantsing" in American 
public schools and "bagging" in British "public" schools. The 
American version is akin to a panty raid (which of course has no 
sexual connotations at all...), in that the objective is to get off 
with a naughty article of clothing and do something conspicuous with 
it. Whereas in the British version, the thrust, if you will excuse 
the expression, is not the bags but what's inside them: Older/more 
popular boys taking symbolic (and often not symbolic) sexual 
advantage of younger/less popular boys. There is a considerable 
difference between having your underpants run up the flagpole and 
having your naked lower body suspended in mid-air, where everybody, 
including your attackers, can enjoy the view.
>
> Sherry:
> > Your comments about the supposed real reason for James turning 
poor
> > Sevvy upside down implies that James did it for Sirius, which 
means 
> > you think James knew of his terrible behavior.
> 
> La Gatta:
> > > Well, yes... I think all four of the Marauders are in on the 
> dirty 
> > > little secret, and responding to it in their individual ways: *
> (snip)*
> 
> Nora:
> > That makes a whole lot of people at Hogwarts nasty voyeurs too, 
> then; 
> > remember that a number of people are watching and laughing.
> 
> Ceridwen:
> Ah.  Okay.  Let's hold on a minute.  Pantsing someone is a longtime 
> tradition among people with the upper hand and a particular way of 
> seeing themselves with power, on the schoolyard.  How many jokes 
are 
> there about running someone's underwear up the flagpole?  Such a 
> situation inforces the view of the pantsee as some sort of 98 lb. 
> geeky weakling being bested by the jocks.  It's humiliation, in the 
> same way that rape is not about sex, but power and humiliation, and 
> other very *un*romantic impulses.  The jocks are portrayed as 
simple 
> brutes in the jokes, while the geek gets derided for not being a 
> jock.  (*sigh* Some people want it both ways)
> 
> The laughing students are behaving like the people who laugh at the 
> joke.  It's funny to see the jocks give the geek, who shows them up 
> in class, 'the business'.  And if Snape's been as agressive about 
> hexing the Marauders, and possibly other students, they may be 
> laughing about the comeuppance.  Each portrayal plays into the 
> stereotype:  The jocks can't compete in class, but they're more 
than 
> physically able; the geek is more able in class, but out of his 
> league in the muscle department.  No matter how it actually works 
out 
> in real life.
> *(snip)*
> 
JKR makes the point, when James is playing with the Snitch, that he 
has lightning-fast reflexes, and I think she says somewhere that both 
James and Sirius are bigger than Snape. She certainly implies in the 
aftermath to the Pensieve, when she describes Snape as "full-grown" 
that fifteen-year-old Snape had some growing still to do.
> 
> La Gatta:
> > > I'd love to be wrong about Sirius, but I'm afraid I don't have 
a 
> > > very high opinion of him and his Marauders, and I don't think 
the 
> > > Prank was even remotely innocent.
> 
> > -Nora thinks that this is the first time this particular 
allegation 
> > has been made about Sirius Black, but there must be a first 
time   
> > for everything
> 
> Ceridwen:
> Oh, dear.  I did snip all the innuendos.  But, I can't see anything 
> that suggests that Sirius was a 'sex offender'.  Even if he had a 
> penchant for boys, it would have been age-appropriate.  He and 
Snape 
> are about the same age.  They're in the same year at school.  Even 
if 
> one had been held back a year, that's still within normal 
parameters 
> for a relationship - see Harry (6th year) and Ginny (5th year).  
Sex 
> offender?  Sexual predator?  Child molester?  How do you get from 
> liking someone his own age, and pedophelia?
> 
I don't. I'm suggesting that Molly knows about his behavior toward 
Snape (and possibly other "non-U" kids as well), and is taking no 
chances when Harry is around him. You can't miss her biddy-hen 
protectiveness in the first Grimauld Place interlude, and I don't 
think it's because she thinks something is going to come down the 
chimney and blaspheme the aspidistra if she takes her eyes off Harry 
for a moment (and she's just as protective of Ron and Hermione, as I 
recall).
> 
> *IF* James is upending Snape for Sirius's lascivious pleasure, and 
> *IF* pantsing Snape would give Sirius a rush and James knows that, 
it 
> still doesn't equate to Sirius having an unnatural liking for 
someone 
> twenty years his junior, whose only claim to sex is obvious organs, 
> as in baby Harry.  Sirius and Snape are the same age.  Harry, the 
> Weasley children, and Hermione, are young enough to be Sirius's own 
> children.  Seeing this memory doesn't imply unnatural feelings on 
the 
> part of any of the Marauders, esp. pedophelia.
> 
> The big problem with the scenario, whether or not Sirius is getting 
a 
> rush and the other Marauders are supporting and enabling this, is 
> that Snape is not willing.  And, it's public.  It's a humiliating 
> incident that shows the Marauders in a bad light (the muscle-bound 
> jocks), as well as Snape (the geeky weakling).  Since pantsing has 
> been a staple of a joke in schoolyard humor for ages, I can't see 
JKR 
> meaning anything beyond the obvious stereotypes of Jock and Geek in 
> this showing.
> 
> And, enjoying the traits of people the same age, doesn't 
> automatically lead to sexual offenses.  Fifteen might be a bit old 
> for such juvenile games.  But at the same time, it's also an age 
more 
> and more, where kids are still trying to cling to the favorite 
> remnants of childhood, like bathroom humor, jokes about bodily 
> funcitons, and pantsing people just because, not for the sexual 
> rush.  I guess what I'm struggling to say is that, even if Sirius 
is 
> inappropriate toward people his own age, that doesn't mean he'll be 
> inappropriate with children.  Or, that the memory shows him being 
> inappropriate *with a child*, since he was a child then himself.  
> They were peers, contemporaries.  No way can I see this memory of 
> Snape's as Sirius being... well, anything but an immature brat who 
> just likes to see someone he doesn't like, being humiliated.
> 
> And, if anyone was getting excited, it was Peter.  But, I rush to 
> add, it was the excitement of the capture, IMO, not the creepier 
> variety.
> 
> Ceridwen, who is still resembling a google-eyed emoticon.
>
As for Harry vis-a-vis Sirius, I think I said that he'd be safe 
enough, because he is (a) James' son, (b) one of "us", and (c) not 
someone that Sirius has control issues with. 

As for Snape, as you so aptly pointed out, the analogy really is to 
rape. Sirius' penchant isn't for boys per se, or for sex per se 
(though he obviously isn't adverse to a little whoopsie-do on the 
side if one is offered), it's for power and control. He just can't 
stand it that this weedy little half-blood kid stands up to him, and 
like your average fifteen-year-old male, he uses sex as a bludgeon to 
get back at him and humiliate him. I was hit between the eyes by the 
similarity between the Sirius/Snape dynamic and what went on between 
a herd of Mormon jocks and other Young Men Who Are an Inspiration to 
Us All at the high school where I used to teach, and a "non-U",  
gentile girl who refused to go out with one of them. They stopped 
short of outright rape (I think), but the harrassment had a definite 
sexual subtext (grabbing, skirt flipping, pantsing), and it for sure 
didn't have anything to do with love. In the end, her parents gave up 
and transferred her to another school. I wonder what that taught the 
poor kid about how the world wags.

I realize that this is one of those discussions like Hagrid versus 
Snape that is never going to be resolved in this life, so I'm bowing 
out of it before somebody throws a bust of Paracelsus at me. To 
paraphrase the hair-dye commercial, "Only your Rowling knows for 
sure."

--La Gatta