Snape's abuse (Re: Would an "O" for Harry vindicate Snape?)

[horridporrid03]

No: HPFGUIDX 131834

> >>Sarah:
> <snip>
> I work for child protective service.  And Snape is abusive.       
> Sorry.  He's emotionally abusive (yes, there is such a thing),    
> neglectful, and physically abusive towards Harry in OotP.         
> Umbridge is abusive in her punishments, but she is not nearly as  
> bad as Snape is.  (At least in her duties as a teacher before     
> she tried the imperious curse.)

Betsy Hp:
Huh.  So you would call a person who has admitted to trying to kill 
a child and torture a child, and whose punishments are not complete 
until blood is drawn, *less* abusive than a man who will verbally 
attack a child but has never put a child in harms way and has in 
fact saved at least two children's lives.  It's an... *interesting* 
tact to take, to say the least.

> >>Sarah:
> <snip>
> First of all, Snape is a bigot...

Betsy Hp:
Erm... huh?  Where's your proof of that?  

> >>Sarah:
> ...and a "reformed" Death Eater.  As a Death Eater, he has        
> probably been asked to kill, torture, maim, etc innocent people   
> for their ancestry or beliefs.  I think most readers tend to      
> forget that he was a Death Eater, and what being a Death Eater    
> entails.  Remember, Sirius' brother was killed when he tried to   
> back out for what he was being asked to do.

Betsy Hp:
I, for one, have not overlooked Snape's past.  Nor have I overlooked 
the fact that for Snape to leave the Death Eaters probably took all 
of the bravery and cunning he had.  What Regulus's death showed us 
is that one doesn't leave the Death Eaters lightly or on a mere 
whim.  I think that Snape is one of Dumbledore's most loyal 
followers, and of course I'll have to rethink things if this is 
shown to not be the case (highly unlikely, IMO).  However, to judge 
Snape on the mistakes of his past, to completely overlook all he has 
done and is doing to make up for those past mistakes is... well 
obviously your right as a reader, but not something I'm able to do.  

> >>Sarah:
> <snip>
> Snapes behavior towards Hermione is neglectful at one point: he   
> did not allow her to get medical treatment for her teeth after    
> Draco's spell hit her.  Not taking a child in for medical         
> treatment is considered medical neglect.  She went in spite of    
> Snape, but it was Snape's duty to have someone take her to the    
> hospital wing.  (Just as it was Hagrid's duty to take Draco to the 
> hospital wing when Draco was injured by the hippogriff.)

Betsy Hp:
This is just wrong.  Hermione ran as soon as Snape made the 
admittedly unkind remark about her teeth.

"Snape looked coldly at Hermione, then said, "I see no difference."
Hermione let out a whimper; her eyes filled with tears, she turned 
on her heel and ran, ran all the way up the corridor and out of 
sight." (GOF scholastic hardback ed. p.300)

Snape had neither the opportunity nor the need to tell Hermione to 
go to the hospital wing, as he did with Goyle.  Neither child had an 
escort, but neither child needed an escort.  Draco, on the other 
hand, had collapsed from his injuries and whether he was faking or 
not, didn't appear to be in any condition to take himself to the 
hospital wing.

When Harry has his dream in Trelawney's class and comes to with a 
scorching headache, Trelawney doesn't ask anyone to escort him to 
the hospital wing. (ibid p.578)  Actually, she comes the closest, 
IMO, of denying a child access to medical treatment they appeared to 
have need of.

> >>Sarah:
> <snip>
> Snape was physically abusive towards Harry in OotP.  Snape grabbed 
> Harry hard enough to cause Harry pain in the arms (and Harry is   
> used to pain), threw Harry to the ground, and threw things at     
> Harry.

Betsy Hp:
And this is where your argument starts to fall apart.  Because 
Umbridge grabs Marietta Edgecombe and shakes her "very hard" (OotP 
scholastic hardback ed. p.616).  So either, you feel that shaking a 
child hard is not physical abuse (and you seem willing to overlook 
the "carve into the back of your hand until you draw blood" thing, 
so maybe this *is* what you're saying) or you've got a bias.  The 
unfortunately familiar "Any teacher who's not Snape can do whatever 
they want to any child that's not Harry" bias.  It's what leads to 
the somewhat contorted, "Snape made Neville shiver! He is the EVIL!" 
followed by "Moody bounced Draco until he was shaking in pain and 
humiliation!  He is the FUNNY!" arguments that leave me scratching 
my head in confusion.

> >>Sarah:
> <snip>
> I very much doubt that Dumbledore would permit this if he knew,   
> but Harry didn't tell anyone about the physical abuse.

Betsy Hp:
Dumbledore seems to have a zero tolorance policy for any kind of 
physical abuse.  Which, since we know that Arthur still bears the 
scars of his punishment for being out past curfew (GoF p.616), is 
something I think is probably unique to Dumbledore within the WW.  
Especially when we see how quickly Umbridge is able to legalize 
whipping students once Dumbledore is gone (OotP p.674).

I don't think Dumbledore would have approved of Snape throwing Harry 
from his classroom (which I honestly took as Snape trying to 
*prevent* himself from physically abusing Harry -- the man was 
*furious*), but I think he wouldn't have approved of Harry's 
snooping either.

And I'm quite sure Dumbledore would have been furious if he'd 
learned about Umbridge's blood-quill.  That was a particularly cruel 
punishment, IMO (and *nothing* like getting whapped by a ruler, 
again, IMO).  However, when it comes to emotional abuse though Snape 
is horrid to the children, the only one who seems really affected by 
it is Neville.  And unfortuntely, I think Neville's family would 
approve of the treatment.

I would also add, that though Snape makes the students fear and hate 
*him*, McGonagall seems to favor manipulating the student she's 
punishing into being hated by their peers.  In PS/SS she causes 
Harry and Hermione and Neville to be hated by practically the entire 
school.  Even quidditch becomes an ordeal for Harry, and Hermione 
stops answering questions in class. (SS scholastic paperback ed. 
p.244-245)

McGonagall takes a similar tactic in PoA when she sets Neville apart 
from his housemates by refusing to give him the password to the 
Gyffindor dorms. (PoA scholastic hardback ed. p.271)  Neville isn't 
*hated* but he's certainly made an object of public disdain.  And 
again, his entire house is made aware of just what an idiot he is.  

I would argue that when it comes to true emotional abuse, McGonagall 
could teach Snape a few tricks.  She's certainly got a knack for 
making a child miserable beyond her classroom door.

Betsy Hp, who had to delete her previous post for bad vocabulary