[HPforGrownups] Re: Lusting After Snape

[Laura Ingalls Huntley]

No: HPFGUIDX 129459

Gerry:
> I wonder in what kind of society this Porphyria lives, that she has
> such a stereotypical view of what woman can be or cannot be.

The problem with bring up these lovely old posts from ages and ages ago 
is that we lose all sense of context (Porphyria's theory must seem like 
a very out-of-the-blue kind of idea to you, but within the framework of 
what HPfGU was generally discussing at the time, it was not at all 
unusual).  I think you may have misinterpreted Porphyria's actual views 
on this matter -- I don't think she was saying that she *buys* these 
stereotypes -- she is merely acknowledging the place they have in what 
I will, for lack of a better term, call our "societal subconscious".  
Of course, very few (educated) people nowadays will actively espouse 
the traditional "feminine" and "masculine" roles, but the fact remains 
that they are ingrained in our culture.  Sure, that culture *is* 
changing, but the old sex roles and their imagery still affect our 
actions and thoughts in subtle and pervasive ways.

> As for the anima-animus rubbish: if you look at the associations a
> society considers male or female you get an excellent look at what the
> dominant gender considers attractive and worth attributing to
> themselves. Feminine symbolism has nothing to dot with women, but is a
> cultural pattern.

It's unfortunate that she is not around to speak for herself, but I 
don't think Porphyria would disagree with this statement at all.  In 
fact, her entire theory is based on the divide between what women are 
*supposed to be* and what they *are*.

I suspect the "anima-animus rubbish" was simply introduced into the 
argument because it was a ready-made set of concepts that Porphyria 
could build off of with the assumption that everyone was already 
familiar with them.  We used to do a lot more Jungian analysis around 
here. ^_~

Laura
http://www.livejournal.com/users/laurahuntley