Magic-Muggle Marriages was Spinner's End as home (wasRe:

[Steve]

No: HPFGUIDX 142183

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "lyraofjordan"
<lyraofjordan at y...> wrote:
>
> lealess:
> > > I am wondering if witch-Muggle marriages *DO* work.  The 
> > > examples we have show no signs of happiness.   As for wizard-
> > > Muggle marriages, are there examples of that in the books?
>  
> Potioncat wrote:
> > The one that comes to mind is the Finnegan family. However, we 
> > don't know anything about it. ...
> 
> Lyra now:
> ... But at the same time, in CoS Ron says "If we [wizards] hadn't 
> married muggles, we'd have died out" [Chapter 7], which makes it 
> sound a lot more prevalent than is reflected by what we've seen in 
> the books. ...
> 

bboyminn:

Let's no get carried away and forget that Ron' statement had a
context. He said it in a conversation about 'purebloods', and his
point is that if purebloods only marry purebloods then wizard would
have died out, which is exactly what the book tells us about pureblood
families.

There are more options and I believe that these options are what Ron
is referring to. For example, if Harry marries Ginny, that is not a
pureblood marriage even though both of them are magical beings. I
would call it a 'full-blood' marrage; the marriage of a not-pureblood
magical person to a pureblood magical person. Even if Ron marries
Hermione, Ron is marrying a magical person, BUT he is marrying into a
muggle family. My point is there are may options for marrying in the
wizard world the don't include magical/non-magical marriages. I'm not
excluding those, simply saying that the scope is bigger that
pureblood/pureblood and magical/muggle.

I think the point Ron is making is not that most /marriages/ are
mixed, but that most /families/ are mixed; either indirectly as in Ron
marrying Hermione, distantly as in Harry marrying Ginny, or directly
as in Mr and Mrs Finnegan's case.


> Lealess wrote:
> > > Perhaps witches are even forbidden to disclose their magic to 
> > > their purely-Muggle intendeds until after marriage because of
> >>  the Secrecy Act.  ...
> 
> Lyra again:
> I've wondered, too, if there might be some stipulation against 
> revealing magic before you're married. ... If that's the case, 
> well there's nothing like a little disception to get a marriage 
> off on the wrong foot, is there?  
> 

bboyminn:

That is a sticky situation, and something I never thought of before.
Techincally, you can't reveal yourself to a muggle. Now if the muggle
asked to marry you, and you said yes, then there is room for the very
delicate explanation before the blessed event occurs. If the person
can not accept your magical status and is deemed a risk, then you can
call in the Obliviators to recitfy the situation if necessary.

A separate point that may people seem to miss, is that within very
definite boundaries, muggles are allowed to know about magic. We see
this in the Dursleys. That fact that Petunia has magical beings in her
family, while greatly denied and ignored, is known, and it is further
know that they actually have a magical being living with them (Harry).
As long as they are certain to keep the secret, then I think it's OK. 

I can only conclude that a muggle knowing about magic is related to
the protection of the existance of the wizard world as a whole from
the muggle world as a whole. It seems as if it is alright for trusted
immediate family members to know the secret.

Keep in mind too that if an indiscrete family member were to reveal
that their sister-in-law (for example) were a 'witch'; there are
plenty of common real world interpretations that would come into play
long before the person pondered the idea that the 'witch' in question
might truly be a magical being. So in some sense, some degree of
revealing the 'secret' CAN occur which does not in fact actually
reveal the secret.

Just a bunch of rambling.

Steve/bboyminn