muggle baiting vs. muggle torture

[sistermagpie]

No: HPFGUIDX 155296

Random832:
He doesn't know why? Not his fault he's stupid, I suppose, but not 
the twins' either. One of the key factors in muggle-baiting is that 
it takes advantage of things that the muggles don't think should be
possible (disappearing keys, etc) - this element is missing here
because Dudley knows about magic.

Magpie:
Okay, whatever he knows, presumably, after the first few seconds 
that it's magic, but he doesn't know what exactly is being done to 
him, nor does he have any control or way of doing anything against 
it.  I don't see why Muggle-baiting has to depend on Muggles not 
knowing Magic is being used.  Are you suggesting that it's illegal 
to make Muggles' keys disappear but what the DEs were doing was just 
fine since the Muggles at least had some idea that the guys with the 
masks were causing them to levitate in the air?  

> Random832:
> But it's natural to them. Asking them not to use it is like asking
> humans (magical or otherwise) not to use their opposable thumbs.

Magpie:
No it's not.  Wizards are perfectly capable of choosing not to 
perform a hex on someone.  It's not like they wouldn't make that 
decision in a different situation.

> Random832:
> OK, so self-defense is fine. how about defense of others?

Magpie:
Are we talking about actual defense of others? Or "He did something 
to my friend and I'm going to get him back for it?" 

> Random832:
> I don't think that's anything like the definition we've been 
given. I
> don't trust Arthur as an authority to say what is and is not
> muggle-baiting, we've been given a definition (with examples, even)
> and we should judge it for ourselves.

Magpie:
That's all we can do.  I am judging it for myself, as a Muggle.  
 
> Random832:
> I liken it more to a victim bringing his older brother to the
> schoolyard to intimidate the bully than a simple case of "meeting a
> bigger bully" - particularly since the Weasleys are more of a 
family
> to Harry than the Dursleys ever were. The tongue thing was 
ultimately
> harmless, my opinion is that the whole point was simple 
intimidation
> rather than retaliatory harm.

Magpie:
Dudley's already intimidated of Harry as soon as he becomes a 
Wizard.  (And Dudley's gotten his punishment once with the pig's 
tail, as a_svirn pointed out.)  They're not protecting Harry from 
Dudley in the scene.  They're testing their products, having a laugh 
and trying to give Harry some pleasure by doing something to the 
cousin that beat him up for years.


> Random832:
> We're not given the definition he's using as a basis for his
> accusation against the twins, and whatever it may be it's in direct
> conflict with the definition we _are_ given.

Magpie:
What definition that we are given is it in conflict with?  

Random832:> 
> He's also overzealous to a fault. Remember, this is the man who 
banned
> flying carpets because "muggles have rugs too" (yet somehow he 
didn't
> notice that we also have brooms... and cars.) I think his anti-
muggle
> bias takes a much more insidious form than the views held by Lucius
> Malfoy et al.

Magpie:
Yes, I think all the Weasleys have an anti-Muggle bias--as do all 
Wizards I can think of.  

PJ:
I guess I see Muggle baiting as purposely trying to harm someone
specifically *because* they're Muggles and therefore inferior... This
doesn't qualify for me.

Magpie:
Whatever we call it, I'm one of those Muggles who isn't comfortable 
giving Wizard's a blank check to whip out the wands to discipline me 
(and anyone who'd grant that power over themselves to the Twins, 
who've never even pretended to not be self-interested first, is a 
fool). I think the two parts of that sentence can happen 
independently.  One seeks out Muggles, the other acts out when 
annoyed.  But I think a person who truly respects a person of 
different abilities or a minority person vulnerable to 
discrimination as a person naturally continues to do so when they 
are angry at him/her.  If the minute you're angry at the person or 
the minute the person does something wrong you're quick to establish 
that you are the superior one because of the different things you 
were born with, I don't think you truly respected them to begin 
with. Given that Muggles are also sentient beings, and that their 
children even become Wizards and Wizard children can be born 
as "Muggles," it should be something they could manage. Even if 
there were times when they did resort to it, it wouldn't be done 
lightly.

-m