muggle baiting vs. muggle torture

[horridporrid03]

No: HPFGUIDX 155656

> >>Jennifer Choi:
> > which makes me curious as to what level of harm would constitute 
> > Muggle baiting. 

> >>Gerry: 
> Hm, I don't think it has anything to do with the level of harm. I
> would expect Muggle-baiting is using magic maliciously on Muggles
> because they are Muggles.
> <snip>
> That is not what the twins did. Now I agree that it was wrong and 
> that it caused a lot of panic. But it was not muggle-baiting.      
> Because they did not do it to him because he was a Muggle. They   
> would have done exactly the same if he were a wizard. 
> So yes, it is wrong, just as wrong as beating him up would be. But 
> no it is not muggle-baiting.

Betsy Hp:
The thing is though, it really *looks* like Muggle-baiting.  I agree 
that the twins would have done the same to a wizard family.  (Though 
of course the outcome wouldn't have been nearly as satisfying.) But 
actions matter.  That's why Arthur blows off their attempt to 
explain motive.  In a case like this it's important for the boys to 
recognize that their motive doesn't matter.

It would be like a couple of white teenagers in the 1950's Southern 
US burning a cross on the front lawn of a black family to scare a 
kid they didn't like.  They aren't doing it because the boy is 
black, they just know cross-burning scares him so it's funny.  The 
twins used magic against Dudley because they didn't like him and 
they knew it would scare him and it would be funny.

But it is, in the end, an abuse of power.  Dudley and his parents 
can't fight back, just as the black family in the above analogy 
couldn't fight back.  So despite motivation the twins come across as 
Muggle-baiting.  If Arthur and Molly had been stronger parents 
they'd have made sure that point sunk in.  And probably made the 
twins write an apology note.

Betsy Hp