Hate crimes (was Re: muggle baiting vs. muggle torture)

[horridporrid03]

No: HPFGUIDX 155793

> >>Magpie:
> > So as long as you felt that the kids did not target the kid      
> > because he was a Jew, you wouldn't consider it anti-Semitic that 
> > they decided to prank the Jewish kid they didn't like by putting 
> > a DIRTY JEW sign on his back? 
 
> >>Alla:
> Eh, No, this was how Betsy analogised the prank, I don't see      
> anything close to this analogy in what twins did.

Betsy Hp:
Hmm, that's actually *exactly* how I meant to present that analogy.  
So wasn't as clear as I wanted to be, so let me try again. <g>

Okay, so we're in Russia, and the Dursleys are Jews.  They've been 
given Harry, a Christian, to care for and they treat him badly and 
their son, Dudley, bullies him.  Two older friends of Harry, 
Christians themselves, Fred and George, decide they're going to get 
back at Dudley for bullying Harry.  Since they live in an area where 
Jews are bullied by Christians in general, they decide that it'll be 
funny to attach a sign saying "Dirty Jew" to Dudley's back.

They are specifically using the fact that as Christians they are 
more powerful, and they are specifically using the fact that Dudley 
is Jewish to give him a bit of pay back.  And they think it's funny.

Their father has worked to try and improve relations between Jews 
and Christians and he's furious when he sees what his sons have 
done.  He tries to help the Dursleys remove the sign, but as they're 
Jewish and are terrified by Christians (based on past experience) 
they throw things at him and try and shelter Dudley from him.

The twins explain to their father that they didn't put that sign on 
Dudley *because* he's Jewish, they were just thinking of Harry.  
Their father rages, "That's not the point!"  But the rest of the 
family laughs because they don't like these particular Jews anyway.

> >>Alla:
> I said it many times, but if we continue with this analogy, what   
> Twins did as targeting the kid, who is a big bullying git and just 
> **happens to be a Jew** and him being a jew has **nothing** to do 
> with the reason he is being pranked.
> <snip>

Betsy Hp:
The thing is though, the prank in the analogy *depends* on Dudley 
being Jewish.  If the twins in the analogy pasted a "Dirty Jew" sign 
on the back of a Christian kid, the reaction would be totally 
different.  Just as, if the Potterverse twins slipped a wizard kid 
the ton-tongue toffee, the reaction would be totally different.

The prank *depended* on Dudley being a Muggle.  That's why I see it 
as Muggle-baiting.

Just as the Christian twins should *not* have used the fact that 
Dudley is Jewish and they are Christian to prank him, the 
Potterverse twins should *not* have used the fact that Dudley is 
Muggle and they are Wizards to prank him. There is too big of a 
power differential there for it to be ethical to used so lightly.

> >>Magpie:
> > Or would the fact that they went for that prank suggest a latent 
> > anti-Semitism that was already there but they just didn't have   
> > cause to act on as long as the Jew was a nice guy their view?

> >>Alla:
> Huh? So are you saying after all that Twins do hate Muggles and    
> just do not act on it? I am not sure I understand.
> <snip>

Betsy Hp:
It does bother me that *everyone* in the Weasley family laughed 
about the Prank.  (Especially Bill.  Et tu, Bill? etc. <g>)  I think 
it's indicitive of the entire WW, however.  Muggles are all a tiny 
bit lesser-than.  Poor Arthur is really fighting an unhill battle, 
without even family support.

> >>Julie:
> <snip>
> However, their actions aren't as bad as the DEs, because
> motivation does make a difference too. Fred and George wanted
> to punish Dudley for his previous actions, even if it wasn't
> their place, and they used unfair tactics (magic against someone
> with no defences against it). The DEs intended to humiliate and
> hurt the Muggles they mistreated simply for the fun of it though
> the Muggles had done nothing to them or anyone else.

Betsy Hp:
The gradation is where the motivation comes in, I agree.  The twins 
aren't at Death Eater level.  Though I don't think JKR wrote that 
scene so quickly after the prank by mistake.  There's a definite 
echo, IMO, and I think JKR does it quite deliberately.  Two ends of 
a slippery slope.

> >>a_svirn:
> <snip>
> The twins find making people frightened and humiliated funny.

Betsy Hp:
And that, in a nutshell, is why I'm not a big fan of the twins.

> >>a_svirn:
> They found it particularly hilarious when the whole muggle family 
> was humiliated and went frantic with panic. How come their notion 
> of fun is so very different from that of Death Eaters'?

Betsy Hp:
Oh, the Death Eaters would have found the Dursley family's panic 
*hilarious*, which, frankly, should be a bit of a warning sign, 
IMO.  And it's this bullying behavior that worries me about the 
twins.  However, they don't have a fanatical hatred for muggles.  
Not that I've seen, anyway.  Just the usual run-of-the-mill wizards 
contempt for all things Muggle.  Which, again, is why Arthur (who 
even shares that contempt, I think it is rather insidious) is facing 
such an uphill battle with his anti-muggle-baiting laws. 

Betsy Hp