Female sexuality in HP (Was: Slytherin as villains / LOTR spoilers)

[Carol]

No: HPFGUIDX 179112

Magpie wrote:
> <snipping fruitless discussion of Slytherin on which we're never
going to agree> I find the depiction of sex quite weird in the
Potterverse. We get the stairs to the girl's dorm, which seems a nod
to the obvious fact that boys are going to be trying to get into the
girl's beds. 

Carol responds:
You're referring to the slide that prevents a boy from climbing those
stairs, right? We do get Hermione's comment about the old-fashioned
attitude of the Founders (trusting girls more than boys) in that
regard. But it would be inconvenient for the plot if Hermione couldn't
enter the boys' dormroom, and I suppose we need an explanation (other
than that Harry and Ron never thought of it) why they're never in
hers. (Also, Ginny has to get in Harry's room to steal back the diary
in Cos.)

Magpie:
> And yet based on what we see of our male heroes it's completely 
> unnecessary and in fact ought to be the other staircase. Sexually 
> the boys are all far more passive while the girls scheme, ogle and 
> attack. It's girls who buy love potions throughout the 
> books...because apparently 16 year old boys would never want a drug 
> that would make a girl eager to throw herself at him. Myrtle, 
> Hepzibah, Romilda and Merope are all predatory. Ginny sets her 
> sights on Harry at 10 and never stops. Hermione gets frustrated when 
> Ron doesn't step up and go after her the way he should. But then 
> there's also the old-fashioned undercurrent of girls being "scarlet 
> women"--Hermione for her non-affair with Harry, Ginny's brothers 
> getting worried when she sees all of 2 boys in a year, and now 
> Lavender for snogging Ron. Oh, and Cho pretty much drags Harry 
> throughout their entire aborted affair and apparently Ginny still 
> feels the need to defend Harry against her (and Fleur's little 
> sister) a year later.

Carol responds:
And yet there's an element of realism here, isn't there? Girls mature
sexually earlier than boys in RL. I don't find it at all surprising,
for example, that both Harry and Ron are clueless about Cho's behavior
in OoP or that Ron takes several years longer than Hermione to figure
out that he's attracted to her (he knows that he likes her as a
friend, but he doesn't recognize his own jealousy or sexual
attraction). Why? Could it be, in part, because girls in the WW, like
girls in the RL, are programmed to look for *romance* whereas, for
boys, a relationship with a girl is a kind of sexual experimentation
that, until OoP for Harry and HBP for Ron, the boys aren't really
ready for? Girls (other than Hermione and perhaps Ginny) wear lipstick
and exhibit other signs of wanting to be attractive to boys. Parvati
knows how to dance and has to "steer" Harry, who has no clue what to
do with his feet. Asking a girl out probably *is* a big deal for a boy
of fourteen who's still emotionally a child in many respects, just
getting used to his new voice and body and unable to understand how
girls think (the ones who are intent on getting boys to notice them,
that is, or the ones who want boys to be aware of their *feelings*,
like Cho in OoP and Lavender in HBP). Typical boys of fourteen or even
fifteen would rather think about sports, in this case, Quidditch, than
whether they're attractive to girls. OTOH, "snogging" has its
attractions, but it's a whole lot easier if the girl does the pursuing.

Maybe Hogwarts is a bit too much like the world of Jane Austen, in
which finding a husband is almost a duty (and the mother's job if the
daughter isn't doing her part). Jane Austen's heroines really have no
other options. Or maybe they resemble girls of the 1950s, some (by no
means all) of whom went to college to obtain their MRS degree. (The WW
has no colleges; the girls have to find and attract their future
husband at Hogwarts since the field will be considerably narrowed by
the time they leave school if they can only find future husbands in
their own career field. At any rate, the girls who don't marry Muggles
or relatives seem to find their husbands at Hogwarts, the Weasleys,
the Potters, the Lestranges, and the Malfoys being examples.) Real
girls think about their hair, their clothes, their makeup, their
nails, their accessories. (I was an exception, as is Hermione except
on Yule Ball night, but surely Parvati and Lavender and Cho resemble
typical teenage girls in some ways? If it weren't for the requirement
to wear school uniforms, we'd probably hear them discussing the latest
fashions.) Boys *might* worry about their hair or complexion or uncool
clothes, but it doesn't take up the same proportion of their time as
it does for girls. And boys in general (not all boys, of course) are
more interested in sports than girls are. (Maybe that's why Ginny is
so "wonderful"; she plays and talks about Quidditch, and unlike Cho
(also a Quidditch player), she doesn't let her emotions get in the way
of her performance. At any rate, I don't think what we see in HP is so
much girls as sexual predators (they're not out to get the boys to
have sex with them). It's girls wanting boys to *like* or "love" them.
Having a boyfriend is a status symbol for a girl. It's also, for
Hogwarts girls (including Ginny with Harry, the only boy she *really*
wants), a prelude to marriage.

Carol, who thinks that girls really are more interested than boys in
boy/girl relationships and remembers turning up her nose at
"boy-crazy" girls as early as fifth grade (age ten to eleven)