I am so happy. There is a gay couple in canon after all.

[Miles]

No: HPFGUIDX 178290

> Tonks:
> Rowling has been very successful in doing want so many have dreamed
> of and failed to do. She has united all people of the world. People
> of all ages, races, religions, and nationalities have embraced the
> teaching of Albus Dumbledore as if he were a god.  They have great
> respect for DD.  Through him she has give great lessons on moral
> theology to people the world over. These are timeless lessons, given
> us by others long before DD, but through him they are brought afresh
> to the world of today.  This is very good. And the unifying
> influence of the HP series is also a good thing.  Now Rowlings has
> taken out the gun and shot herself in the foot.  For whatever
> personal reason, one can only guess. But it severs no useful purpose
> to discredit her wisest of wizard in the eyes of millions of people
> who do not share our world view.  For example, the books are read by
> many Muslims the world over and in places such as Iran. How do you
> think those people are taking this news?  All I can say, is what the
> hell was she thinking!!

Miles:
I think your opinion is, to say the least, strange. But I'll begin with a
few questions and answers.

a) Does this new piece of information fit into canon of books 1-7?
I think it does. We do not learn much about the private life of Dumbledore
prior to DH, because Harry is not interested in it. But DD being gay totally
fits in the story of DD and Grindelwald we are told.

b) Could JKR have told us about it before DH? And/or in DH?
No, I don't think so. For the first question: Since we do not learn anything
about DD (Harry's POV), there was no chance to do it. We do not know
anything about the private life of any teacher prior to DH. For the second -
well, she could be more explicit in her Dumbledore/Grindelwald story. But do
not forget, we do not have any firsthand information about it, neither from
Grindelwald, nor from Dumbledore himself. And it is not likely that DD would
tell Harry or any character in the books something about it.

c) Did JKR really always thought of "DD being gay"?
I'd think so, yes. We will never know exactly, because we cannot practice
legilimency on her. But IMO it fits in her general behaviour concerning
background information only she knows. Just remember her amused commentary
about the Harry/Hermione shippers. That never there would be a romance
between these two was absolutely clear to her, since she knows her
characters and plans exactly. But is it as clear in the books? IMO not - I
do not want to restart this old discussion, though.
What I mean to say is this: JKR seems to have problems to seperate her
background knowledge from what she really tells us in the books. So I really
believe her, that she always "knew" DD is gay, and that she simply never
told us before, because, and that's important, it would have given away a
crucial point of DH before it was published.

Sorry for extending the scope just to return to my bewilderment about Tonks'
statement.
Considering my answers being correct for the sake of the argument, should
JKR really have held her tongue in order not to endanger her message of
tolerance? Would it be better if she hadn't told the script author of the
HBP film not to let DD speak of a girl he knew when he was young?

Your argument seems to be, that with extending the message of tolerance in
the books, she endangers the "tolerance impact" of the HP books, because it
excludes people who will dismiss the series because DD is gay. But where
would you like to draw the line? Racists won't like the book, because colour
of skin and national background of people is not important for the wizarding
world. Should JKR make Hogwarts a monoracial school just to make racists
accept her books more easily?

I really don't think that considering intolerance helps any message of
tolerance. If there are Christian or Islamic fundamentalists who will boycot
the books because JKR crossed this line - so what? If we begin to let
intolerance dictate the limits of Enlightenment, we are lost.

Miles