[HPforGrownups] Re: JKR messed up........ no.

[k12listmomma]

No: HPFGUIDX 178329

> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "mandorino222"
> <mandorino222 at ...> wrote:
>>
>> However you feel about homosexuality, it is naive to ignore the
>> fact that JKR has definitely damaged the long-term viability of
>> this series.   There are legions of people who are viscerally
>> disturbed by homosexuality, and I'm afraid that homophobia is not
>> going anywhere fast.  While this stunt has certainly worked to her
>> benefit in the short term (i.e. the megalomaniac who was feeling
>> empty and starved for attention has gotten her name back in the
>> paper), it will accomplish nothing in the long term but to limit
>> her audience and stifle exposure of her book to children of future
>> generations.
>
>
> JKR is richer than the queen already, has other books into the
> plan, she does not NEED a headline... so he's gay. Whooopdee dooooooo. For 
> one it was the press who portayed this news to us... not in video, where 
> we can see it for ourselves how she let this info loose,(not that I have 
> seen) but by their words. If you remember correctly these are some of the 
> same idiots who let loose the ending too early and also pump up bad 
> headlines for their own tactic to increase sales on anything.
>
> Now, she says she hopes this helps in teaching tolerance in all
> areas, racism, homophobia, etc... well the only way that it is going
> to be overcome is that people be that way instead of teaching it. I
> am a parent of 3 kids. My oldest knows what being gay is already. He
> doesn't agree with it but finds no fault of them being a bad person or a 
> lesser person who does not deserve respect (as most people who are most of 
> the time get none and are dissmissed).
>
> There have been many famous people who have been gay or rumored
> to be gay and it has no effect on what we thought of their work. For
> example... Walt Whitman *U.S. poet, author, 19th c.; Oscar Wilde
> *Irish author, 19th c.; James Dean *U.S. actor, 20th c; Leonardo Da
> Vinci* Ital. artist, scientist, 15th c.; etc. Now you wouldn't say we
> can not go and see his work because he was gay,.... no. What should
> it be any differnt that DD being gay? There is none.

Snipping just so the last line is the one I want to address. When you read 
Walt Whitman's poetry though, it's not about homosexuality. Thus, people of 
all sexual types can appreciate it. When you see an actor play a role, as 
well, if the role is not about anything gay, people of all sexual types can 
appreciate the movie. Something changes though when the artwork itself is 
openly gay oriented, or the movie is gay based. And thus enters the subject 
of Dumbledore. Before, the series was about Harry Potter, and not about 
anyone's sexuality. By making Dumbledore gay now, she has made this work 
about sexuality, and that does change things. When you read the work, it's 
the gayness that comes through in the writing- of course, gay people can 
write works that everyone can appreciate, but when you have gay characters 
in your written works, the medium itself becomes a gay promotion or 
political statement about homosexuality. Had she wrote the series promoting 
homosexuality, the same way that she brought to light the racial hatred 
(Mudbloods, Purebloods), the series would have been very different indeed, 
and many people would not have continued reading the series, or supporting 
the fandom. It's not necessarily about "hate"- which seems to be a very 
common mistake the gays make- it's merely about choosing what you like to 
read about. I just don't care to read about gay lifestyles, and so that 
would have definitely been an ice cube for me in this series. I would not 
have continued to buy the books, nor would I have cared to read them to my 
children had this series been about gays. That's just not something that I 
even find to be remotely enjoyable.

Shelley