Sadism or not ? McGonagall and her punishments

[a_svirn]

No: HPFGUIDX 186711

> Shaun:
> And the fact that Professor McGonagall chooses to reprimand a student on a 
> formal occasion for having something inappropriate in her hair, suggests 
> that Hogwarts does have such rules. Does it prove it? No, it doesn't. But if 
> people are going to base a case for attacking a teacher as having done 
> something inappropriate, then in my view the burden of evidence should be on 
> them to prove it wasn't something the teacher was allowed to do under the 
> school rules - 

a_svirn:
I fail entirely to see how it is my burden. Neither narrator, nor McGonagall herself says anything about any rules Parvati allegedly violated. Nowhere in the books are hairstyle regulations mentioned. You are the one who makes this claim, and the only thing you've come up with by way of supporting it is your own real life experience. Which, of course, cannot be convincingly cited as "proof" of anything Hogwarts-related. Sorry, but that burden is all yours. 

> Shaun:
> The position that Professor McGonagall is doing something inappropriate in 
> this case is founded upon an assumption that she could not possibly be 
> enforcing a rule. The position that she might be acting entirely 
> appropriately on the other hand is merely founded upon an assumption that 
> maybe Hogwarts has a rule that is quite typical and exists in many schools.

a_svirn:
"Assumption" being the operative word here. Your assumption seems to be that if she does it then it's OK, because she is a teacher. Neither my real-life experience, nor my knowledge about Hogwarts teachers en masse and McGonagall in particular leads me to assume anything of the sort. 


> Shaun:
> This isn't a criminal trial, but in law, a person is considered innocent 
> unless proven guilty. 

a_svirn:
Someone should have explained it to McGonagall – she's rather an off-with-his-head type. 


> a_svirn:
> > So do I. However, "normal" is an operative word here. You yourself
> > diagnosed Neville with learning disability. That would make him
> > not quite as normal as the rest of Gryffindors. Is it reasonable
> > to expect a boy with extremely bad memory not to misplace a key
> > when he misplaces everything else? I am not sure. But this
> > situation is even worse than that. Sir Cadogan's passwords are
> > described as "ridiculously complicated" and he moreover "changed
> > them at least twice a day". Even if it is reasonable to expect
> > a thirteen year old boy with notoriously bad memory not to
> > loose his key, it would be absolutely unreasonable to expect
> > him to memorise complicated code combinations which are changed
> > at least twice a day.
> 
> Shaun:
> 
> To an extent, I agree with you. It is not entirely reasonable to expect a 
> child with CAPD (and I really do think that's what Neville most likely has, 
> and most of the other alternatives would actually be less likely to cause 
> him problems in this particular case) to remember complicated passwords that 
> change regularly.

a_svirn:
Meaning, to some extant it is still reasonable? Could you give one example of its relative reasonableness? 

> Shaun:
 That's why I've said on a number of occasions now that I 
> can understand why Neville felt the need to write the passwords down and 
> that particular situation doesn't worry me too much. But it's only the first 
> of three steps in the chain that lead to the problem.
> 
> It is reasonable to expect him to maintain tight control of the list. Yes, 
> he might find that somewhat more difficult than most people - but just 
> because something is difficult, doesn't excuse not doing it. Your assumption 
> seems to me to be that just because a child finds something difficult, it's 
> reasonable for them not to do it. It's not.

a_svirn:
No, it is not my assumption at all. Neville certainly shares some responsibility for the whole password fiasco, but not the whole of it, and not even the most of it. My *concern* is that while the entire situation is of McGonagall's own making, the only one who's got blamed for the whole thing is Neville. This is a classic case of scapegoating: when a person of authority abjures any responsibility for her own neglect and carelessness and lays the blame squarely on the victim of the said neglect. 

> Shaun:
> Should Professor McGonagall have put some strategy in place for Neville to 
> help him in a situation where the passwords are constantly changing?
> 
> *If* she is aware of the fact that Neville has a difficulty with the 
> passwords, then, yes, I would think it was reasonable to expect her to do 
> something. But do we know that Professor McGonagall is aware of this problem 
> that Neville has? 

a_svirn:
She'd have to suffer from a serious case of a memory loss herself, not to be aware of the potencial problem. 

> Shaun:
Do we know that Professor McGonagall knows Neville has a 
> problem with the passwords? If we do, then, yes, I think it's reasonable to 
> expect her to have taken some steps once the situation regarding passwords 
> became even more difficult. But if she didn't know, that's another matter.

a_svirn:
Didn't know or didn't want to know? Or care? 

> Shaun:
> When Professor McGonagall arranged for Hermione to be given a Time Turner - 
> if Hermione had then chosen to use that Time Turner to rob Honeydukes, would 
> you be claiming Professor McGonagall bore all the responsibility for that 
> and Hermione none at all? Somehow I doubt it. 

a_svirn:
So do I. What does it have to do with anything?

> Shaun:
> 
In my professional judgement as a qualified special 
> education teacher with experience in the field, it is not unreasonable to 
> expect a 13 year old child displaying the characteristics of LD that Neville 
> Longbottom displays to take a reasonable degree of care with a list of 
> passwords (equivalent to a house key) and to report the loss of that list if 
> he does lose it. That's not an unreasonable expectation given the degree of 
> impairment he displays (relatively moderate) and the list of competencies he 
> has developed (generally within normal expectations for a child his age).

a_svirn:
No one says it is. I wasn't talking about Neville's not taking proper care of the list. I was saying that Sir Cadogan's passwords were beyond his capabilities. As for the list, it was stolen from him – can happen to anyone. Point is, McGonagall wilfully ignored and callously ridiculed his disability, and when her tactics backfired she punished the victim of her bullying – Neville. 

> Shaun:
> 
> > > Have we ever seen Professor McGonagall require a student to do something 
> > > we
> > > know to be contrary to the rules of the school? For the life of me, I 
> > > can't
> > > think of a single case.
> 
> > a_svirn:
> > Yes, we have - when she made Harry a seeker in his first year. And that's 
> > a
> > far more important rule than appropriateness of large ornamental 
> > butterflies.
> 
> Shaun:
> 
> Yes, it is - but, no, Professor McGonagall did not act contrary to the rules 
> of the school.
> 
> "I shall speak to Professor Dumbledore and see if we can't bend the 
> first-year rule."
> 
> She asks the Headmaster for permission to bend (not break) a rule. 

a_svirn:
So what is the fundamental difference between "breaking" and "bending"? If it is a student who does it, then it is breaking, and when it is a teacher who does the breaking it is actually "bending"?