The Overarching message - Caning

[dumbledore11214]

No: HPFGUIDX 191660



> > > Alla:
> > > > I disagree that hating fictional character is offensive to anybody. I also think that Snape mind raped Harry on a regular basis - that is what to me Legilimency is and to me there are plenty of hints in the book that Snape legilimenced Harry when he had no idea that Snape poked around in his mind.
> > > >
> 
> Julie:
> The problem is, Snape doesn't live in a vacuum. He lives at
> Hogwarts and within the Wizarding World, which has a very 
> different set of standards than the real world. I have no
> doubt Dumbledore legilimized both teachers and students,
> perhaps on a regular basis. And god knows what he put in 
> those lemon drops he offered to everyone who ever visited
> his office!

Alla:

But of course as I said I consider Dumbledore guilty of that as well. You know how much   I came to "love" him eventually ;) I have no problems agreeing that whatever Snape was doing was expressly sanctioned by Dumbledore. That does not mean  I will be admiring that though, quite the contrary.

Julie 
> Human rights have a very limited meaning in the Wizarding
> World, from what we've seen. Discerning students feelings 
> and intentions--which seems to be the actual effect of 
> Legilimency as we've been told it isn't reading someone's
> thoughts--seems to be just one of the many accepted (or at
> the very least tolerated) methods of addressing suspected
> misbehavior.

Alla:

Sorry, to me it is pretty much the same. We hear Harry thinking that Snape and/or Dumbledore may have read his mind, right (in PoA for example)? I am going to assume that this was put in the text for a reason, especially since later we know that this is exactly what both of them are capable of. Not the equivalent of empathy, but reading any exact thought in other person's mind.
Human rights are in a sorry state in WW I do agree, however I think the strong argument can be made that such sorry state is acknowledged by the end of the book and the need for a change.  Even in the interviews (which of course we do not need to take as canon of course) JKR was saying that grown up Trio changed the WW eventually.

So, my  point is that the fact that there are maybe other Severuses Snapes and Dumbledores and worse people there does not mean that I should call what they have a good thing. By the end of the books I was sorely convinced that they do not deserve Harry and his friends and that they did them a huge favor by sticking around and saving their sorry you know what ;). 

Julie: 
> As for calling it "mind-rape" that seems a bit extreme.

Alla:

Not to me.

Julie:
> That to me would be forcing yourself into someone else's
> mind while that person is resisting, causing actual pain
> and damage--which would be much more invasive than the
> quick surface reading involved in the Legilimency Snape 
> and Dumbledore seem to practice. (And, no, I wouldn't 
> call the Occlumency lessons mind-rape since they were 
> sanctioned and both Snape and Harry participated freely,
> reluctant though both were to do so.)
>.

Alla:

To me any sexual contact without consent is rape, it really does not have to be violent, and the analogy I am making is that any mind reading without consent is rape, person does not have to feel damagged and resist, just not to give consent and silencce to me counts as no consent. I would not call legilimency lessons rape either.