case: (Default)
Case ([personal profile] case) wrote in [community profile] fandomsecrets2016-02-03 06:57 pm

[ SECRET POST #3318 ]


⌈ Secret Post #3318 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.


__________________________________________________



11.



















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 026 secrets from Secret Submission Post #474.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.
philstar22: (Default)

[personal profile] philstar22 2016-02-04 12:22 am (UTC)(link)
Sexual assault? That's a stretch. A big stretch. And we have no evidence that he had those traits as an adult. The only evidence we have of him as an adult is of him growing out of the bullying. And given we have no evidence to the contrary at all, there is no reason not to believe that.
blitzwing: (Default)

[personal profile] blitzwing 2016-02-04 12:26 am (UTC)(link)
Not really. A kid at my school thought it would be funny to de-pants someone once like was done to Snape, and that's what it was treated as.

(Anonymous) 2016-02-04 12:27 am (UTC)(link)
Do you think that it was right for it to be treated like that, in that context?
philstar22: (Default)

[personal profile] philstar22 2016-02-04 12:30 am (UTC)(link)
Maybe. But we're talking the Potter world where playing around with magic of that sort seems to be the norm. I'll be the first to say that it isn't okay (I'll rant about things like Hermione's bird attack on Ron or Ginny flying into the stands at Smith). But calling it sexual assault seems to be taking it to far given the context and the Potter world.

(Anonymous) 2016-02-04 12:55 am (UTC)(link)
Plus it was set in the 70's at a British boarding school.

(Anonymous) 2016-02-04 01:40 am (UTC)(link)
You're not supposed to think it's the norm -- Harry is disturbed when he sees the flashback and it causes him to seriously reexamine his feelings about his father.

(Anonymous) 2016-02-04 01:41 am (UTC)(link)
It's not the norm, but the question is whether it's dickish bullying, or sexual assault.

(Anonymous) 2016-02-04 03:58 am (UTC)(link)
Why not both?

(Anonymous) 2016-02-04 05:15 am (UTC)(link)
Because there's a number of things that might be considered "sexual assault" in the HP books if you're going to look at it through those lenses. Hermione sending Umbridge to the centaurs, depending on your understanding of mythology. Snape reading out an article that directly body-shames Hermione and mentions things like her "natural charms" is another.

(Anonymous) 2016-02-04 05:35 am (UTC)(link)
sa

*slut-shames, not body-shames. Although the article also body-shames her, go figure
blitzwing: ([magi] drakon)

[personal profile] blitzwing 2016-02-04 03:06 am (UTC)(link)
What does it being the Potter realm have anything to do with it? If you touch someone in a sexual way against their will, it's not suddenly okay just because magic and flying exists. Jesus.
philstar22: (Default)

[personal profile] philstar22 2016-02-04 03:25 am (UTC)(link)
First off, not a sexual way. Second, the rules do seem to be a bit relaxed in the Potter world because of healing magic and such. Things that would warrant assault charges in our world are frowned on but not to the same extent. There is a general feeling through the books that there is a level of violence that is just accepted and expected with magic.
blitzwing: ([magi] drakon)

[personal profile] blitzwing 2016-02-04 03:29 am (UTC)(link)
First off, not a sexual way

You're not the one who had your privates, clad only in underwear, exposed to a group of jeering people against your will. So I don't think it's up to you to decide whether it was sexual humiliation or not. For a lot of people, that is sexual.

Second, the rules do seem to be a bit relaxed

That changes nothing. Marital rape is still legal and accepted in parts of the world, and isn't considered rape in those places. Does that change the basic nature of what it is?

(Anonymous) 2016-02-04 12:59 am (UTC)(link)
Unless you grew up in 1970s wizarding Britain... or even 1970s Britain, period, you really can't look at it through the same lens as your experience.