[ SECRET POST #3318 ]

[case]

⌈ 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.

Comments

[blitzwing]

There is nothing in canon to rule out James being an abuser.

people are going to have problems with interpretations regarding james and his family that contradict canon based on james's relationship with a character who is neither his wife or son, and i really doubt being a fan of the guy is a necessary requirement for that.

There is nothing in canon to contradict the possibility of James being an abuser. So why would anyone care that people are headcanoning him as an abuser?

is why i'm starting to get a clearer picture of the crazy here.

Someone disagrees with me about a children's book! They must be insane!!!!!
/lawl. You slay me, nonny.

[(Anonymous)]

There is nothing in canon to contradict the possibility of James being an abuser. So why would anyone care that people are headcanoning him as an abuser?

a) abuser to whom?

b) what are your standards for this, exactly? a sworn affidavit from a character saying they'll never abuse anyone ever? there's nothing in canon to contradict the possibility of anyone being an abuser, from harry down to dobby. saying that james is an abuser, and moreover is one to harry and lily is directly contradicted in canon. we see james and lily in canon situations - that dinner with the dursleys - and james does not act like an abuser. we see lily's letter to sirius in which she describes her and james's living situation and james is not acting like an abuser. we see james with harry a number of times and james is not acting like an abuser. canon contradicts this interpretation. whatever you want to argue about their future interactions if they had lived is your business - obviously given the above, there will always be people outright laughing at and deriding that because of the evidence that is still there to contradict that.

tl;dr it's not just disagreeing about a children's book that seems crazy to me, it's your claim that one needs to be a james-stan to have problems with this interpretation.

[blitzwing]

a) abuser to whom?

To anyone anyone wants to headcanon him as an abuser to.

there's nothing in canon to contradict the possibility of anyone being an abuser

Precisely. Headcanon Dobby as abusive to Winky if you wish.

canon contradicts this interpretation.

None of the things you listed do. Do you understand anything about domestic abuse? Most abusers don't go over for dinner with relatives and then bust their wife in the face in front of everyone. Most abusers don't tyrannize their children and wife every minute of every day.

Your reasoning is, I hope, based out of ignorance of what it's like to live as an abuse victim, and not out of deliberate malice.

it's your claim that one needs to be a james-stan to have problems with this interpretation.

You haven't given me a valid example of why someone other than James-stans would have a problem with others interpreting it that way.

[(Anonymous)]

None of the things you listed do. Do you understand anything about domestic abuse? Most abusers don't go over for dinner with relatives and then bust their wife in the face in front of everyone. Most abusers don't tyrannize their children and wife every minute of every day.

fictional characters =/= real people, they don't actually have lives or real existences behind the scenes we see them in, js. any argument that this is what's happening behind the scenes that we do see of james, lily and harry is literally being pulled from one's ass and nothing else.

You haven't given me a valid example of why someone other than James-stans would have a problem with others interpreting it that way.

yeah, now you're getting into the territory of "you must be transphobic if you hate the headcanon of [insert character here] as trans"
i mean i'm sorry, it's really that incomprehensible to you why someone might a) not appreciate headcanons of domestic abuse and b) have extra problems with it when it's about the other half of one of the biggest fandom ships whose never once shown even a hint of evidence for it in canon?

[(Anonymous)]

sa

it's like saying you have to be a ron-stan to have problems with the interpretation of ron as an abuser. no, you really don't.

[arcadiaego]

To be honest, I'm disturbed someone is so set on interpreting a loving family relationship, where that love is written as the core point of the entire story, as potential domestic abuse just because JKR never explicitly says James did not abuse his wife and child. I don't really understand why someone would want so much to view something in such an unpleasant way.

[tasogare_n_hime]

Super late to the party, but lets be real. JKR could explicitly say James was not abusive to his wife and child in anyway, She could write a canon short story showing James as literally THE BEST DAD EVER!, and that would still not be good enough.