[ SECRET POST #4053 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #4053 ⌋

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

01.



__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.











Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 16 secrets from Secret Submission Post #580.
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

[(Anonymous)]

I don't know. People are already willing to go to the mat arguing that he was hinted at being gay in the book and that's definitely enough, so I don't see why this will change anything for anyone. People are just really committed to making excuses.

[(Anonymous)]

So we will be going the "Dean is totally gay because I saw him make eye contact with this guy for more than 1 second" route of proving a character is explicitly gay.

[(Anonymous)]

I don't understand what you mean or what point you're trying to make - would you mind explaining a little more?

[(Anonymous)]

In the show Supernatural, fans argue that Dean is gay (or in love with Castiel) based on BS like eye contact, where he is looking, how he is standing.

I assume they do the same thing in the Harry Potter books. Digging up tiny passages that can only be interpreted as "This character is gay" if you squint at it with the mindset of "I MUST FIND SOMETHING TO PROVE THIS CHARACTER IS GAY!"

[(Anonymous)]

Thank you for clarifying! But that's not quite what's going on. The thing with Dumbledore specifically is that the character wasn't depicted as explicitly gay in the series, but JK Rowling (who wrote the books) came out and said after the series was over that the character was gay.

So there's basically a whole bunch of arguments about how meaningful that is - to have a character who isn't depicted as gay but who the author later identifies as gay. And people make a lot of arguments about how it should be considered representation because they say that there are various hints in the book (I would say that there are moments where Dumbledore is queer-coded but nothing that's an unambiguous indication that he's gay) and also coming up with various reasons that it would have been impossible for JKR to have made him explicitly gay (which I personally disagree with).

And now they're making a movie about Dumbledore as a young man and they came out and said that he won't be explicitly depicted as gay in the movie, which frankly seems like horseshit to me personally, but I can't speak for anyone else.

[(Anonymous)]

He was hinted at as being gay though. People were saying it before JK made the statement. We saw it when we were reading the book. Say all you want about her not getting ally points for not saying it directly in the book, but it's not something she just made up afterwards either.

[(Anonymous)]

People created theories - with reams and reams of "evidence" - for every single named character in the series being gay. That there were people hoping desperately for a single scrap of representation doesn't mean it was actually there!

[(Anonymous)]

Just because not every headcanon was intended as canon by the authors, doesn't mean that none of them were. Dumbledore was hinted at being gay and Rowling confirmed that the hints were intentional.

There's nothing in American Gods or Anansi's Boys that explicitly refers to its main characters as black. There are only hints of that. But the author confirmed that the characters are indeed black. I haven't seen anyone argue that they're not.