[ SECRET POST #4293 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #4293 ⌋

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

01.



__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________


03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________














05. [SPOILERS for Castle Rock]



__________________________________________________



06. [SPOILERS for Deadpool 2]



__________________________________________________



07. [WARNING for discussion of rape/assault]

[Buffy the Vampire Slayer]










Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 00 pages, 00 secrets from Secret Submission Post #614.
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)]

No, we are going to act like LGBT people would not have been allowed in children's literature in 1997, because that's true. eg: Scholastic banning KAA from saying a char was a lesbian in the mid 2000s.

(POC were, and they definitely are in HP. Harry's first girlfriend was Asian and his first sort-of-date was Indian for heaven's sake)

[(Anonymous)]

No, we are going to act like LGBT people would not have been allowed in children's literature in 1997, because that's true. eg: Scholastic banning KAA from saying a char was a lesbian in the mid 2000s.

The series was not written in 1997. Philosopher's Stone was published in 1997. Prince and Hallows were published in 2005 and 2007, respectively.

And JKR had some pretty fucking considerable leverage to say the least.

[(Anonymous)]

Marvel had an explicitly out lesbian in one of their teen titles before Deathly Hallows. Harper Collins had gay parents. Simon & Schuster had gay penguins. Heather Has Two Mommies and Jenny Lives With Eric & Martin were from the 1980s, nearly a full decade before Philosopher's Stone.

[(Anonymous)]

Because comics for teenagers are literally the same as a children's book series.

[(Anonymous)]

Half Blood Prince and Deathly Hallows

[(Anonymous)]

"No, we are going to act like LGBT people would not have been allowed in children's literature in 1997, because that's true."

No, it's not true because we had entire shelves of LGBT people in children's lit before 1997, and certainly before 2006 when Hallows was published.

[(Anonymous)]

Scholastic wasn't the only publisher of children's literature back in the day. I'm not saying they weren't big guns in the children's lit world, but it's a little weird to argue that no LGBT characters were possible because a single publisher banned them.

[(Anonymous)]

Yes, JKR the billionaire in 2007 would have been totally helpless against her mean publishers if she'd wanted to include anything in her last HP book, which came out a decade later, after the franchise was one of the world's most popular. You can tell how hard they were on the author basically funding their entire company by that point by how well-edited and tight the last books are.

[(Anonymous)]

This. Rowling could've done whatever she liked, given the success of that series. Her publishers would've been idiots to refuse her and they certainly wouldn't have been able to bar her from writing LBGQT characters. Because, you know, she could just take those characters and that extremely profitable likely bestselling book to a publisher who WOULD be okay with it. The very idea of Rowling being censored by her publishing company is preposterous. I assume it's coming from someone who knows very little about how the industry works.

[(Anonymous)]

And you know what? The books would be fine if fans stopped wanking about how Dumbledore was important LGBTQ for its genre and grade level.

Yates's earlier comments that screenwriters don't need to deal with it because everyone already knows are pure shit though.