[ SECRET POST #7056 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #7056 ⌋

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


Content warnings on everything today!






01. [WARNING for possible discussion of sexism, racism]




__________________________________________________



02. [WARNING for discussion of sexual assault]




__________________________________________________



03. [WARNING for discussion of child sexual assault, IRL murder/death]




__________________________________________________



04. [WARNING for discussion of child sexual assault, IRL murder/death]




__________________________________________________



05. [WARNING for discussion of JKR/transphobia]




__________________________________________________



06. [WARNING for discussion of JKR/transphobia]


















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 00 pages, 00 secrets from Secret Submission Post #1007.
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

[fscom]

05. [WARNING for discussion of JKR/transphobia]
https://i.postimg.cc/4dXrRYps/28.png

Transcript by OP

[fscom]

I do not understand the accusation that Dumbledore was 'made gay after the fact' for brownie points. Did anyone else read Deathly Hallows? Hearing he was gay was a confirmation of the obvious, imo.

[(Anonymous)]

She announced that he was gay during a Q&A on The Half-Blood Prince, iirc, and it was definitely for the brownie points. Since Deathly Hallows follows HBP, it makes sense that there would be "more obvious clues".

[(Anonymous)]

Not OP but it was after Deathly Hallows came out and the books were done. It was absolutely for brownie points though. Anything OP is seeing in the book is the same as countless scenarios involving cishet men throughout entertainment history. It *can* be read as gay but also it isn’t actually gay.

[(Anonymous)]

THIS.

[(Anonymous)]

So are you saying she wrote it as (very intensely obviously) able to be seen as gay in order to be able to say it out loud afterwards for brownie points?

I really doubt that because nobody straight did that kind of thing back then unless they were writing fanfiction. One because saying a character was gay wasn't the automatic guarantee of popularity that it's been in the years after Deathly Hallows; at the time it was still a risk that most of the response you'd get would be homophobic -- especially for saying it to a child at a school Q&A! Because "How am I going to explain to my child what gay means? Children are too young to know about sex!"

Two because that was pre-queerbaiting phenomenon and the default was for straight people to just... not consider that anything they didn't intend to be gay could be seen as gay. If something they wrote was that fucking gay in subtext, it was either entirely unintentional, or entirely on purpose.

[(Anonymous)]

I don’t think it was intentional at all. I think it just happened to end up being able to read either way, same as literally countless characters could be read as attracted to each other or not.

[(Anonymous)]

The final book was released in July 2007. She made the comment at Carnegie Hall in October 2007.

[(Anonymous)]

Yup

https://www.writerswrite.com/jk-rowling-dumbledore-gay-101907177

[(Anonymous)]

It was after DH...

[(Anonymous)]

She half assed it for brownie points too! Don't forget that.

[(Anonymous)]

Granted, I tend to read non-attached male characters through gay goggles.

But yeah, it was unmistakably clear in the chapter "King's Cross Again." Like enough to be awkward and unsettling for Harry. Not because DD was gay but because he'd been gay for Wizarding Hitler.

The revisionists like to conveniently forget what 2007 was like. In the U.S. at least, conservatives had been in power for 7 years and gay marriage was still illegal. Mainstream movies and shows did not have gay male characters. JKR likely could not have maintained American audience with an openly gay male character in a lead role in a children's book. She initially whispered/mumbled the comment at Carnegie Hall because she was wary of the reaction. I like to believe she felt heartened by the warm reception of the audience.

Regardless, I will die on this hill because AD/GG is like endgame level shipping to me. It's Cherik level shipping. It's so fucking obvious that these two men were in love. And she got as close to showing it as she could at the time. In hindsight, it's hard to believe more people didn't see it.

[(Anonymous)]

Harry absolutely would have been uncomfortable to suddenly find out Dumbledore was gay. But he didn’t because it didn’t happen because she decided to say it after the fact instead of include it in the book. The book that was the finale of a worldwide record breaking series and would have sold out everywhere regardless. But also she had a contract that meant the American publishing partner, Scholastic, couldn’t make any changes from the original publication. She had that sealed up early on because she didn’t like her books being Americanized.

[(Anonymous)]

This always gets trotted out as an excuse when it’s weak at best.

There have been gay characters in books before and during the HP book release, her inability to do anything much with Dumbledore was a choice because she just didn’t care that much. She clearly knew it would be easy brownie points with her sycophantic fans though.

[(Anonymous)]

I wasn't making an excuse. I was making an argument. Try it sometime! Maybe with a personal perspective and more than three standard carbon copy bullet points.

[(Anonymous)]

YEAH, like I did think it was fairly obvious he had already BEEN written as a gay man. Now, that does not shield her from the ways that some of her writing was homophobic, let alone all the racism/transphobia/antisemitism/classism/fatphobia/general weird misogyny, but it wasn't out of nowhere.

[(Anonymous)]

Eh, I think JKR is a hack and didn't handle it well, but I really doubt she word of gay'd Dumbledore just for clout. I still remember what people said back then about the interview, growing up closeted in that era was hell and making a character gay in the 2000s is not a way to gain popularity.

[(Anonymous)]

This. I think her intentions were good, in a clueless but well-meaning and only moderately informed straight person kinda way. The complainers accusing her of wanting brownie points were very lucky adult queers in big leftist cities, and the message was not for them. It was for kids who hadn't heard the word "gay" before and if they had it was as an insult.

That doesn't mean she didn't have subconscious homophobia that grew and rotted to make her the person she is today. But the way the story as been warped is lowkey terrifying to me as a queer writer. Imagine trying to do something good with my writing and being mocked forever of being insincere and wanting brownie points because I didn't please the people who consider themselves queerer than I (and straight people wanting to get brownie points from THEM, looking at you in the afterlife Terry Pratchett with your self-congratulatory announcement [unlike JKR's simple answering of a question] that a male character you'd explicitly written as liking women [unlike Dumbledore] was gay.)

[(Anonymous)]

As someone who remembers that time very well: she got a lot of heat in the wake of DH for not having a single LGBTQ character in the whole series. Maybe it wasn’t as much or as well reported in America since that’s the place you seem to be describing, but she got a ton of criticism in the UK for it.

[(Anonymous)]

Oh, definitely. My whole queer ass friend group was talking about it as soon as we read the book, before JK Rowling said the thing.

It actually makes me mad because I think we were deprived of a lot of good fic authors who would've written Dumbledore/Grindelwald in spades, and they aren't doing it because that would be admitting JK Rowling wasn't just talking out of her ass for cookies.

[(Anonymous)]

To each their own but I never saw anything that hinted at Dumbledore's sexuality or that it would matter in any real way.

The second part is what gets to me most.

When I was younger, I thought that it was cool of JKR to state Dumbledore is gay. She was implying anyone can be gay. They don't have to adhere to stereotypes, and they don't have to constantly tell everyone that they are gay.

But now? If all of what I said is true, then why wouldn't she just make it an official thing in the book? If she's so comfortable and proud of making Dubledore gay, why not actually blatantly make it canon in the the official texts? Why only bring it up during a press tour of the last book?
If someone wants to be a true ally and/or advocate for queer rights, they should educate blatantly and loudly. Subtly will not change minds.

Pre-Stonewall, the LGBTQIA+ community was not even really a thing yet. Queer folks mostly tried to keep their lives small and quiet.
But the cops continually kept harassing queer folks and their clubs/hangouts, and Stonewall was a big moment because that was when the queer community came together and officiated the LGBT community. It was through marches and protests, being loud and visible was what got mainstream attention and showed the real human beings that is the LGBTQIA+ community.

So that's why if you want to advocate for queer rights, you have to do it with clear intentions.
JKR's attempt with Dumbledore feels much more of a self-stroking ego boost. She was so proud of herself for choosing to make Dumbledore gay and presenting it in a casual matter-of-fact way.
Like, I understand the intention but this is why you have to speak to actual people in the community you are not a part of and with experts in advocacy. The problem and the solution is not as easy as "a person of influence has an opinion, world peace soon to come".