[ SECRET POST #2418 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2418 ⌋

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

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.
[Pitch Perfect]


__________________________________________________



10.


__________________________________________________



11.


__________________________________________________



12.
[LeeSaem of Nine Muses, Kota of Sunny Hill, Lime of Hello Venus and Minzy of 2NE1]


__________________________________________________



13.


__________________________________________________



14.


__________________________________________________



15.


















[ ----- SPOILERY SECRETS AHEAD ----- ]


















16. [SPOILERS for Harry Potter]



__________________________________________________



17. [SPOILERS for Life]



__________________________________________________



18. [SPOILERS for My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic]



__________________________________________________
















[ ----- TRIGGERY SECRETS AHEAD ----- ]













19. [WARNING for abuse]



__________________________________________________



20. [WARNING for sexual abuse]



__________________________________________________













Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 00 pages, 000 secrets from Secret Submission Post #345.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 1 - 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

[morieris]

Hm. It's interesting, because I see some people hate Dumbledore...not because of that, but because of his unwillingness to tell Harry things.

[(Anonymous)]

I hate Dumbledore after learning about his past. I understand not telling kids everything, especially in war, but the fact that he was pretty much Wizards Are Better and we're supposed to think of him as the representation of GOOD.

Then there's Rowling's "he became asexual" after his love of Grindelwald led him down the wrong path and that just kind of irritates me. It reads like sexuality is a choice.

And she followed that up with his life of celibacy and asexuality and celibacy don't go together all the time. Much like gay people have sex with straight people, abstaining from sex doesn't determine your sexuality, nor does having sex.

[dragonimp]

Did she actually say that? Fuuuuck. I was already annoyed over the gay-as-a-plot-devise thing.

[(Anonymous)]

http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/2008/3/8/new-j-k-rowling-interview-confirms-working-on-scottish-book-reflects-on-dumbledore-homophobia-fundamentalism-future-writing-projects-and-more

It's in the Dumbledore section of the interview. So yeah.

[(Anonymous)]

Offs, someone confusing asexuality and celibacy isn't the same as homophobia. Get off your high horse.

[(Anonymous)]

But if they do that, how will they feel oppressed?

[(Anonymous)]

Never said it was? I meant that people commonly associate celibacy and asexuality which doesn't help anyone and it's annoying that it's treated that way. I used the homosexuality analogy to show that people explore their sexuality in that they step outside their preferred gender/sex/romantic expression/etc.

I think it's problematic for all sexualities that Rowling implied Dumbledore chose to be a certain sexuality.

My point wasn't about people's reactions/oppression/bigotry/general grievances but rather annoyance with continued tropes and spreading of misinformation.

[(Anonymous)]

But think about it: she is heterosexual, she's from the 60s. Asexuality is well-known on the internet in our age, but she was probably never familiar with it. I only ever learned about it a couple of years ago, and even then I wasn't well-informed about the complexity of it as a term. To a non-asexual person, i.e. a sexual person, asexuality is not something you know of instinctually. People always tend to assume everyone is like themselves.

So when someone says they're asexual, they'll often associate that with "celibate", because it's what they know. And vice versa. It's a logical assumption to make, given the most basic information.

It sucks for asexual people, but to say she's being homophobic or anything like that is a bit ridiculous. She's ignorant, and she can learn if she's educated about it. But ignorant != bigoted, and it doesn't mean willfully ignorant, either.

[(Anonymous)]

Again: I didn't say it was bigoted or on par with homophobia. I said they're false equivalencies, annoyed me, and was part of the reason I don't like Dumbledore.

[(Anonymous)]

Yeah, but 'ok, being gay didn't work out I'ma go be asexual now' kind of is.

[(Anonymous)]

...You can be a homoromantic asexual, you know.

[lex_antonia]

we're supposed to think of him as the representation of GOOD.

I really don't think we are. Harry is not exactly a reliable narrator.

[(Anonymous)]

Harry's somewhat unreliable but JKR has made certain to go on at length about Dumbledore's many, many good points, including his inherent goodness.

[(Anonymous)]

No, but Rowling's stated that he's the "epitome of goodness" (http://www.accio-quote.org/articles/2000/0700-hottype-solomon.htm). Harry may not be a reliable narrator, but even the author says he is. I realize this is an earlier article but still, we're supposed to feel angered by Rita Skeeter's portrayal of Dumbledore. We're supposed to see him as the man who made all the right choices when he had to. He's the closest representation of what the wizarding world should be like: wise, kind, compassionate, thinking of the greater good than just individuals. And since most of us read these growing up, it's really hard to move past the "wise old mentor" to "flawed character but still good" without some negative feelings, I think. It's a bit like when Ben Kenobi talks about "a certain point of view" - the readers are a lot like Luke in that "a certain point of view" just isn't going to cut it when we're talking about good vs evil in a story about the ultimate showdown of good vs evil. Children do a lot of black and white thinking, so good is always good and evil is always evil, this is a children's series. Obviously there's more to it and that's what makes the series so good, but that "the author says so!" kind of thinking still carries through because of the intended audience.

I think writing villains who can be redeemed is easier than it is to write heroes who stumble/fall, even if they get back up again. There's always that "I TRUSTED YOU!" feeling and doubt. And need for a good reason for the character to fall/stumble like they did.

[lex_antonia]

I grew up with the series too, and I never saw it that way. People have a too narrow view of what a children's book can and cannot be, imo. There isn't one fleshed out character in this series that is doesn't have shades of grey. Many character, especially Gryffindors, have strong ideals that they completely fail to live up to (e.g. Sirius, Kreacher, and how a man treats his inferiors). Dumbledore is one of them. He is wise, and then gets killed by a stupid and entirely predictable mistake. He is compassionate AND thinks of the greater good, and sometimes these two thing just don't work together. His ideals are fine, the man behind them is deeply, deeply flawed.

I don't think what JKR says in one interview overrides several thousand pages of character building.

[nyxelestia]

I always took the whole "he's the representation of good" thing to not mean his life, but the choices he made (turning away from that wizard superiority) and what ideals he ultimately fought for in the end. It used to confuse me why people who read the books saw Dumbledore as this Gandalf-like figure, the oldest and wisest of wizards. He's not even that old by wizarding standards, considering someone who procotored his OWL exams is still doing so today! He was an asshole and made some absolutely horrific mistakes, and now he is trying to make up for them. Sometimes he succeeds, sometimes he doesn't. No one is 100% successful or good at everything they do, and in that context it's trying and working hard for a goal that's important, just as much as achieving it (which Dumbledore does, even if it was with more tears and pain than necessary if he hadn't made those mistakes).

Besides, is anyone really surprised that even the 'good' characters are flawed and have some really skewed views of their world? I mean, even characters like the Weasleys have their slightly more bigoted views - look at how cavalier they were when house-elves first came up. (i.e. the kids' remarks that their mother wished she could have one, Ron and the twins' total apathy about house-elves even as they fought so strongly against blood-bigotry, etc). Racism and wizarding-superiority complexes are deeply ingrained in this society, and they are really only just beginning to unravel it.

[mimi-sardinia.livejournal.com]

Personally I hate it when people compare Dumbledore and Gandalf. It shows that they fail to understand the Gandalf, behind the form he wears, is not human, and in fact is the LotR equivalent of an angel.

And even then, Gandalf is not absolutely perfect either.

[nyxelestia]

I wonder how much of this mix-up/comparison is due to them being the "old, wise wizard everyone turns to", and how much of it is them looking alike in the movies. -_-

[mimi-sardinia.livejournal.com]

Ehh, I can kinda see the "became asexual" thing, as I know some people can choose to ignore their libido until it stops even being an issue for them.

It's not asexuality one is born with, it's asexuality someone takes on.

[(Anonymous)]

So, celibacy. Which is not asexuality.