Oh Noes! Teh Gay has infested Hogwarts!
Link roundup:
Teh Wrrld Has Endeded! Mah Fandumb Iz Ruinded Foar Evar! Saiv Teh Chilldrunz!
A Christian, quoted in atheist, objects to Rowling's announcement: However, thanks to Rowling's declaration, on-canon now means sodomy is included in Harry Potter. Because I cannot contribute to the destruction of young minds I must close down this group.
The Roman Catholic Blog comments generally think that it's all media hype, but one person says that instead of being a positve role model on homosexuality, this shows the destructive nature and taint it provides.
Don Surber's blog entry is fun, and the comments insist We are talking about our children here, we don’t need to teach them “tolerance of an immoral lifestyle of sin”, and that doesn’t mean we are teaching our children bigotry.
The Christian Worldvew Network, which isn't a fan of the Potterverse, says she did the Christian world an enormous favor by her perverse revelation: she settled the Harry Potter debate once and for all.
And some comments agree: Although Satan is never mentioned by name, these books glorify witchcraft and satanism and now homosexuality.
A commenter at 's blog is upset about "stealth gay": I feel that no one has the right to indoctrinate my son sexually no matter WHAT their orientation is, THAT'S why!!! ESPECIALLY in a sneaky, subtle way. WTF, bal? I have a RIGHT, a DUTY, to have a say in what my child is exposed to. Can't you get that?
Brad Williams' says It's like saying, "Dumbledore was a pervert."
The Fantasy Fiction for Christians blog says, in comments, that Rowling is Guaranteeing that the media will be obsessed with Dumbledore's moral perversion. And not Christ's beauty.
Linwenilid says JKR is a bad Christian: what is the point in announcing to the world your religious affiliation if you're going to, later, announce your support for something that goes directly against the doctrine you claimed to follow? All you've managed is to look like the biggest hypocrite ever!
Several are upset that he's in charge of a school; they're worried that he'll be molesting young boys (apparently, nobody was worried that a straight headmaster would be molesting young girls): one older gent told me he was put in an orphanage at age 3 and the headmaster was homo*se*xual and he got abused so he eventually ran away just to be put in another orphanage ... he told me all the headmasters of orphanages were ho*mo*s ... so this news to me is very disturbing.
Ostritch Impressions, aka "Teh Gay is all in JKR's mind, unlike the rest of the story, which belongs to the readers." (Interestingly, these support the fannish position "the only canon is book canon." I guess us Snarry fans do have something in common with the Bill O'Reillys of the universe.)
John Mark Reynolds, who's spoken in the past about the Christian elements in the Potterverse, says, if Dumbledore was gay, she decided to hide it. She hid it so well that there is no evidence of it.
The GoogleGroups discussion which claims it's "creepy" includes comments like I believe JKR was joking about Dumbledore being gay, because of the black helicopter conspiracy theories and fan fiction circulating on the Internet. She refers to Dumbledore's being gay as"fan fiction"
The Rant Box says Dumbledore is not gay because I choose to believe that he isn’t. ... the author, by necessity, must only define those parts of the story that are most important and leave the rest of the universe to be filled in by the imagination of the reader. ... Nothing in the books indicated Dumbledore’s sexual preference, so he was defined by what I thought was the most logical reasoning.
Turin Hurinson says Rowling didn’t make this clear in the books. There’s no evidence that Dumbledore is gay. None whatsoever.
Even lawyers get in on the act: given that the Potter books, now complete, make no mention of Dumbledore's sexuality, Rowling would not appear to have any authority to declare the print version of Dumbledore gay, straight or bi.
It's just fascinating how many of them are offended that she mentioned it="Exactly why homosexuality is vital to her story, Rowling never reveals." and "What's the point? Why introduce sexuality into stories aimed at children?" There are several claims it's all part of the "gay agenda." (Not providing links. Too stupid many to bother with.)
It wasn't essential; that's why it's not in the books. It's minor background details, like the names of Lily Evans' parents or Tonks' favorite hair color or how Lucius and Narcissa fell in love. It's a detail like "who did Draco marry" or "what's Ron's favorite Christmas treat?" --Fun to think about; irrelevant to understanding (and enjoying) the story. And the Christian bigots have never screeched about those other details that she throws around (although fandom has); it was fine when she said most wizarding kids were homeschooled before they went to Hogwarts, or that Luna got married to the grandson of Newt Scamander. Wasn't that also introducing sexual elements to the stories?
Teh Wrrld Has Endeded! Mah Fandumb Iz Ruinded Foar Evar! Saiv Teh Chilldrunz!
A Christian, quoted in atheist, objects to Rowling's announcement: However, thanks to Rowling's declaration, on-canon now means sodomy is included in Harry Potter. Because I cannot contribute to the destruction of young minds I must close down this group.
The Roman Catholic Blog comments generally think that it's all media hype, but one person says that instead of being a positve role model on homosexuality, this shows the destructive nature and taint it provides.
Don Surber's blog entry is fun, and the comments insist We are talking about our children here, we don’t need to teach them “tolerance of an immoral lifestyle of sin”, and that doesn’t mean we are teaching our children bigotry.
The Christian Worldvew Network, which isn't a fan of the Potterverse, says she did the Christian world an enormous favor by her perverse revelation: she settled the Harry Potter debate once and for all.
And some comments agree: Although Satan is never mentioned by name, these books glorify witchcraft and satanism and now homosexuality.
A commenter at 's blog is upset about "stealth gay": I feel that no one has the right to indoctrinate my son sexually no matter WHAT their orientation is, THAT'S why!!! ESPECIALLY in a sneaky, subtle way. WTF, bal? I have a RIGHT, a DUTY, to have a say in what my child is exposed to. Can't you get that?
Brad Williams' says It's like saying, "Dumbledore was a pervert."
The Fantasy Fiction for Christians blog says, in comments, that Rowling is Guaranteeing that the media will be obsessed with Dumbledore's moral perversion. And not Christ's beauty.
Linwenilid says JKR is a bad Christian: what is the point in announcing to the world your religious affiliation if you're going to, later, announce your support for something that goes directly against the doctrine you claimed to follow? All you've managed is to look like the biggest hypocrite ever!
Several are upset that he's in charge of a school; they're worried that he'll be molesting young boys (apparently, nobody was worried that a straight headmaster would be molesting young girls): one older gent told me he was put in an orphanage at age 3 and the headmaster was homo*se*xual and he got abused so he eventually ran away just to be put in another orphanage ... he told me all the headmasters of orphanages were ho*mo*s ... so this news to me is very disturbing.
Ostritch Impressions, aka "Teh Gay is all in JKR's mind, unlike the rest of the story, which belongs to the readers." (Interestingly, these support the fannish position "the only canon is book canon." I guess us Snarry fans do have something in common with the Bill O'Reillys of the universe.)
John Mark Reynolds, who's spoken in the past about the Christian elements in the Potterverse, says, if Dumbledore was gay, she decided to hide it. She hid it so well that there is no evidence of it.
The GoogleGroups discussion which claims it's "creepy" includes comments like I believe JKR was joking about Dumbledore being gay, because of the black helicopter conspiracy theories and fan fiction circulating on the Internet. She refers to Dumbledore's being gay as"fan fiction"
The Rant Box says Dumbledore is not gay because I choose to believe that he isn’t. ... the author, by necessity, must only define those parts of the story that are most important and leave the rest of the universe to be filled in by the imagination of the reader. ... Nothing in the books indicated Dumbledore’s sexual preference, so he was defined by what I thought was the most logical reasoning.
Turin Hurinson says Rowling didn’t make this clear in the books. There’s no evidence that Dumbledore is gay. None whatsoever.
Even lawyers get in on the act: given that the Potter books, now complete, make no mention of Dumbledore's sexuality, Rowling would not appear to have any authority to declare the print version of Dumbledore gay, straight or bi.
It's just fascinating how many of them are offended that she mentioned it="Exactly why homosexuality is vital to her story, Rowling never reveals." and "What's the point? Why introduce sexuality into stories aimed at children?" There are several claims it's all part of the "gay agenda." (Not providing links. Too stupid many to bother with.)
It wasn't essential; that's why it's not in the books. It's minor background details, like the names of Lily Evans' parents or Tonks' favorite hair color or how Lucius and Narcissa fell in love. It's a detail like "who did Draco marry" or "what's Ron's favorite Christmas treat?" --Fun to think about; irrelevant to understanding (and enjoying) the story. And the Christian bigots have never screeched about those other details that she throws around (although fandom has); it was fine when she said most wizarding kids were homeschooled before they went to Hogwarts, or that Luna got married to the grandson of Newt Scamander. Wasn't that also introducing sexual elements to the stories?