Time for a new thread, the old one here has reached 50 pages.

Are there hidden sexist themes in the story?

Is Jo more old fashioned then she let's on?

Is Ginny nothing more then a baby-making machine? Is Molly? Tonks?

Does Hermione need to be defined by what man she is with, whether it be Ron or Harry or anyone at all?

Are Mothers glorified over Career women?

Just posting some questions to keep the ball rolling.

I see some people on this thread are really grasping at straws in their attempt to bash Ginny. the claim that she was trying to make Harry jealous by kissing Dean is simply ridiculous: she was in a secluded spot of the castle, and she was quite annoyed at having been seen by Ron and Harry. also, if she wanted to make him jealous she could have simply snogged Dean right in front of him at the breakfast table or at quidditch training. she never flaunted Dean in front of him.

also, I wanted to reply to purplestarz, who said that Ginny lever unleashes her temper on Harry. I remember her giving him quite a shard time about his attitude in OOTP, when he believed to be posessed by Voldemort. So much that he apologized to her, when he didn't even apologize to Ron and Hermione. she told him to "don't take that tone with her" later in the book. also she was really worried and angry about hearing he was "doing what the HBP book told him to" and told him so.

also, that's a clear prove that they do have a connection in both of those scenes: she can relate to the experience of possession in OOTP, and Harry "immediately knows what's on her mind" when she sees her look upset over the book in HBP.
She is the only one to wich Harry has apologized for being a git in OOTP, and he reassured her about the prince's book in HBP, while he just brushed off Hermione's worries and told her to stop bothering him.

also, Ginny has shown that she does whatever she wants whatever Harry might say. she didn't go with him in DH because she knew about the trace and she would have just put the trio at risk by going with them, but she went to hogwarts and led the resistence with Luna and Neville and later she fought in the battle of hogwarts. she's certanly no shrinking violet that needs Harry's approval and guidance to do everything. she's quite indipendent and she's got initiative.

So the fact that two characters admire Ginny's beauty does not mean she's pretty but the fact that Ron claims she never shuts up is a definite proof of her outgoing nature (despite the fact that her best friend was an enchanted diary). I see some double standards here.


Harry isn't the only person who talks in the books or expresses an opinion on the other characters.


How does that prove that she is popular? So far I have yet to read an argument which supports the statement that she has always been popular and good looking.


Was Lily Luna in the books?


I though Harry was the one who convinced her to stay away.


Popular may not be a personality trait but "funny" and "outgoing" are. Ginny has not proven that she is either in the first five books.


Fair enough, but this was before they got together. Once they did, we hardly see her standing up to him or demanding anything from him.


In OotP, Harry forgot all about Ginny's experience with the diary which shows exactly how important she is to him.

Yes, it is my personal opinion and taste. I think Neville, in my personal and subjective eyes, is a really cool mate because he's sensitive, understanding, calm, patient, weak, profound, sweet, caring and tender (like we can see with his plants, e.g.), home and family -drawn, yet adventurous, strong, active, determined but not obsessed, only caring about the sole contents of whatever it is he's doing rather than any images and ego (which is rather rare in men (because of their education and civilization), as a matter of fact), intelligent, interested, emphatic,... Neville RULEZ !!! (again, in my opinion). I think Neville is someone who's not afraid of showing and talking about his feelings in a relationship with a woman, and not ashamed of being weak sometimes (his past specifically permitting him to develop like that).

as for the other boys in the PV:
Ron - too dim and rude for me, sorry (I don't really understand Hermione about that)
Draco - thrilling but too brutish and uncontrolled for me to have a crush on him
Bill - too patriarchal and traditional and always so serious and normal, imo. I just couldn't have a laugh with him, and there wouldn't be any suprises with him at all.
Charlie - so cool and nice and awesome, imo, but too occupied with dragons for there to be much space for a girl in his life - so it'd be rather unsatisfying to be with him, imo.
Percy - NO WAY - *runs for her life*
Fred - too annoying and nervous and dominant
George - pretty cool, actually !
Arthur - too boring and normal for me
James - NO WAY
Sirius - maybe for an affair, but not live with him
Lupin - big YES until book 7 (in book 7: oh no, damn, he becomes almost like Bill, wanting to meddle with every business possible)
Lucius - too arrogant
Hagrid - awesome, if he weren't so big
Flitwick - YES, love him
Cedric - too popular and perfect for my taste
Krum - actually: maybe, why not

the others are either too old or it's otherwise obvious why they don't appeal in the slightest (e.g. Pettigrew).

I would like to hear other girl's opinions about cool boyfriends in the PV, actually, and why you think they'd be good for a girl or why not, or who is a more traditional man in the PV, and who is more progressive.

(bold mine)

No they can't. An author writes something to get something across, however marginal the storyline is. What the authors write, is (whether consciously or not, but always necessarily) in order to get something across - so what he or she actually writes, and how marginal that may be, is therefore legitimately down for analysation. If she had wanted to get something else across in her marginal storylines, she could have written it another way (the thing staying marginal nevertheless). Besides, I don't think romance is a marginal theme in the books at all. We get pretty fair insights (too many for my taste).
In a book, everything has meaning, nothing is just coincidence (saying that would be just totally missing the essence of what litterature is). The same with Parvati's Butterfly-thing. Books are not life where coincidences naturally happen.

The same applies for this statement, speaking of Ginny's snogging Dean and Harry stumbling across it:

(bold mine)
------------------------------------------------------------
(bold mine)

Sure!, but that's not the way those girls' psychology works, and one of the reasons why it is so unhealthy. Unfortunately, I know a lot of girls like that, so I have a background fore being able to notice their existence in litterature as well if it is there, as it so clearly is in Ginny's case.



But this is precisely about taking away all his obssessive traits involved in it !

"You are stretching what you want to see to fit an innocent occurrence." (bold mine)

no such things in books, as I pointed out above. And also when seeing it concretely from within the books, this "occurrence" is totally consistent with the particular nature of Ginny's previous showings-up, I don't know how that could possibly not be consistent, and how one can possibly interpret that away. But as I already elaborated on the consistent chain of Ginny's character and it's satyromaniac behaviour, which clearly exists throughout the series, until she gets Harry (having waited long enough and been miserable long enough to deserve him), I won't repeat myself now.

"Please explain how, if this was always Ginny's intention, she waited til almost 2 years after getting a boyfriend to 'show herself snogging' in front of Harry? Why did she not jump at the opportunity to go to the ball with Harry? If she was as focussed on him as you seem to think, why does she keep her word to Neville?"

This is, again, an inherent part of the psychology of such a girl. The waiting and longing yet not daring, to do anything whatsoever besides showing up blushing and stuff like that. In book 4 (and also later), she was still in this indirect state of persuing the cause (which also applies for her "innocently" snogging Dean), that doesn't diminish anything from her being focussed on Harry at all, on the contrary (as I already pointed out in a previous post where I elaborated precisely on that).

And when she didn't take Harry and stuck to Neville instead, this is exactly one of the traits of the psychology of such a girl - they say no and then, immediatly afterwards, are being totally angry, depressed, desperate. They are so overwhelmed and embarassed and even more uncertain and helpless in this situation than they were before, by the sudden initiative of their prince on their behalf (which they didn't consider to be likely at all, as they don't have the self-esteem that is required to consider something like that to be possible in the first place), after having waited so long and become so accustomed to the absence, that they turn it down. It is another element along the consistent chain of this character through the series (until getting him), which supports the consistency of my interpretation.

"I still have fond feelings for my first crush even though I've been married for years"

Of course, and this is totally normal, and has nothing to do with the satyromaniac state Ginny's being in and which I've been trying to explain (there's a huge difference between what you're saying here, and what Ginny goes through, but I already elaborated on that).

"It's not her passivity that he notices, that attracts him to her"

That's because he doesn't notice her at all when she was hiding and retaining her desire for years, over-altruistically and selflessly (out of lack of self-consciousness) sparing Harry from her difficult and profound emotions and despair.

"(I don't see this passivity myself)"

That's the whole point of it, and it only supports that it is there. You'll only notice it during further and very precise readings. You'll notice the consistent chain there is throughout the series, and which reveals about Ginny what I've been elaborating on her.

"It's not her passivity that he notices, that attracts him to her (I don't see this passivity myself), it's her life and spirit and vibrancy." (bold mine)

Exactly. When she finally dumps her complicated, unattractive inner self (or the author doesn't let her have it any more), and becomes all cheering you up and compromising about everything (her rare "outbursts" of "anger" or "complaints" mainly towards Harry never lead to a change of the situation in her favour, so they're almost cynical to be there nevertheless, it's dumping your emotions and whishes in the end and swallow), he becomes interested all of a sudden.

"QUOTE Where exactly does he ever compromise on her behalf ? Sorry, but this is just completely untrue.
He backs down on numerous occasions from trying to stop her doing what she wants to do (ie going to the Ministry). He would rather 'protect' her and the others, but knows he can't force her to do what he wants. He has to compromise his wishes there for hers, and he does." (bold mine)

I find that statement really disturbing. Equating compromising with not stifling somebody's whishes

"and believing that she moulds herself to Harry's wants and needs is saying that he is dominant"

the author is moulding her into what fits Harry's personality, it's not Harry being dominant - he doesn't even have to - as the author has already moulded the girl into what he likes, there's even no need for him to be dominant any more. And I don't recall anybody saying or even suggesting she was a sex object either.

No, I am not saying they are wrong, just that it isn't as exceptional as some people are trying to make out, so there is no evidence that Ginny is "very pretty and very popular" like Cho, or "the best-looking girls in the year" like Padma and Parvati, which puts her on a par with many other girls at Hogwarts.
Ginny was hoping (though not necessarily expecting) that Harry would argue on her side, but he shakes his head so she (apparently) accepts her mother's opinion, supported by Bill, that the fight isn't for anyone under-age, though given that she tries to sneak in when the distraction of Percy appears. It is Lupin who proposes the compromise that Ginny stays in the Room of Requirements, and it is her father (not Molly) who agrees to this and demands that Ginny comply.
No, Harry just hadn't remembered until Ginny reminds him, which isn't that surprising considering how self-absorbed he was at the time.

Uhm... where exactly did he ever display any of this fondness (any of this huge perception of and interest in the human being Ginny, not in what is convenient for him about her) ?



which has chauvinistic traits. It is her decision, and her's alone. Not letting her do something, even something dangerous, is oppressive (wanting to hold her back from the Hogwarts battle).



He "shared with her" what was convenient for him, and put up a barrier towards the things he didn't like in her.

(bold mine)

You've hit it on the nail !!

(bold mine)

Every man who puts his career first needs an understanding wife. (the Voldy-hunting is metaphorical here)

"And she would be a demanding nag"

Very telling that a girl who is not all-convenient is immediatly viewed as a nag and as totally unconvienient, in fact, as totally horrible and menacing to the man's person, and all the other degrading things you said about girls who are individuals with personal whishes.

"One doesn't go looking for someone who is plain, unpopular and disagrees with their every move. That just makes no sense to me." (bold mine)

Of course it doesn't. As a male apparently accustomed, like many men, to girls agreeing with their every move. It is no surprise so many men fancy Ginny in this thread.

"The Harry POV argument is to explain why HARRY started noticing Ginny. Why she suddenly became attractive to him (although JKR gave them a summer together so it wasn't so sudden - we were not invited). All we had was Harry's POV. Now prior to Harry noticing her, it was evident other guys were noticing her. She was already popular - that is why Pansy claimed Blaise had an eye for her. Ya see, when Ginny came around, Blaise would start his posing or whatever he did - and Pansy noticed, so she accused. Dean and Michael also found Ginny attractive prior to Harry coming to the party. And pretty people can be popular, just like uncombly people. That is just a fun, nice, talented (in some way - even if just at telling jokes) pleasant person to be around - regardless of looks. So I think a mountain is being made of a mole hill here with Ginny. Her personality did not change other than her natural maturity. What changed was Harry's perception and that is what WE read. We have no idea when other guys started to find her attractive because Harry doesn't know and he is our information boat."

Her looks are clearly getting hugely emphasized in HBP (this is not only a question of quantity). Why? Even Draco, a very demanding and pampered little boy, admits it. And I think Pansy says something about there being many boys lately finding her pretty, "even you Draco", or something like that.

"You want them to be at one another's throats like Ron and Hermione? That is only one type of relationship. I hate arguing all the time, so that type would not work for me, for instance"

Surely it wouldn't. If you're considering an independant, individual woman as someone who goes at your throat. See what you're saying here? That a woman who doesn't accept everything, is immediatly a complete psycho attacking your person, a horrible disgusting weirdo (as you clearly suggested). You don't seem to have a concept of what "an independent, individual woman" means.

"Harry says something about her, then quickly adds 'ugly though' "

As so many guys who want to just get you going with them or keeping you adoring them in order to get from you what they want, however how. This is about HIS interests, not about HERS.

"where she stays in the RoR but at her first opportunity she's out of there"

And I'm relieved she went. What I'm not relieved about, though, is that she stayed with a man who tries to withhold her from doing things she wants to do, like she were his child, and not supporting her in her activities. (metaphorically speaking)

"People who are friends tend to laugh at each others jokes. " (bold mine)

Exactly.

"Actually Lily LUNA Potter, thank you very much."

Luna is not related exclusively to Ginny's biography, but equally to Harry's, if not more to his, seeing as Ginny wasn't there in the Malfoy-cellar-scene and then at Shell Cottage. It was most likely Harry's choice too.

PS: (this and my previous posts are in response to comments from the first thread on the topic, page 50)

I'm still on the first thread as well. Anyone remember which pages the Molly and Bellatrix conversations were on - to give newbies a chance to bring up that conversation as well.

If you are a new to this topic - WELCOME ABOARD! And please forgive us if we have egged each other on a bit - we will calm down in a bit - once we get distracted onto someone else.



There is a difference between snogging because one wants snogging to be part of your life and using snogging as a means of getting a guy. In the former case, you decide when you want it and when you don’t want it and there are other things you do together. In the latter case, your lips always have to be puckered and ready to go whether you actually feel like snogging or not because one of the fears that goes with getting a guy with one’s lips is losing him if you are not ready to kiss whenever he wants to. And in real life, a relationship is living on borrowed time if it is only based on snogging.

There is a difference between liking how someone looks (and how jealous the other guys are of you because of who you are with) and liking the person. There is a difference between wanting to kiss someone and liking the person the lips belong to. There are too many young girls who have a mistaken belief that just because a guy wants to kiss them that he actually is in love with them – and this plays into a fantasy which often leads to a harsh reality. As Janis Ian sang in At Seventeen:

Remember those who win the game
Lose the love they sought to gain
In debentures of quality
And dubious integrity
Their small town eyes will gape at you
In dull surprise when payment due
Exceeds accounts received
At seventeen



I think that Hermione overly complicated Cho’s emotions on purpose so that Harry would not trust his own judgement concerning the circumstances of his first kiss. Hermione basically made Harry feel like he did everything wrong and Harry could not question her. The only part of the experience which Harry was uncomfortable with before Hermione dissected the whole experience was the tears. And there are two things to note about the tears. One, Harry was looking at Cho every chance he got and I went through all those scenes before the kiss and that was the first instance of her crying. If Cho was crying half as much as Hermione insinuated, would not Harry have witnessed Cho crying before this instance. Secondly, not crying very much was the only quality, besides her snogging ability that Harry reports liking about Ginny in DH – yet Ginny seems to cry a lot in that book – turning away sometimes to cover it up so Harry doesn’t see it – but crying still. It seems strange to me that JKR did not latch onto another quality to highlight.

As far as sharing emotions, I think that Cho and Harry basically had conflicting views as to what was the kind thing to do when someone is upset. Cho figured that the kind thing was to talk about it and Harry felt that the kind thing to do was to leave them alone and let them decide for themselves when they were ready to talk - both felt that the other was being inconsiderate and treating the other’s feelings with disrespect. Cho I think was caught up between wondering if what Harry wanted was physically intimacy or real intimacy (which she figured included the sharing of feelings) – and Cho does seem jealous of Harry’s friendship with Hermione and the fact that Harry seemed more willing to share intimate things like feelings with Hermione than her. As far as Cho was concerned, people shared feelings if they were important to each other. As far as Harry was concerned, if someone is important to you, you do not insist that they share their feelings when they are raw but wait until they are ready to do so:

p. 508 (OOTP 26) – “Ron dragged himself to bed shortly after this. Out of respect for his feelings, Harry waited a while before going up to the dormitory himself, so that Ron could pretend to be asleep if he wanted to.”

Harry doesn’t show Ginny’s feelings the same respect he shows Ron’s – he doesn’t really care if she is upset or not – unless it means that he won’t get a kiss. Harry will call Fleur ugly in exchange for a kiss (which is more humouring the person for personal gain than the sparing of feelings). However, Harry doesn’t seem to care what is important to Ginny.



Harry doesn’t seem to care what is important to Ginny – Harry seems to think that snogging is more important than the fact that Ginny just led the team to victory or that Ginny is trying to study for her OWLs and he totally disregards what Ginny wants and thinks when he makes decisions concerning her (not just decisions concerning himself). It is one thing to tell Ginny that he has a mission that he needs to do – but to tell Ginny that she should stay out of the fight and tell her what to do is quite another. Don’t couples discuss things or is one the master and the other the servant who just bows and says “as you wish”!

Even with the excuse of hormones, there does seem to be something excessive about Harry’s behaviour – he is ether trying to kiss Ginny or keeping himself going in her absence by thinking about the last time he kissed her. Harry seems to feel that the type of “time together” that tests Ron’s tolerance was being more and more restricted over time. We never find out whether Ginny figures that their time together is too restricted or just right. The word “forced” is also unusual since it creates the impression that studying for OWLs is something Ginny is being coerced into doing – rather than something she wants to. Could Ginny not wish to do well on her OWLs?

p. 501 (HBP 25) – “But Ron’s tolerance was not to be tested much as the moved into June, for Harry and Ginny’s time together was becoming increasingly restricted.”

p. 501 (HBP 25) – “… Harry and Ginny’s time together was becoming increasingly restricted. Ginny’s O.W.L.s were approaching and she was therefore forced to revise for hours into the night.”

And if Harry really wants to spend time with Ginny – and not just “happy hours” either, couldn’t he not help her study for her OWLs? There are enough required courses that Harry had taken for him to help her with at least those. But no, even Hermione seems to realise that Harry has no intention of helping Ginny with her OWLs – that Harry is trying to distract her from studying! We learn back in COS that Ginny had wanted to attend Hogwarts since she saw Bill off at the train and her big fear was being expelled. Then there was the pumpkin incident in COS when both Ginny and Hermione figured out how Hagrid was getting the pumpkins so big when Harry didn’t – meaning that education was something that had been important to Ginny for a long time. But you are right Purpleztar – Harry doesn’t seem to notice or care that Ginny is intelligent just as long as she doesn’t worry her, like you said “pretty little head” about anything important.

p. 501 (HBP 25) – “… Harry was sitting beside the window in the common room, supposedly finishing his Herbology homework but in realitiy reliving a particularly happy hour he had spent down by the lake with Ginny at lunch-time, …”

p. 501 (HBP 25) – “Only the previous day, Hermione had told him off for distracting Ginny when she ought to be working hard for her examinations.”

But this is where it gets weird even for regular male hormones. DD is dead, Harry finally is spending all his time with Ginny and Ron/Hermione and all he can think of is all the snogging he would be getting in if DD had not died – that being with her is not enough/satisfactory on its own. It is stuff like this which makes one wonder if there is more than just male hormones going on – for example, something flowery, treacle-like and reminiscent of one of Harry’s two broom handles:

p. 591 (HBP 30) – “Harry, Ron, Hermione and Ginny were spending all of their time together.”

p. 591 (HBP 30) – “Harry could imagine how it would have been if Dumbledore had not died, and they had had this time together at the very end of the year, Ginny’s examinations finished, the pressure of homework lifted …”

“A male garter snake courts anything that smells, to his flicking tongue, like a female …” / “… even a paper towel dipped in female pheromone. A paper towel is so obviously not a snake, … , that the only explanation is a complete pheromonal override of all snake sense.”
http://forum.kingsnake.com/garter/messages/13789.html



You are not one for subtle sarcasm are you! Even if Harry is not acting under the influence (which I strongly question), it takes two to tango. It is up to Ginny to decide how she wants to be treated and if she loves herself for who she is more than she likes some guy. What Harry needed was someone who could give him what he needed in a life partner without giving up on herself and becoming a doormat. Adolescence is about sorting through competing expectations to become who you are rather than what someone else figures you should be. Ginny had the choice to be cool or not, to decide a relationship on her terms or not, to follow her dreams or not. Ron and Hermione went through a similar journey - the one where you distinguish between the person you are expected to be and the person you were meant to be – and that includes the expectations one has concerning how the other person should be.



Good comeback – even if the Medusa isn’t laughing (see Helene Cixous). Personally, I would like to know what spell witches use to make their bo smell pleasant or even flowery. I don’t think that Ginny (aka miss paper towel) was originally intended as Harry’s love interest – but that she sort of coopted the role due to JKR’s miscalculations. JKR figured that she could have someone long unrequitedly for the hero, seem to get him and it all turn out to be a fraud and get away with it – the readers would not stand for it. Viewers wanted Sam to get Diane in Cheers and Spike to get Buffy – even though neither of these men were good catches – but why is that? At least in the case of Diane, there were signs that she was interested in Sam early on – but in the absence of that!



Yes and no – JKR had a tendency to want to include too many subplots and her editors had a tendency to want JKR to scale them back – even back in PS/SS. I presume that the final result, as always, represents a compromise between writer and editors.



That begs the question – if you have to put a great deal of effort in becoming suitable and staying suitable, are you really suitable? Also, despite his hatred of tears, if Harry figured he had a future with Ginny, he should have went over to where she was grieving with her family and comforted her. Don’t the vows say “for better or worse” – meaning that you deal with the tears even if they make you uncomfortable!



Being with Cho did not stop Harry from thinking of Luna. And even if Harry is still stuck on Cho, he should have some feeling (or interest) at the news that Ginny was with what was presumably a desirable guy. Usually, one becomes more and more open to thinking about someone else as the relationship deteriorates – yet even at the time of the chocolate egg incident (when Harry and Cho were basically over), Harry had no interest what so ever in Ginny.



Ginny had reason to believe that Harry believed that Ginny had given up on him. We have Hermione, who is giving Ginny advice on how to get Harry telling Harry that Ginny HAS given up on him. Strange coincidence. Since we will probably agree to disagree on this: how would your view of Hermione change if she was as manipulative and interfering in Harry’s lovelife as I seem to think? Would it change your view of her? Would you consider her actions appropriate or inappropriate? I sense that no only do you not want to believe Hermione is being manipulative but that you figure that it would be inappropriate for her do be so since she is Harry’s friend.



One thing that always bugged me was when Ginny and Harry spent time with Ron presumably cheering him up while Hermione was at Slughorn’s parties. I don’t mean the part about Ginny teasing Ron about Cormac (which probably actually made Ron feel worse) – I mean where was Dean! Shouldn’t it be Ginny, Dean and Harry cheering up Ron? Same with Ginny’s friends, none of them are with her and Harry “cheering” Ron up?

Previous thread



I presume that you have never uttered anything offensive when very hurt and angry. :rolleyes If you look at it that way, I guess Ginny and Snape do have something in common. I always figured that Snape would, from an early age, become stuck on someone imperfect whom he considered flawless and want the same woman his whole life, but Lily sounded to cliche and idolized. It makes sense for the plot, though. And if Snape lacked confidence in his youth, would he not be drawn towards someone who seemed to exude confidence? Tom Riddle had none of the advantages of a Lily or a James (not pampered or adored as a child) – but he drew people to him because he exuded confidence – just like they did. It is like the example of the girl wanting to be a doctor and growing up to be a doctor’s wife – people who lack confidence tend to be attracted to more confident people.

p. 346 (HBP 17); p. 462 (HBP 23) – “Riddle smiled; the other boys laughed and cast him admiring looks.”

p. 346 (HBP 17) – “Harry recognised Riddle at once. His was the most handsome face and he looked the most relaxed of all the boys.”

p. 463 (HBP 23) – “Tom Riddle merely smiled as the others laughed again. Harry noticed that he was by no means the eldest of the group of boys, but that they all seemed to look to him as their leader.”



Neville actually has a lot of qualities which would be good in a mate – the most important is that he respects women with being kind and caring and nurturing coming in close after – but he is not seen as “cool” or “confident”. However, the strange thing about Ron when it comes to Hermione or Ginny – either could spend a secluded afternoon practising charm spells in an empty classroom without raising Ron’s suspicions but if Cormac was to ask Hermione directions to Snape’s office then Ron would be ranting and raving about Hermione being a scarlet woman – because Ron sees Cormac as “cool” and confident – and, therefore, a threat. If Neville has many qualities one would like in an ideal mate, and Cormac basically has none, then why does Ron feel more threatened when it comes to Cormac than Neville?

Although, technically Snape’s status was more similar to Black’s in that he wasn’t the bully leader, but the follower of a bully – the comparisons are between Snape and James. It doesn’t matter how bad James was or Mulciber was – only that they were both bullies and Snape failed to notice a difference between the two (as the memories indicate). Snape also saw James as his main competition – rather than some Neville-like character – so it was James (as Snape saw him) that he was trying to out do. Snape would not know that James had “changed” to get Lily to like him because James was still sticking it to Snape (and who knows who else) whenever he was away from Lily. Thus, as far as Snape knew, he was still competing against James the bully rather than James the “I don’t do that any more, honest.”

One point that DD made with his “faceless” comment was that it was easier to accept the victimization of those you don’t know very well compared to those you do. Regulus was not in love with Kreacher but he knew Kreacher well enough to know that he did not deserve the fate that Voldemort set for him. Regulus knew Kreacher well enough to feel guilty about almost causing his death – and, more importantly, through Kreacher, Regulus went from being a loyal DE who thought it an honour to volunteer his Elf in the service of the Dark Lord to despising Voldemort and wishing him defeated. The one thing that we know about Mary McDonald was that Snape saw her as faceless while Lily did not. Considering that Bertram Aubrey was at the top of the pile, the opposite may have been the case about him:

p. 739 (OOTP 37) – ‘… What did I care if numbers of nameless and faceless people and creatures were slaughtered in the vague future, if in the here and now you were alive, and well, and happy? …’




At least you are admitting that Ginny seems more passive than one would expect from her based on what we know about her. The trace is a reason no one mentions, though the thought that Molly (who has a false but idealised image of Ginny as being dainty and delicate) putting a stop to her going anywhere has come up. I did not like Harry playing “Father Knows Best” when Molly (especially) was browbeating a Ginny trying to stick up for herself and make her own choices.

What do you think Ginny needs in a guy and which Harry is Ginny in love with (using the metaphors Clark Kent and Superman)? Ginny feels “overly coddled and over-protected” through-out the book and seems to only manage to be herself by stealth – leading some to think that she finally gave in and lost the battle. When Ginny wanted to play Quidditch with her brothers and they never let her, why didn’t Molly step in? Why did Ginny have to sneak out in the middle of the night and use her brother’s brooms without their permission? Why does Ginny rat on Percy in COS and rat on Hermione in HBP?

Re Getting each other: Harry looks over at a Ron who is very upset and Ginny fills him in as to why Ron is upset. Harry arrives at the Burrow in DH and Ginny answers the same question everyone else had when they arrived. Ginny walks in when Hermione and Harry are arguing about whether the book is dangerous – which brings up the obvious tie in as to when Ginny trusted a book. Most of these are contextual – based on something that just happened or a conversation that was already going on. Luna takes one look at Harry and realises that he needs a break from the crowds.



I don’t like it that Harry was not on Ginny’s side either. Ginny is not made of glass and, even if she was, she did not deserve to sit on a shelf while history was being decided without her. Her perfect man would have understood that. Then again, I think that the twins should have been a bit more humble during Percy’s apology – such as admitting that they could be gits as well.



So what was all that snogging about in HBP – light comic relief?



What about girls who only focus on the guy – not Snape on Lily or Black on James so much as Bellatrix on Voldemort and Ginny on Harry?



I don’t have the other quote right now – but this isn’t a route that Harry and Ron took by chance but the one they tended to take regularly. And, since Ginny and Dean had just come from practice, Ginny should have expected Harry and Ron to be along any minutes. Also, they were kissing very passionately and fiercely – so they hadn’t been at it long.

p. 268 (HBP 14) – “When Harry pushed open the tapestry to take their usual short cut up to Gryffindor Tower, however, they found themselves looking at Dean and Ginny, …”




Though they both seem to be attracted to what, according to the beliefs they grew up with, would be construed as the “hero” aspect of the wizard in question. Pansy liked the “Superman” aspect of Draco so much that when he was “Clark Kent” complaining about kryptonite, he had to talk to Myrtle rather than Pansy. Ginny is always referring to Harry as being a hero and, even as late as HBP, she tells him this is what she likes about him.



Agree with whoever said that the name was already taken – George named his son after Fred and Percy named one of his daughters Molly. What doesn’t make sense though is why Ginny named her only daughter after Luna and Luna named one of her twin sons after Ginny’s great grandmother. Also, doesn’t twins run in Ginny’s family – with both Molly and Molly’s mother giving birth to a set of male twins! Can’t complain about Albus Severus – there is something instantly likeable about him and Rose. If Harry was married to anyone other than Ginny then Albus Severus and Rose could hook up eventually. Hope Rose is more Gosalyn Mallard - what a girl should be like.

How is that chauvinistic? Just because she's female? Harry didn't want Ron and Hermione to get involved with the Horcrux hunt at first, not out of sexism (in Hermione's case), but because he couldn't bear the thought of people he loved being hurt, or even killed. It was the same with Ginny. And I might point out, she wasn't of age during the Battle of Hogwarts, and underaged students were not allowed to fight.



And where's the evidence that Harry put his career before Ginny? Metaphorical or not, I would have thought hunting down and destroying the wizard responsible for ripping apart his family, plus many more, was more important at the time than his love life.



Well to me, that statement smacks of sexism. Is that not stereotyping men, suggesting that the majority of them prefer women who agree with their every whim?
And where is your evidence that many of the males posting in this thread fancy Ginny? Because they're defending her?

I'm female, I'm perfectly capable of making my own decisions without a man telling me what to do, yet I still have no problem with Ginny's character throughout the series, no matter how many times I've read it.



Where does the poster "clearly suggest" that a woman who doesn't accept what the man says is a complete psycho? They're talking about a relationship in general, where both parties are at each others' throats, not just the woman, so I think your assumption that they "don't have a concept of what an independent, individual woman" is, is completely unfair.



I'm sorry, but where's the evidence that Ginny stayed with a man who tried to with hold her from doing what she wants apart from this one occasion, where her own mother forbade her from going to fight?
She was underage, her own parents forbade her from fighting (does that make them sexist?), so was Harry supposed to go against their wishes and tell Ginny she could fight?

After that, we see them nineteen years later, with nothing to suggest that Ginny has been held back by Harry in any way.

It's her decision whether she fights or not. But it's not just her decision as the whether she goes with the Harry on the horcrux hunt. Harry has every right to say she can't go with him there, just like every person has the right to choose their company.



I don't think many of the men on this thread necessarily fancy Ginny. We just don't see a problem with Ginny and Harry's relationship, or with Ginny's behaviour in the books.
I don't want to speak for all the men here, but I don't see anything wrong with Ginny dating Michael and Dean, even tho she still has feelings for Harry. I don't see anything wrong with Ginny accepting the fact that she can't force her company on Harry during the horcrux hunt, or that she can't stop him dumping her.

And I don't know what century you're living in, but men no longer expect girls to agree with our every move.



Again, I don't really like to speak for another poster, but where is it clearly suggested that a woman who doesn't accept everything is a complete psycho or a horrible, disgusting weirdo?
That isn't suggested at all, as far as I can see.

Harry and Ginny don't argue much, as far as we see. And for some reason this is being criticised. The fact that Ginny doesn't argue with everything Harry says apparently makes her a doormat in some people's eyes.
Ron and Hermione do argue alot. This is what this poster contrasted Harry and Ginny with. But where does it say that Hermione, who doesn't accept everything Ron says, is a psycho or a horrible disgusting weirdo?



So you're criticising Harry for not wanting Ginny to get hurt. For wanting Ginny to be safe.
You didn't criticise Arthur and Molly. Why is this?
And what's wrong with not wanting loved ones to be in danger. Is this a fault now?

Harry also didn't want Ginny, Neville and Luna to go to the ministry in OOTP. He didn't want the body doubles to risk their lives in the 7 Potters. He didn't want any more people to die in the Battle of Hogwarts.
Is this also bad? Should he have been perfectly content to see his friends risk their lives?

Well I have figured out you hate James . But let's stick to pure canon for the sake of the gender argument for a moment. Lily here is not characterized as an "idealized" woman. That is Snape's tortured and narrow view. A perfect "Mother Teresa" Lily would turn the other cheek when harmed - Lily does not, she comes back with fire. And that proves Snape's idealism is a function of his delusions, imo. James' head shrinking is necessary to Lily - not to Snape. So PER THE CANON, when Snape continued to hex James in 7th year, he didn't take it lying down and hexed back (neither would I, head shrunk or not) and then did not run to Lily to complain "Snape hexed me! Snape hexed me!" which would only serve to make her upset. Now the male James here, has dropped his level of arrogance - but that does not mean he drops all wont to defend himself and becomes "Father Teresa" James. To me, that is a characterization laced with sexism - adding some kind of wimped out slug attribute to 'lack of arrogance'. Of course he should fight back, I don't care if you are the humblest man in the world, you should fight back - the two ideas are not synonyms in any way, imo.

It doesn't matter what was in one character's head (Snape's). Of course he saw James as his main rival. He never called him a bully in all of canon (that is solely your cry) - he called him a coward twice referring to those days. And further, when it came time to give his deepest feelings about Potter to Lily (Memory #5) he told the truth: he was jealous ("Big Quidditch Player" was all he could come up with in his incoherency). I don't know why you separate Sirius out, he issued stronger curses than James in SWM. But actually I do - because Snape does. It is like your interpretation adopts his jealousy within it. James was no Mulciber any more than Sirius.

But the fundamental problem here is that the interpretation indicates that a less arrogant male (which Lily required) was like an impossibility because males will stand up for themselves (females too). So the linking of ideas just seems like a slam on men. Finally, Snape was a budding death eater, who as you mentioned saw harming others as immaterial and just a laugh and trying to expell people out of jealousy and dislike, just fine. And all the while he was sending off Sectumsempra left and right, to the point where Lupin considered it his favorite or specialty. The one who would call his friend a filthy mudblood in behaving like a major bigot. Yet you try to characterize this person as a victim - and that does not meet the canon, imo (like Draco does not meet the canon as a victim despite being nearly killed by Harry). And this type of male - who to me, stands for the worst sort - thus is supposed to get sympathy?? I think not. That is no example of what a male should be or stand for and JKR didn't reward him in canon with any indication that his behavior, acts, beliefs and attitude deserved any. To me, Snape in the one scene where he is lifted by his own curse was both a victim and a bully - outside looking in of course. But his overall characterization was not to be held up as any type of prototype male, but rather the male miscreant, bully and type of boy a girl should dump, even as a friend, which is what Lily did.

So I think the charcterizations you have made are all twisted around and the ideas of "males" in this situation equally twisted, imo. Sirius and James were equally cruel to their enemy, as their enemy, Snape was to them. But within those characterizations, there are fundamental "male" attributes to be highlighted, and if twisted, I think the characterization of males comes out looking atrocious. That was not JKR to me - that was your interpretation.



References to Snogging, boys liking girls, dating, etc., does not turn an adventure fantasy into a romance novel. That was an "aside" from the main tale - like Lupin being a werewolf, or Luna's oddness or Charlie loving to tame dragons, or the Twins/Marauaders pranking, or Trelawny's drinking. These were just interesting side facts to give the story a little depth while the main adventure (hero defeats Voldemort) was built up and characterized. Lots of things happened in the book, but deep insight into Harry and Ginny's romance was not one of them - nor was deep insight into any romance a part of the book. It kept interest (who ends up with whom?) just like Snape (why does he hate Harry?) or Lupin (will he give in and marry). Little details, but not full blown descriptions. These side issues are only touched upon lightly.

So Ginny was developed perfectly in terms of a side plot, to me. I don't need to know anything more about her or her relationship with Harry to be perfectly happy.

RE Lily LUNA debate – the book (DH) only give Lily Potter’s first name – her middle name (Luna) is supplied later by the author'd website (behind the door).



Neville has a lot of good male qualities – but they also seem to be ones which our sexist society labels as “feminine”. I remember, after reading the bottom quote, thinking that Neville would make a good father:

p. 762 (OOTP 38) – “… and Neville was stroking his Mimbulus Mimbletonia, which had grown a great deal over the year and now made odd crooning noises when touched.”



Yeah I can understand a fling, but do pity the witch or muggle who wants/expects something more from him. Black’s hair certainly doesn’t have that “casual elegance” later in life. Black strikes me as a wizard who knew he was good looking, knew the advantages associated with being good looking and was not looking for a commitment with anyone other than his buddies. Seems that Black objectified women a certain amount:

p. 565 (OOTP 28) – “He was very good-looking; his dark hair fell into his eyes with a sort of casual elegance neither James’s nor Harry’s could ever have achieved, …”

p. 148 (DH 10) – “There were many pictures of Muggle motorcycles, and also (Harry had to admire Sirius’s nerve) several posters of bikini-clad Muggle girls; Harry could tell that they were Muggles because they remained quite stationary within their pictures, faded smiles and glazed eyes frozen on the paper.”



You both agree that Harry forgot about an event he shared with Ginny which was very significant in Ginny’s life – at least until Ginny reminded him of it. It does show that Harry did not give Ginny much though after she survived a near death experience. What you seem to disagree on is how significant it was that Harry forgot this concerning his feelings for Ginny – either he is “self absorbed” (which does not sound like a complimentary quality) or Ginny was not very important to him.

There is one other thing that it shows – that Harry, despite being in 5th year, was not handling this whole Voldemort interference thing very well – that he was freaking out, frightened and not thinking straight. Harry was willing to quit Hogwarts and go back and live with the Dursleys not really thinking that, if he was possessed by Voldemort, he would probably be a danger to all the muggles on the street. Compare that to how Ginny, a first year witch, handled her possession by Voldemort in COS. Ginny was able to fight the possession long enough to manage to throw away the diary.



The original or the sarcastic retort? This was not about Ginny per see but about why the hero cannot fall in love with an ordinary looking girl but has to fall in love with one that is “very pretty”. I think there was a statement earlier about beggers and Death Eaters finding Ginny exceptionally good looking (reference to the Pansy-Blaise and Amycus comments in the books). Ginny did not have to turn heads to be good for Harry.

There is a debate over whether or not Harry liked Ginny for the good qualities we all admire or whether Ginny had to start toning down or hiding those qualities to attract him.



Won’t get into the hunter/hunted debate here – but will if it comes up again. You say it yourself that Harry has a desire to stop innocent people from getting hurt – Hermione calls it his need to be a hero. Being an auror puts Harry into an occupation where he is responsible for rescuing people and preventing further people from being in need of rescue. Being an auror is basically what Harry doing much of what he was already doing in the books – except he gets paid for doing it. What drove him in the books will continue to drive him in his career. This is ok as long as Harry and his wife are childless, but once they decide to have kids, one career will have to subordinate itself to the other. Everything we know about Harry indicates that he would figure his career too important to the well-being of wizardkind to put anyone else’s career before it.

Page 43 (original thread)
Why make Ginny a Quidditch player and then make her quit while in her prime - it doesn’t seem fair to me. If JKR liked Ginny at all, she would either steer her towards a career which one can do while pregnant or give her children later in life - which is what women do in the real world. This is one reason why it strikes me as a quick edit to change a detail of the plot. Quick edits are not seamless – they stick out like sore thumbs.

Page 42, third post (or put “curl” in edit/find)
http://www.leakylounge.com/Hidden-Sexism-G...html&st=410




Note that while Ginny and Neville argued with Harry in an attempt to get him to change his mind, Luna just stated that she was going and considered the whole thing settled. It does help that she is the only one who figured out how to get to the Ministry – meaning that she wasn’t dependant on the others for getting there.



Sure, do you have any quotes you would like to share? :evilgrin James, according to Black’s own testimony, engaged in duplicity. James told Lily that he had given up bullying yet still continued to bully at least one person behind Lily’s back. Maybe the risk did make it fun, but doesn’t make James the kind of guy we would like our daughters to marry.

Lily was popular and could have her choice of guy. And, as far as we knew, she was never in the position Ginny was of liking a guy who did not really pay much attention to her existence. Lily could be picking. JKR said Lupin liked her but figured that she was out of his league – and Slughorn liked her.

Neither Snape, James or Black are ideal guys – they all have flaws – one being the way they freak out whenever the other one even infers the “c” word (coward). All of them were bullies and all of them figured that being bullies made them cool or “impressive” – Black referred to himself and James as the biggest bullies in the playground in POA, and seemed rather proud of that characteration.

My daughter could marry the dude just fine. If the worst thing he ever did was not tell Lily every time Snape zapped him and he zapped back - that would be awesome. The canon says Lily didn't know "much about it" - not that she knew nothing. (POA). But again, criminalizing this act is retarded to me - I see it as no big deal at all. I'm sure he didn't tell her every time he happened to not wake up in time to take a shower too - and visa versa - aint the end of the world. His head shrunk - that was Lily's big concern and he turned out to be an upstanding Order member with the same view and a good dad - what more could she ask?

But again - that is what I think JKR was trying to get across here, because I don't think her intent was to bash-smash male behavior altogether. A slight put down of fighting that goes on between males more than females (call it bullying if you like) - fine - but let's not demonize it because 70% of guys engage in one form or another when young and just cuz many young girls don't doesn't make it horrific. Girls have their young behavior also, it aint pretty - and JKR may not have highlighted it too much, but we all know it exists.



I did see both Snape and Sirius do this - but not James in canon. He might too - so might Dean - but these people didn't have a chance to show that behavior in canon. I'm just keeping it real here. Let us not make a giant characterization of men without basis. Some men don't like being called a coward - some girls don't like being called 'frilly' and to generalize either is not what was happening in canon. Hence people like James, Dean, Arthur, Kingsley, et al., we don't see going bonkers at being called a coward to their faces - it doesn't happen, so I have hope JKR was not generalizing.



For me you don't have to provide quotes unless you make something up. Here I would request one because Sirius never said that. To my memory he said they were arrogant berks - not the same thing at all as I was trying to point out in my last post. Arrogant does not equal willingness to engage in a hex war. Perhaps that is some stereotype I am unaware of, if so, I don't like it or agree with it. I do give JKR some quarter since she is female, but I refuse to buy into major generalizations like all boys who engage in fighting are bullies - or all girls who like to wear pink are frilly Janes. That type of thing is pulling stereotypes out of the air to me. Since JKR wrote in such a way as to give us various viewpoints via Harry's POV and what others said to him or he overheard, I think it is safe to say that there was not one the book 'stood for' when it comes to young male and females and generalizations. Not to mention that this age group generally changes like the wind. .

It's not so much that they like her, it's got more to do with the fact that men are not as sensitive to women being objectified as women are. If you are not dealing with something like this and don't have this problem then it doesn't bother you to read about it books. There are of course men who think the H/G ship is sexist, as well. But I think it mostly bothers women.


Not to mention the fact that arguing in a relationship is actually quite healthy. A relationship where the couple doesn't argue can only mean one thing: someone is being submissive.


There is also the issue of the chest monster which is supposed to be... what exactly? A metaphor for sexual arousal? Ginny is touching Harry in a friendly and suddenly his chest monster is awake. Another slap in the face to the argument that Harry likes Ginny for her personality. Chest monsters don't care about personality.


But Vaudree!!! Harry doesn't like it when girls cry, remember? If he feels uncomfortable then of course he shouldn't go.


But he at least told Hermione and Ron about what he was going to do. And he didn't protest too loudly when they offered to go with him which means he actually wanted them there. Ginny doesn't even know what Harry is doing on his trip. In DH she is surprised to find out that Harry is going to try to kill Voldemort. Not because Harry tells her of course, but because she hears a conversation between the Trio.

I agree that compromises are a vital part of a relationship. Can anyone come up with an example where Harry compromises on Ginny's behalf? Can anyone come up with something Harry does exclusively for Ginny, something nice? Can anyone come up with an example where Harry treats Ginny like an equal and like his soul mate?

When does James tell Lily that he'd stopped bullying? Could you provide a quote?
I seem to remember the book saysing that Snape never lost an opportunity to hex James, and that James didn't take it lying down. It also says Lily didn't know much about it, as James obviously didn't take Snape on dates and jinx him in front of her.



Like Wickedboy said, where does Sirius refer to himself and James as the biggest bullies in the playground. I don't remember this one either.


PURPLEZTAR:


Nobody knew what he was doing. He was ordered to tell nobody but Ron and Hermione.
It doesn't matter how nice it would have been for Ginny to have been there, or how much Harry might have liked. It wasn't feasible in any way. She couldn't have gone.



Do you mean when they were a couple? Cos we don't really get to see them as a couple. It's basically a page or two in HBP and then the epilogue. How much do you expect to be crammed in there?

One example of compromise though, when Harry spends less time with Ginny than he'd like to when they finally get together in HBP. He doesn't want to distract her from studying for her OWLs.
If Harry was as selfish as some people seem to think, he'd have been hounding her and hindering her study.

(bold mine) How does that mean one of the couple is being submissive? Is it not possible that a couple can rub along just fine without resorting to arguments?

My father and stepmother don't argue, but I wouldn't have said either one of them was submissive. If they disagree on something they talk about it, rather than get into an argument.



I can't say I've ever picked up on the "chest monster" being a metaphor for sexual arousal. It's mentioned when Harry and Ron stumble upon Ginny kissing Dean, but there was nothing sexual about that - his feelings were more to do with wanting to kick Dean off the Quidditch team. He was jealous.



As Wendall pointed out, Dumbledore told Harry not to tell anyone except Ron and Hermione what he was planning to do. He wouldn't tell Mrs Weasley, he wouldn't tell Remus, just like he didn't tell Ginny. Why should he? They weren't even going out at the time. And the less people who knew exactly what he was doing, the better.

I think that is pretty random. Men are so two dimensional, they either agree with your view or are not sensitive to women being objectified. Where is the room for the male (OR female) who reads it and doesn't interpret it as objectifying? I don't want any one of any gender objectified, but the often far fetched interpretations here are what is creating the idea, not the canon, imo.



I agree with Snape's sister. Arguing is not the only way, nor in the opinion of some, the best or "healthy" way to resolve problems. Many couples talk things out - and surprise - some even let topics drop after airing their views to think about it and resume discussion later rather than let it build into an argument. If I had to generalize, I would conclude just the opposite of what you said. However, I don't like generalizing. Arguments don't spell the end of the world in many cases.



I agree this was to represent jealousy - and that is what I meant by reader interpretation. Based on your interpretation, you can conclude Harry doesn't like Ginny for her personality. But if the original interpretation is jealousy, that doesn't follow. Considering the monster appeared in moments when he liked her and she was with others...I have a hard time understanding your interpretation.



This isn't a case of "don't worry your pretty little head about it" unless Harry was making that same assertion to Kingsley and Arthur - and a myriad of others. It is true he wouldn't wish for any of those people to worry about him overly much, but secrecy of his quest was at the request of Dumbledore. That Harry didn't make an exception even for the girl he loved, speaks highly of his character, imo.



An example off the top of my head? He gave in to her wish to give him a present for his birthday that he'd been attempting to avoid. He wanted it too (the kiss), but doing so was a compromise both on her behalf (versus a slap in the face type refusal) and a compromise of his own determination.



Off the top of my head - he went into the chamber to save her life. That was awfully nice if you ask me - and exclusively for her.



When did Harry ever treat Ginny as his inferior? I think he always treated her like an equal. The thing is, we were not privy to their conversations. Try this on for size: What did Ginny share with Harry about herself? We don't know - anymore than we know what Harry shared with her about himself. But why do you assume they wouldn't do this? Don't all couples do this? Didn't Arthur and Molly do this? We don't know, but I assume so.

I think on this subject of sharing that it is rather telling that Harry lets slip to Ginny that he is going off with the trio to kill Voldemort, which suggests to me that they shared such confidences in their time together (on things other than Dumbledore's task which Harry would tried to keep quiet about because of Dumbledore's instructions).

I just lost a long post by closing too many windows after looking for a quote in a word document.



I’ve seen a lot of fiction from people who don’t feel the need to provide quotes - and I let most of it go without comment. I include quotes because I can (all it takes is a cut and paste).



I will withhold any katty reference to the fact that Paul Bernardo is now single, because I presume your daughter has better taste in men than her father. There are plenty of good men out there, she doesn’t have to settle.

“(O)nce I heard of a woman saying the hardest thing about men I ever heard – and she was an ardent suffragist too. She said that what was wrong with the women in England was that they were too particular – that’s why they were not married, ‘and,’ she went on, ‘any person can tell, when they look around at men in general, that God never intended women to be very particular.’ I am glad I never said anything as hard as that about men.” – Nellie McClung, p. 39, 1915

In reference to murderer Paul Bernardo, being able to present a polite respectable image may impress one’s grandmother, but images can be deceiving.



I am sure that Lily can tell whether or not the water has been turned on. In (OOTP 29), rather than POA, James attacked Snape without immediate provocation (I will allow you a history of animosity) and Lily indicated that James hexed people because he could - in neither of the instances mentioned does James strike only after the other person struck first. I concede that James did not strike first every single time, although I don’t know of any canon specifying that he didn’t. Likewise, Snape says “four on one” though I think that we can both agree that Peter was mainly there to cheer on the others. If James was not afraid to face Voldemort by himself, then why was he reluctant to face Snape alone? Could it be the need of an audience unlikely to share his escapades with Lily rather than fear?

p. 562 (HBP 28) – ‘Coward, did you call me, Potter?’ shouted Snape. ‘Your father would never attack me unless it was four on one, what would you call him, I wonder?’

I am not talking about James pretending to be sick because he wants to see the Quidditch final between the Moose Jaw Meteorites from Saskatchewan and the Stonewall Stormers from Manitoba, I am talking about engaging in behaviour that he had led on to Lily that he had put a stop to. Lily getting involved with James was contingent on him changing his behaviour. It seems from Black’s telling that the biggest change James made to his behaviour was to become more discrete about engaging in it. James was engaging in behaviour that Lily did not approve of behind her back and the attitude was that what Lily didn’t know won’t hurt her. James saw no need to resist his impulses in Lily’s absence. Then there was the other thing about threatening forced nudity. According to Black, Lily may have found out the odd detail, but for the most part, she was kept in the dark about James’s activities during boys’ night out.

It doesn’t take too much to be held in high esteem by the Order - other than the ability (and desire) to hex others without the desire to kill them. James had that already back when he was 15. The difference is that James was now hexing those trying to kill him rather than wizards of his choosing and his primary motivation was survival rather than to humiliate. To humiliate, one needed an audience. Thus, James could get some hexing in with Lily’s approval since she was in the Order too.



Wait, are you accusing JKR of male bashing?



Do you mean girls who do not wear frills or decorate with frills? James came from a family which valued bravery and we see one instance of him insulting someone by inferring that they are a coward. The whole bullying thing was to make himself look better (ie braver, stronger, more competent) than the person he was bullying. If you think about it, the instance where Snape accused Harry of letting Neville mess up on purpose to make himself look better echos the behaviour we see with James’s bullying of Snape. Thus, though we do not see anyone call James a coward to his face, we know how much he valued been seen as it’s opposite.

p. ----- (DH 33) – “James lifted an invisible sword. ‘“Gryffindor, where dwell the brave at heart!’ like my dad.’

p. 169 (OOTP 10) – ‘Wit beyond measure is man’s greatest treasure,’ said Luna in a sing-song voice.”

As far as Dean, Arthur and Kingsley, I do not know. I would like to think that the latter two were too mature to give into peer pressure. Dean doesn’t seem to have many interests other than witches, soccer and drawing.



Not without an audience of some sort anyway. Arrogant is just another way of saying that he was full of himself egocentric, if you prefer. Black seems to draw a comparison between himself and James on one hand and Voldemort on the other – when discussing Peter’s love of having powerful friends. Black seems to infer that he did not need the company of anyone stronger or more powerful than himself (so he prides himself on being strong and powerful – possibly the most powerful of the Marauders). There seems to be some sort of the connection between the phrase “big friends” and “biggest bully in the playground”. Why the choice of the word “big” to denote strong and powerful – which infers that “small” represents its exergue. Though innocent, Black looked guilty because of his penchant for violence:

p. 271 (POA 19) – ‘… When did I ever sneak around people who were stronger and more powerful than myself? …’

p. 271 (POA 19) – ‘… You always liked big friends who’d look after you, didn’t you? It used to be us … me and Remus … and James …’

p. 271 (POA 19) – ‘…You’d want to be quite sure he was the biggest bully in the playground before you went back to him, wouldn’t you? …’

p. 287 (POA 21) – ‘Sirius has not acted like an innocent man. The attack on the Fat Lady – entering Gryffindor Tower with a knife …’


It is inferred. Lily goes out with James once she believed that he had changed – once he stopped acting so conceited and bullying (ie hexing) people for the fun of it. Harry questions whether James had really changed as much as he had let on. James does actually say that he will stop bullying Snape if Lily went out with him - and then continues to do so behind her back.

p. 570 (OOTP 28) – ‘… Leave him alone.’ ‘I will if you go out with me, Evans,’ said James quickly. ‘Go on … go out with me and I’ll never lay a wand on old Snivelly again.’

p. 591 (OOTP 29) – ‘How come she married him?’ Harry asked miserably. ‘She hated him!’ ‘Nah, she didn’t,’ said Sirius. ‘She started going out with him in seventh year,’ said Lupin.”

p. 591 (OOTP 29) – ‘Once James had deflated his head a bit,’ said Sirius. ‘And stopped hexing people for the fun of it,’ said Lupin. ‘Even Snape?’ said Harry.” (US, p. 671)

I hate when stuff like that happens...



Your interpretation is exaggerative to me - that is why I still hold the same opinion. I grew up with tons of friends, the majority of them male - tons engaged in mimicry and fighting. I don't know one who went on to be a murderer and the majority are married, getting married and some have kids. They are fine. So I interpret the writing in that way. The man was shown to be a mature and good father - enough said for me to separate that from childish ways. I won't hold it against Harry that he recklessly used Sectumsempra (in the world of magic) and nearly killed a boy - or that he grew Filch's toenails for fun - or that he thought Draco being turned into a ferret was the best of humor and laughed in the crowd at him. I don't hold it against Draco for hexing Neville as a kid. So unless there is some "adult" canon we can discuss, the interpretations are pretty moot to me. Sorry.



Whatever - this is altogether immaterial to me. I disagree that canon supports what you have said. But in any case note this: I wouldn't care if James didn't mention his fights with budding Death Eater Snape. Snape deserved whatever he got back then (in kids terms). You don't walk around casting dark curses, trying to have people expelled and uttering bigoted phrases and hope to be liked. If someone was brave enough to stand up to Snape - or attack him in the first place, good for them. All the kids cowering from budding Death Eaters would have been horrible. It was like the kids cowering from Umbridge or from Draco. At 15, the attacks and defenses are silly at best unless they are dark magic in nature. So as long as one could avoid Snape using these criminal elements on them, more power to them. (Again, from an in story point of view of those having to deal with Snape and his sort)

But Snape was a kid too - I don't hold it against him until he became an adult and still carried on with the same behavior. That is me personally.

As to your final point: from my perspective, James didn't tell Lily everything so she wouldn't be upset and I like that. If he had told her, she'd of told him to stick it to Snape - yes, hex the lad back - rather than be hexed to death and do nothing about it - in my judgment. That would be the correct response - so I allow that Lily would have given it. So to me, you are making a mountain out of a mole hill because if she knew everything, she wouldn't have left James, she would have attacked Snape (in her way, whatever that might have been). If you want my canon for that - see SWM - see what Lily did in response to Snape bullying her with his bigotry. She didn't stand there and take it, she bullied back, because standing up for yourself was all right with her. And she tried to take up for Snape prior to that - so she was also a defender. She just didn't like people starting things based on nothing more than long standing enemyships - understandable (even if a little delusional when it comes to teens), However, in this case, the person starting things was Snape - and that is what you are failing to take into account, imo. She would not only feel James was responding correctly, she would likely join in his defense as possible (another reason James likely didn't tell her, because he didn't want her to get hurt by involving herself - and more upset)



In certain respects I feel she did. However, she was an equal opportunity basher; some female bashing took place also. And I don't mean bashing either gender just because they were male or female - but rather certain stereotype attributes that are common to either males or females. To me that is just another form of bashing in my judgment.

Thanks! People who lose posts like company.

There is a desire to make things black and white rather than contend with the various shades of grey – the desire to see characters as either all good or all bad on the part of some readers. Thus, if you are critical of a character, it is as if you are trying to take them out of the “all good” category and put them in the “all bad” category – which I think is no one’s intent (in part because only one character in all the HP books fits into either of those categories). When Marshall McLuhan said “I don't know who discovered water but it certainly wasn't a fish” he meant (among other things) was that if women being objectified is too commonplace, then it becomes difficult to notice that it is happening.

I’ve heard the argument that something isn’t “sexist” because it is normal in real society - inferring wrongly that some behaviour or characterisation has to be somehow abnormal before it can be considered sexist. To the degree that one lives in a sexist society, then sexism will seem normal.

I think that James and Ginny are comparable since the side that they present to their respective love interests when they get them differs in small ways from the person you realize they are if you go through the books with a fine tooth comb. In a way, Ginny becomes like Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s Sophie (or woman) and Harry becomes her Emil (or man):

“The man should be strong and active; the women should be weak and passive; the one must have both the power and the will; it is enough that the other should offer little resistance. When this principle is admitted, it follows that woman is specially made for man's delight. If man in his turn ought to be pleasing in her eyes, the necessity is less urgent, his virtue is in his strength, he pleases because he is strong. I grant you this is not the law of love, but it is the law of nature, which is older than love itself.

If woman is made to please and to be in subjection to man, she ought to make herself pleasing in his eyes and not provoke him to anger; her strength is in her charms, by their means she should compel him to discover and use his strength. The surest way of arousing this strength is to make it necessary by resistance. Thus pride comes to the help of desire and each exults in the others' victory. This is the origin of attack and defense, of the boldness of one sex and the timidity of the other, and even of the shame and modesty with which nature has armed the weak for the conquest of the strong. …

Men and women are made for each other, but their mutual dependence differs in degree; man is dependent on woman through his desires; woman is dependent on man through her needs; he could do without her better than she can so without him. She cannot fulfill her purpose in life without his aid, without his goodwill, without his respect; she is dependent on our feelings, on the price we put upon her virtue, and the opinion we have of her charms and her deserts. Nature herself has decreed that woman, both for herself and her children, should be at the mercy of man's judgment.”

http://www.cwrl.utexas.edu/~ulrich/RHE309/...es_rousseau.htm



Is there any indication that Harry actually wanted Ginny to come with him? :evil There is a stereotype saying that boys are better BSers than women and tend to attack an argument, not directly, but by focusing on another’s sloppy wording. Figure that I should take this opportunity right now to put the latter stereotype to rest.



Finally get together, eh – like Spike and Buffy and Sam and Diane? According to this quote (which can also be found on page 1), Harry both wanted to distract Ginny from her studies, and was succeeding at it before Hermione put a stop to it.

p. 501 (HBP 25) – “Only the previous day, Hermione had told him off for distracting Ginny when she ought to be working hard for her examinations.”

You are right that Harry isn’t usually that selfish and Purpleztar is right that “Chest monsters don't care about personality” – but is this “chest monster” which causes Harry to superimpose his face onto Dean’s body (so to speak), male hormones or the effects of a love potion? Harry doesn’t just want to be in Ginny’s company (that is not good enough), he craves Ginny’s kisses like Mundungus craves meade.

p. 270 (HBP 14) – “But unbidden into his mind came an image of that same deserted corridor with himself kissing Ginny instead … the monster in his chest purred …” (US, p. 289)

p. 270 (HBP 14) – “Harry gave a guilty start and wrenched his imagination away from a corridor in which no Ron intruded, in which he and Ginny were quite alone –”

p. 268 (HBP 14) – “… all thought was extinguished, replaced by a savage urge to jinx Dean into a jelly.”

There are other things associated with the chest monster which are more disturbing than intense lust and murderous jealousy – the “forgetting”. Harry goes from being vivid and alert to something more diffused and unfocused. It sort of reminds me of me when I am exposed to air freshener, perfume, or certain cleaners – you brain slows down and doesn’t seem to hold as many thoughts as it usually does, you hearing diminishes so you turn up the volume on the TV (when you perk up again it is too loud), and the feeling of being too dizzy and disoriented to really follow the show you are trying to watch. Of course his emotions are alert and intense when it comes to Ginny, but for everything else, he responds to the world like someone allergic to chemicals:

p. 268 (HBP 14) – “It was as though something large and scaly erupted into life in Harry’s stomach, clawing at his insides: hot blood seemed to flood his brain, so that all thought was extinguished, …”

p. 268 (HBP 14) – “Wrestling with this sudden madness, he heard Ron’s voice as though from a great distance away.”

p. 270 (HBP 14) – “Harry hardly noticed the sound of shattering glass; he felt disorientated, dizzy; being struck by a lightning bolt must be something like this.”


SnapeSister and Purpleztar – I don’t think you are disagreeing on the big issue (at least not yet) – which is whether it is healthy for two people to go along without ever disagreeing. I think what you are debating is whether the word “argument” should be used loosely to describe any form of disagreement between two people or used narrowly to describe rows. Let’s take Purpleztar’s original statement and substitute the word “disagree” for “argue”:

“A relationship where the couple doesn't disagree once in a while can only mean one thing: someone is being submissive.”



Harry thought it was too late, he only went because Ron insisted upon it (can’t find the middle quote between these two right now). Personally, I think that this was something that Ron did for Ginny because he alone never lost faith that she was still alive. Though, I do wonder why Ron decided to trust Lockhart now when he did not think much of him the entire book:

p. 219 (COS 16) – ‘Harry,’ said Ron, ‘d’you think there’s any chance at all she’s not - you know –’ Harry didn’t know what to say. He couldn’t see how Ginny could still be alive.”

p. 219 (COS 16) – ‘I think we should go and see Lockhart. Tell him what we know. He’s going to try and get into the Chamber. We can tell him where we think it is, and tell him it’s a Basilisk in there.’

I hear your point here. But again, it depends on your interpretation of 'objectify'. Is Ginny some girl who is only there to be Harry's girlfriend/wife - an object and nobody in her own right. Well in a sense - yes - in this particular story. She is objectified in that way which would be horrific IF all characters like ginny, male and female were not treated the same. Is Pansy the objectified female to be there as a dual negative character with Draco, admiring independent of what he does or says or how he treats her and a nobody in her own right? Sure. In this story. Is Dean the objectified male who is there in the shadows kissing Ginny and making faces and noises to indicate embarassment, indignation, or whatever else is needed to perform his role as the "last suitor" in the Harry-Ginny tale - and otherwise really nobody in his own right? Yes, again, in this story.

Do you get my drift here? Ginny was given the same treatment as others (with a little more info and page time due to being Harry's love interest). So again, I think it comes back to interpreting JKR as intending to give her more than enough for us to figure out where Ginny was coming from.



Question: this love potion idea. What is it exactly that you felt JKR started off intending to do? Make the only Weasley girl turn to the dark side and follow Voldemort? Was she going to become super powerful and give Bella a run for her money? And what would the fall out have been? Harry redeems her? She dies a dark mistress? Was she going to be an example of a good kid with a loving family going bad for no particular reason? Or was she going to pull a Merope? If so, what rationale do you feel JKR would give Ginny for doing this? Subjugated by the males in her family? A genetic disaster? The affects of possession by Voldemort - but that would cry for redemption and salvation. I can't figure how this idea would really work into the storyline.

He felt a duty to do so. He didn't do it because he liked her.


Most men don't interpret it as objectifying. There are men who do. There are women who don't. I just think that an issue like this will mostly bother girls.


Why does jealousy automatically mean you like someone for their personality?


He let his pretty girlfriend kiss him? Is that an example of something Harry doesn't want to do but does it anyway for Ginny?


What interpretations would those be? You keep saying this. Which argument do you see as being far fetched?


That's what I should have said, yes. Oh, semantics!


Is there any proof that the slipping was intentional, though?


No. Isn't Dean the one who got captured by the Snatchers along with the Trio?

Well if we're gonna look at it from that point of view, there's also no indication that Ginny wanted to go with him. When do we ever see Ginny express or show a desire to go with Harry, Ron and Hermione on their mysterious trip?

My basic point is that I don't think it's fair to criticise Harry for making all the decisions in the relationship, and trying to control Ginny.
He's perfectly within his rights to choose who goes with him on the hunt. He's perfectly within his rights to dump Ginny.



Eh, I have no idea what the Spike and Buffy, Sam and Diane bit means, but anyway, it wasn't just a situation of Harry wanting to distract Ginny, and Hermione stopping him.
You can't just blame Harry for everything. Why aren't you putting any of the responsibility on Ginny for any distractions that may have happened?
I was just going on the fact that "Harry and Ginny's time together was becoming increasingly restricted. Ginny's OWLs were approaching and she was therefore forced to revise for hours into the night. On one such evening, when Ginny had retired to the library and Harry was sitting beside the window in the common room...".
There's no indication of Harry forcing or pressurising Ginny to spend time with him rather than study.

I think Harry was also criticised at some stage for wanting to kiss Ginny. Completely ignoring the fact that Ginny also wanted to kiss Harry.

I imagine both of them would have mixed feelings about it. I suspect that Ginny would want to be involved (as she did for the OotP briefing meeting) but knows it is impractical, and Harry would like her presence but not the risk it would put her under. But this is just guesswork because Ginny doesn't express a desire to go with them.
It is also worth pointing out that what Hermione considers a reasonable time spent studying for exams might well differ from what others think. I am sure Harry and Ginny both want to spend as much time as possible together, but the circumstances severely limit that time, and Hermione just thinks that they haven't got the balance right. It is equally possible that Hermione also told Ginny off for the same thing (though she might hold Harry more responsible because he has fewer demands on his time).

This reference(or should that be non-reference? As you chose to "withhold" it) doesn't seem a wee bit dramatic, exaggeratory, not to mention inappropriate to you?

Seriously, how does someone suggesting that they wouldn't consider James an inappropriate partner for their daughter equate in any way, shape or form to them approving of a notorious serial killing rapist?

I agree with Purpleztar that arguing in a relationship can be healthy. Obviously it depends on the nature of the relationship but there is the concept of productive conflict serving to strengthen a relationship. There are of course also those who maintain that if you're not willing to engage in conflict then you just don't care about your relationship

I don't necessarily agree with the latter, but it seems implausible that a couple will be in constant and consistent agreement, and that any disgreement can be discussed calmly and rationally, in which case an argument can result. If the couple has reached this point of conflict but one side does not engage in the argument it could be reasonably construed as submissive, that they do not feel competent/confident enough to challenge their partner in this manner.


As to what a chest monster is I think Cambryn best interpreted it HERE.

Ok, I had no idea who Paul Bernardo was when I first read that post, so I just ignored it. But when I saw your post, Azkaban's Angel, I googled him to see who he was.

I'd says it's extremely dramatic and inappropriate to compare Wickedboy's approval of James as a person to him approving of somebody like Paul Bernardo.
James bullied some people when he was a kid. Paul Bernardo was a serial rapist and a murderer. That's a completely ridiculous comparison to make, and it seems like an incredible insult too, to both James and Wickedboy.

Wicked Boy - in which ways did JKR stereotype males.



Of course it is! Though not any more of an exaggeration than your impression of Severus Snape. James doing things behind Lily’s back that he had led on that he gave up so as to get her indicates a lack of sincerity, honesty or fidelity – take your pick. James likes admiration, getting his ego stroked, and risk taking. In real life, men like that may appear to be good husbands and fathers and then the scandal breaks. I think that any woman deserves a man she can trust.

You have seen the politicians come out to give a statement to reporters with their humiliated wife standing beside them trying to smile as if the whole thing doesn’t bother them. I am not saying that James ever got around to doing anything that Lily would find humiliating – just that men with those qualities usually end up making their wives cry. Also James has a mean streak which concerns me a bit and I can’t write off completely.

Note the only thing that James has in common with PB really is the ability to put out the respectable image. PB did, before the truth broke, look like the kind of man a grandmother would try to set her granddaughter up with – good job, respectable looking, middle class manners (which is why it took so long for him to be caught). However, this goes back to why Tom Riddle remained free while Hagrid, Morfinn, Hokey and others paid for his crimes – he was able to present a respectable image and they, for whatever reason, couldn’t. (And this goes way back to the beginning of the first thread when we were talking about respectability and corruption when it came to wizards in HP). I was trying to leave out the other thing since murder (which I mentioned) was enough for the example – which was to focus on appearance versus reality (or change compared to the illusion of change).

There is the impression that Ginny is like James, in a way, that she seems to change just before she gets the one she wants. In another way, Ginny is like Snape in that she fixates on one person and seems to imprint to that person for life – like a baby bird thinking the first thing they see after they hatch is their mother (which is why they will follow the researcher around the room). There is a bit of "justification" for Snape being bullied because he later turned out to be a DE rather than a healer or a minister or a goblin rights activist - as if James took all this into account before he decided to bully him.



Harry did not know what sempra would do – which makes his folly trying a spell which he knew nothing about. Note that sempra was supposed to be a silent spell (meaning that saying it would tend to make it more potent) and whether it scarred or caused massive blood loss depended mainly on the strength behind it. In its mildest form, sempra would be similar to the “sneak” jinx that Hermione put on Marietta – something that not only labels her but impacted her looks. It was actually Crabbe he did the toenail thing on (a spell I can see a witch doing on herself if it works for fingernails) – could not remember whether it was Crabbe or Goyle so looked it up. The Filch thing JKR probably got from the peanut butter skits on Sesame Street:

p. 224 (HBP 12) – “There had been a hex that cause toenails to grow alarmingly fast (he had tried this one on Crabbe in the corridor, with very entertaining results); …”

p. 224 (HBP 12) – “… a jinx that glued the tongue to the roof of the mouth (which he had twice used, to general applause, on an unsuspecting Argus Filch); …”



Actually, Ron laughed, Hermione was disturbed by it and we don’t get Harry’s reaction to it. (I should note that, while Buckbeak was facing trial, Hagrid was feeding him ferrets – while Black later fed Buckbeak something more reminiscent of Peter Pettigrew.) It was the same dynamic between the two discussing what happened to Montague (we later learn that it almost resulted in his death). Except when it comes to love (or some other similar “higher purpose”), Hermione tends to have the idea that something is bad no matter who the victim is. Ron, on the other hand, seems to figure that the wrongness of an action depends on whether it is his mates or his opponent’s mates (which seems to be the usual way of looking at things). Note that some of these house rivalries have gone on for generations – making them worse than most sports rivalries.



James and Black walked around hexing people for the fun of it and were considered cool because of it. Same with the twins. It seems that being the House bullies did make you cool in Hogwarts (unless you belonged to a different house). Snape was in competition with James for Lily and was trying to out James James – why would he want to be impressive when the only person he really wanted to impress was Lily! Snape could not have been any more politically aware than Kreacher if he figured that becoming a DE would impress Lily! And take Regulus, he may have been racist without even thinking about it, but he was probably one of the nicer characters of the book.

When Lily blinked, I knew it was shock – though I could not tell whether Lily was really shocked or engaging in sort of a phoney shock that some popular girls tend to engage in to pretend (or get across) that this is behaviour that they are highly unaccustomed to – it turned out to be the former. Before this incident, Lily only blamed Snape for his choice of friends but after this incident, Lily blamed Snape for his own behaviour and made an accusation which Snape did not really understand completely. I wonder if Lily, when talking to her friends about what Snape called her told her that he had used the word before. I also wonder if James used the word before himself because he almost said it when he said (pp) “I would not call you a –” - it would have been game over if he used it in Lily's presence.

p. 571 (OOTP 28) – ‘There you go,’ he said, as Snape struggled to his feet. ‘You’re lucky Evans was here, Snivellus –’ ‘I don’t need help from filthy little Mudbloods like her!’ Lily blinked.”

Earlier, it was brought up that Molly used the “B” word to describe Bellatrix – which is a gender slur rather than a racial slur. Why are gender slurs considered more acceptable than racial slurs – why is insulting a person based on their gender or more acceptable than insulting them based on their ethnicity. If using a racial slur makes one a racist, doesn’t uttering a gender slur make one sexist?

It is pretty easy to utter a racial slur, I remember my friend visiting from the US and hanging around my highschool with me. There was a phrase that a teen from a popular TV show depicting the 50’s used to describe a cute guy which turns out also to be a racial slur against a certain ethnic group more common in North of the border than in North Dakota where she was from – so basically my friend was insulting all the cute guys in my highschool! I didn’t know why the guys were so offended because I wasn’t very up on racial slurs at the time (word in question not important). What I am trying to say is that, to be a racist, it is not just important that you use the word, but why you use the word.

Words such as goblin, squib and mule are not offensive in and of themselves but only in how they are used. Goblin becomes a racial slur only if one calls a house elf one and mule becomes a racial slur only when one calls a centaur that – because they are defined, by their very use as an insult as an inferior being. Likewise, Gaunt calls his daughter a “squib” – which is the same as calling her an inferior witch – though I think that JKR was using “squib” instead of more offensive gender slurs – since though Marvolo was portrayed as blatantly misogynist, it was even more important to highlight his racism.

p. 90 – (GOF 8) – ‘…Dobby. He is getting up to all sorts of high jinks, sir, what is unbecoming to a house-elf. You goes racketing around like this, Dobby, I says, and next thing I hear you’s up in front of the Department fo the Regulation and Control of Magical Creatures, like some common goblin.’

p. 199 (HBP 10) - ‘You disgusting little Squib, you filthy little blood traitor!’ roared Gaunt, losing control, his hands closed around his daughter’s throat.”

p. 187 (PS/SS 15) – ‘Firenze!’ Bane thundered. ‘What are you doing? You have a human on your back! Have you no shame? Are you a common mule?’

p. 395 (DH 24) – ‘ We protest! And I’m hunted quite as much as any goblin or elf, Griphook! I’m a Mudblood!’ / ‘Mudblood, and proud of it! …’

Hermione finally decides that it is just as offensive to consider the word “Mudblood” offensive as it is to use the word as an insult (though she always seemed slightly uncomfortable with Ron defending her honour every time it was used against her). In other words, that by being offended by the word, Hermione is perpetuating the pureblood structure which considers witches and wizards like her second class. In other words, if the word mudblood is considered offensive then being a mudblood is considered inferior. This goes back to what Jean-Jacques Rousseau says about women in his ideal world being subjected to man’s judgement (ie having their value and worth determined by a man). New Woman magazine did a similar thing with the word that Molly used against Bellatrix (and Marge used against Lily) by turning it into an anagram for Brains Integrity Tenacity Courage and Happiness.

Back to the point – it does matter whether one used “Mudblood” to refer to all muggle-borns or divided muggle-borns into those whom one insulted with that word and those whom one didn’t. Not much of a difference, but a bit of one. These things come in degrees. Words are all about power – including the power to offend and insult.



There is a difference between standing up for yourself and bullying someone. Standing up for oneself means deciding what you will put up with or not put up with. Bullying someone means deciding what you will subject someone else to. There is a difference between defending oneself or ones friends when they are under attack and picking on someone just because you do not like them. If one has not been powerful enough to have their boundaries respected (ie young and inexperienced magically) and then one suddenly has the power to have their boundaries respected then they are apt to cross the line sometimes. Maturity means not crossing that line. Oh, if Lily would have approved of James’s behaviour, then why wasn’t James more open about it! And Lily is so used to being popular, that she doesn’t hex someone she is pissed off with – she shuns them (ie turns her back on them).



Dean’s role got cut way back – he was originally supposed to find out what happened to his father and why his father left the family. I guess Dean exists mainly as Seamus’s friend (an echo of James and Black), a person who is a good drawer, a person who helps hold back (was it Ron or Neville) when they were going to fight Draco and to give his opinion on witches. Dean and Seamus say that the Patils are the best looking witches in their year, we later see Dean with Parvati for a fraction of a second, then Dean moves onto Ginny and holds hands with Luna. But then again, we see Dean on the run as a muggle-born hiding out and his argument with Seamus concerning Cedric’s death.

Ginny was the major part of COS and HBP – she took up a lot of ink in both – she wasn’t a peripheral character in the sense of someone you don’t see very much. Being an object was not due to a small peripheral role but to the way she was portrayed.

James and Sirius were cool because they were the best in the school at whatever they did. The bullying was incidental, and would certainly lose them cool if they went too far with it. I don't think that Fred and George were really considered cool until they started their resistance against Umbridge, and were very successful at opposing someone who was causing hardship to most of the school.

Probably James and Sirius could get with the occasional bit of serious bullying against someone as unpopular as Snape, but Lily wouldn't be the only one disgusted at them if they made a habit of it.

But there's nothing to suggest that he told her or led her to believe he'd stopped hexing Snape.
He made an off the cuff remark in SWM that he'd leave Snape alone if she went out with him. So, firstly, he was talking about leaving him alone at that time, he wasn't making a promise to never hex him again. And second, they didn't start going out until their seventh year, over a year after SWM. So I seriously doubt a small remark made during their fifth year would have been brought up when she decided to go out with him.

We're told she started going out with him after he (1)deflated his head a bit, which means he was less arrogant and (2) stopped hexing people for fun. It doesn't say he promised to stop hexing people, or she demanded he stop hexing people, it just says he did. He probably did it off his own bat to make her see him in a better light and Lily just noticed the change in him.
Also, it doesn't say he kept hexing Snape for fun, it says he didn't take it lying down when Snape hexed him at every opportunity. Ie, he defended himself.

There's absolutely nothing in the books to suggest that James was disloyal to Lily, or that he wasn't trustworthy. Infact, we're told quite often that James was an extremely loyal person, and that this was a quality that was just as important to him as any other, including bravery.



Yes, but this still doesn't explain why you keep comparing James to a serial rapist and murderer. It's a completely unfair comparison to make.
There are plenty of people who have respectable public images while doing minor misdeeds or acts of disloyalty in secret. If this is a comparison you want to make, then why not compare James to one of these people instead of an unbelievably evil, disgusting human being like Paul Bernardo.



Well actually Sirius suggests that Snape's love of the dark arts was a factor in James hating him and bullying him. When Harry talks to Lupin and Sirius via floo powder in OOTP Sirius says that "Snape was just this little oddball who was up to his eyes in the dark arts, and James - whatever else he may have appeared to you, Harry - always hated the dark arts".



Sectumsempra wasn't meant to be non verbal. Levicorpus was, but sectumsempra just said "for enemies" beside it in the half-blood prince's potions book, it said nothing about being non verbal.
And although I agree that the extent of damage was controllable if you knew what you were doing, I don't agree that it's mildest form would be the same as the spots on Marietta's face. Sectum means cut, sempra means always. So this doesn't exactly equate to leaving you enemy with spots on his face.

But the seriousness of the spell is only slightly relevant to Wickedboy's point. The point is Harry was trying to attack Draco, just like Draco was trying to attack him. But as we know Harry to be a good person, and as we know Draco changed quite considerably, these acts can be forgiven.



Yeah, but bad as James and Sirius' behaviour was, they never used the dark arts in their attacks, and both of them were essentially good people who improved with maturity. The same can't be said for Snape, who did use the dark arts, and didn't improve very much.

And I don't see how Regulus was one of the nicer characters in the books. He was a death eater. He played some part in murder and torture of innocent people. Just cos he was upset by Voldemort's treatment of Kreacher doesn't make him one of the nicer character in the books.

Also, could somebody give some examples of how the twins hexed people for fun like James and Sirius did. A few people have criticised them, so I assume there are plenty of examples of it. But I can't really remember it much. I remember them disarming Zacharias in the DA. I remember them shoving Montague into the vanishing cabinet. I remember them giving Dudley the ton tongue toffee. But I didn't see them as bullies at all myself.
I'm not saying it didn't happen, cos like I say, the fact that a few people have seen it suggest that it is there somewhere, but I honestly can't remember it much.



Is the B word a gender slur? I mean it's not really insulting the fact that the person is a woman, it's insulting the type of woman she is.
Like if somebody uses the N word toward a black person, they're insulting them specifically for their skin colour. But if you use the B word toward a woman, it's not their gender that you're insulting, it's something about their personality.
Like Molly was calling Bella a B, because she was evil and was trying to kill Ginny, Luna and Hermione, not because she was a woman.

The only (possibly) serious incident I can think of is when they put Bulbadox powder in Kenneth Towler's pyjamas, though that wasn't hexing. In the most part the twins go for things like turning Neville into a canary, which is funny for those around, but even the victim can laugh about after the spell ends.

Males in the series were generally not too concerned over any of the females problems and avoided the complexities of their emotions, imo. Ron, Harry, Lupin, Arthur all come to mind as avoiding or disdaining certain female emotions. That is stereotypical (and sometimes true) - but not all males respond in this manner. There were shared moments (Ron and Hermione at the funeral crying together and Lupin/Tonks holding hands), but girls were given a rather short shrift in canon by the males concerning their problems. Whereas the females were shown (imo) to be more attentive to the male's in this regard.

With a couple of exceptions, the males were highlighted as the more aggressive youths - a true stereotype to some degree. However to me, it was written not as something that is a function of society - but rather something that was to be seen as a highly condemnable "anomoly". Harry participated, but in this, he had a personal "anomoly" instead of simply being a part of society where this sort of real factor takes place. I grew tired and annoyed by Hermione's constant strictures on the topic.

Basically little things that I saw, but to this day I don't feel it is a big deal. It was a woman author and she wrote a great story overall, so I see this as a little thing. Blatant gender bias bothers me a lot, but there was not too much of that - and where it "could have been", I feel JKR mitigated to some extent.



Let's just agree to disagree on this since our views differ on every single point and conclusion.



Because the "B" word is an attribute. A racial slur speaks of an immutable trait. One does not have to be a "B" if they don't want - but you can't change your birthright. A more comparable example would be calling someone a "woman" in a derogatory sense - because that would be something that a female could not change about herself.



Point taken regarding Real Life. However, everyone in HP canon who vindictively and/or nastily used the word toward others in a derogatory sense knew exactly what it meant and were racists.



Any word can be offensive. If Ron called Harry a two-eyed, clockheaded, goof, Harry would be offended - even if he didn't know what a clockhead was. But there are certain words with meaning built in "mudblood" is one of them - a classic racist term in HP universe. Those who used it against others were racist in the storyline (unless imperiused).



No. It is not okay to adopt a derogatory, racist term of inferiority and proudly stand under it. "Mudblood" the word was created with a meaning - Hermione cannot adopt it and change the meaning for herself to mean "equal opportunity muggle born of full worth" because nobody using it will mean that except her. It is meant offensively by those saying it and so it remains. The problem is not Hermione's - the problem is with those using the word (especially if someone curses them to high heaven for using it.)

Your last sentence is not reasonable, imo. The word Mudblood is offensive precisely because those saying it mean it as a word of inferiority. It has nothing to do with what any listener thinks of themselves. It is what the speaker is saying about them. You don't validate the word by taking offense to it - you invalidate it by standing up against the prejudice being shown.



Yes - that was a complete injustice to women, imo. You don't adopt a negative slur connoting derogatory attributes on women and try to change the meaning into something 'good' so that it can be regularly used with merit. The whole point is that it should not be used in the first place, because it has a meaning already. If you want a word that means "Brains, Integrity, Tenacity, Courage and Happiness" then create one - but the "B" word is not that word. It already as a well established meaning in society and all using and hearing it are not going to think of this new meaning at all (except the author and a couple of readers perhaps).



No. You are grasping at straws in my opinion. Mudblood was negative and nasty to the same degree no matter who said it in canon. Draco, Snape, Voldemort, Bella, Lucius, Narcissa and Yaxley all used it in the same derogatory way, and it spoke to inferiority to the LISTENERS - which is what it was intended to do. None of these people fell into the category of "Mudblood" and so they were not hurt by their own use of it. None of these people would be able to call every muggle born in the universe "mudblood" - they wouldn't have the opportunity - so your point here is immaterial, imo. There are no degrees of bigotry in HP Universe; those who use the term in a derrogatory and nasty sense are bigots and those who do not are not.

I also agree there were other terms of bigotry (blood traitor) which these same individuals used. That was just as bad and there are no degrees involved, despite their using it against purebloods like themselves - they were not hurt by the term because it did not apply to them. They were making the point that Mudbloods and Purebloods who consorted with Mudbloods were ALL inferior and worthless - to the point in HP universe where they should be exterminated. There is no degree involved, none were saved.



You have not distinguished Dean's portrayal. All you did was explain the ways in which he served as an "object" in the story. We have no feelings or emotions, barely any personality or character about him. He was merely a "proxy" for a student - and a "proxy" for a boy who would be the one Harry was jealous of in relation to Ginny. He was a "proxy" for those students who had to go on the run. We found nothing out about his feelings on any of this - or his trauma and trials, we don't know what happened except for bare details - because his role was "objectified" to suit the story, imo. That is what I am talking about.

Ginny was mainly given the same treatment - but we got a little more because she was Harry's love interest. So we saw more interaction and heard her speak and actually found out some of her feelings and how things happened with her.

Azkaban's_Angel – will read the article. I did not intent to share the full extent of who PB was – just the image versus reality part (which is why I included a sentence of explanation). He came to mind because his image was inconsistent with his crimes (in a not judging a book by the cover sort of way). James changed his cover – just like Harry took the cover of a new book and put it over the pages of the HBP old one. To be truthful, James, Black and Snape are probably not good husband material – though they each have some qualities one would find in a good husband.



I would have liked to see Ginny as the seventh daughter of a seventh daughter become powerful – sure. And she always had talent – even something so mundane seeming as the musical box incident shows that she has the presence of mind to act when others don’t. Ginny was like Bellatrix, a skilled witch only on our side. I have compared her to Peter Parker before and figured that HBP would be her deciding her limits (ie With Great Power Comes Great Responsibility). It seems that any hero (even a minor one in the course of a story) needs to go through some moral dilemma or other. Ginny was never weak for her age but weaker than others due to her age and lack of magical training. She was finally strong enough not to have to put up with anything not to her liking (ie Fleur) so her journey would be deciding whether she should just because she can.

p. 108 (OOTP 6) – “There was a musical box that emitted a faintly sinister, tinkling tune when wound, and they all found themselves becoming curiously weak and sleepy, until Ginny had the sense to slam the lid shut; …”



Not at all! Love potions were recommended by Lockhart, Mrs Weasley admitted to using one, Fred and George sell them and even Hermione considers them harmless – so the disincentive against using them was not that all that strong. The only negative image witches associated with love potions were that only ugly girls used them. You can understand Ginny figuring that she deserved Harry more than Romilda or any of these Jenny come latelys because she had liked him longer – thought of him as cool whether the rest of the school did or not. Ginny was competing against other girls willing to resort to love potions:

pp. 176-177 (COS 13) – ‘… Why not ask Professor Snape to show you how to whip up a Love Potion! And while you’re at it, Professor Flitwick knows more about Entrancing Enchantments than any wizard I‘ve ever met, the sly old dog!’ Professor Flitwick buried his face in his hands. Snape was looking as though the first person to ask him for a Love Potion would be force-fed poison.”

p. 56 (POA 5) – “… Mrs Weasley was telling Hermione and Ginny about a Love Potion she’d made as a young girl. All three of them were rather giggly.”

p. 287 (HBP 15) – ‘Fred and George send them disguised as perfumes and cough potions,’ said Hermione. ‘It’s part of their Owl Order Service.’ / ‘It was all on the back of the bottles they showed Ginny and me in the summer,’ she said coldly.”

p. 288 (HBP 15) – ‘… and anyway, love potions aren’t Dark or dangerous –’

That Ginny was a person whose longing for Harry to like her and notice became very painful to witness at times (leading to both the “finally!” and “get over him!” groups) to feel sorry for her. It is believable for Ginny to believe that if she could get Harry to notice her that she would get her chance to prove to him that she could make him happy – for her to justify extreme measures because she believed that she would be good for Harry. There was also the small thing about the way her family treated her – it was hard for Ginny to get Harry to take her seriously as a woman when her family insisted on treating her like a little girl. I think this was both frustrating and embarrassing for Ginny because she wanted Harry to take her seriously and her whole family seemed to be working against her.

Trying to get Harry jealous with Michael did not work and backfired a bit when he hooked up with Cho minutes after they broke up (or started to). Dean had an advantage over Michael in that he shared quarters with Harry and Ron and a Common Room with all of them, so it would be easier for Dean to be in Harry’s face. I think that Ginny figured that using both strategies would work better than either alone and originally only planned to use love potion enough to make Harry more apt to notice her as being something else than a little girl and let jealousy do the rest.

Ginny had the best opportunity since she worked in the kitchen with her mother and sat with Harry et al at the Griffindor table. Ginny was also present when the twins told Harry how to get to the school kitchen. Harry’s favourite foods seem to be anything with treacle or sausages. Harry also has a history of trusting those who like him and distrusting those who don’t – and the Weasleys all like him. There would also be a certain amount of unevenness of effect because of the way the potion is administered (through food). One would expect a negative correlation between Harry’s degree of alertness and his obsession toward Ginny with the more alert Harry is (and aware of his surroundings the less he thinks of Ginny). One’s strongest impulses would come back first with weaker one’s later on.

Ginny is used to getting things through stealth – the most common example is teaching herself how to play Quidditch. She figures that there would be no down side to a love potion but finds Harry becoming less and less interested in her as a person as he becomes more and more interested in her. Ginny wanted the Harry she liked but got some person who loses interest in all things except for her but doesn't seem to know her any more. It would be sort of like what Harry went through with Cho with small differences. Harry decided he did not like Cho’s personality as much as he thought he would, and Ginny did not like Harry on potion as much as she liked the real Harry either. It was the realization that, sometimes, getting what you want is not worth it. Ginny, though she still cared for Harry deeply needed to know that she could not have him in a way which would be good for either of them.

Remember – a love potion is not like the imperious curse – the potion only alters what one desires – the curse makes one do things whether one wants to or not.

Ginny would make an attempt to seduce him in DH – which is why that kiss was “real” and the other ones somehow artificial. Ron would still get after Harry for breaking Ginny’s heart but Harry would be keeping Ginny’s secret because he understands how painful this whole thing was for her and would not wish to humiliate her further. Ron would accuse Harry of looking at Ginny and someone else – which would give the later charge Ron makes against Harry being a player (and a threat to him and Hermione) more legitimate.

Ginny would confess to Ron when he leaves Harry and Hermione in the tent – which would explain why Ron doesn’t fall for the locket’s personification of his fear because he knows the truth. It would also make more sense of the fact that Harry didn’t join the family at the end after Fred was loss because it would no longer be his place to be the shoulder Ginny cries on.



Ginny has a history of being excluded from their activities whether it is Molly telling her to help her in the kitchen or leave them alone or Ron telling Ginny to get lost the odd time. The only person who has ever made and effort to include Ginny was Hermione. Hermione grabbed Harry’s hand and Ron’s hand and got them all out of there when the wedding was attacked unexpectedly.

I don’t know whether Ginny would have preferred to go with the trio or whether she had already planned to organize something at Hogwarts with Neville and Luna.

Buffy showed no interest in Spike but Spike started becoming obsessed with Buffy and eventually they got together. Sam and Diane were from Cheers – Sam was crude and Diane was cultured – Sam was a Roger Davies and Diane was used to more patient and polite men. Someone was interviewed once saying that fans should not want them to get together because Sam was a Roger Davies, but just the tension of them almost getting together but not made fans want them to be a couple – and Carla want to vomit. The show (along with Married With Children) used to be on three times a day and my eldest insisted on watching it when I was trying to put my youngest to sleep (which was counterproductive). You need to snuggle with babies/toddlers on the chesterfield until they fall asleep and then you carry them to their bed.



The thing is that we don’t know what Ginny wanted – just what Harry wanted and what Hermione figured was appropriate.



I can't used more comparable examples on this board and get away with it, so we are stuck with the "B" word. Both Mudblood and the "B" word tend to be used when the person in question is getting too uppity (ie acting as if they have equal status to the insulter). Both mudblood and muggle-born have the same meaning - only one is used in polite company and the other not (unless you are racist like the Malfoys).

I think that Snape was more racist against Muggle than muggle-borns. It was a word that his friends used to insult Muggle-borns (or maybe even like Marvolo to insult anyone). There are men who figure that all women are the "B" word and others who think that only some are - the same rule should hold for Muggle-borns.

Well she seemed to have accepted that Harry was going without her when she gave him his birthday kiss as something to remember her by. If she had any plans to go with him she wouldn't have had to do this.




Well in fairness, I'd say it's obvious that Ginny would have liked to spend time with Harry rather than study. She didn't spend all those years wanting to be with him just so she could spend no time with him when it finally happened.
We know what Harry wanted, we can guess that Ginny wanted the same thing. We know that both Ginny and Harry knew realistically that they had to give up some of their quality time for Ginny to study, and as far as we know, Harry was fully respectful of Ginny's need to study and didn't pressurise her to stop studying for his own selfish desires.

Can you tell me where exactly did you read that Regulus killed or tortured someone ? He joined as a student, because it was "expected" from his parents, and V. was not so terrible violent at the beginning.
I don't think that the cuttings from the newspapers spoke about V. murdering people.

I understand that he was an intelligent and sensible boy who had his heart in the right place and began to work against V. once he found out how bad he was. He sacrifized himself to bring V. down, no other D.E. than Snape had done. Most of them were cowards and afraid of death the same as V.

Mrs. Weasley admitted to making a potion, there is no indication she used it, or whether it would have worked if she had (since she was a young girl at the time it seems likely it wouldn't have done).
Also Hermione doesn't say they are harmless, just that they aren't dark or dangerous, but as Tom Riddle Snr. and Merope found out they can do a lot of harm.

But the main thing about love potions is they can't produce real love, so the long term effects of using one are almost certainly going to be detrimental to the chances of forming a proper relationship because the victim of the love potion is highly likely to feel manipulated. It also wouldn't help Ginny with Harry anyway, because it is how she behaves around Harry that needs to be changed. Harry needs to see her true personality rather than a shy little girl to be attracted to her, and a love potion wouldn't change that. So I can't see Jo ever planning to use them in the Harry/Ginny relationship because it would seem tainted if it had been formed with the help of a love potion.

While I don't agree with any of your love potion theory (mostly because it takes only those parts of the text needed to 'prove' it and ignores a lot of other things), I think this part is just wrong. You have decided that this kiss is 'real' while the others weren't, but that isn't what is actually said in the book.

'She was the only real thing in the world' (Bloomsbury, p. 99) is in no way the same as saying 'this was the only real kiss they had shared.' What it actually suggests is that in that moment there is nothing else on Harry's mind: no Horcrux hunt, no jealous brother, no impending doom. Just Ginny. It doesn't say at all that this kiss is 'real' while the others were fake.

So in essence you are unhappy because she was not characterized as choosing to use her power for evil?



I don't really get the point of this in the storyline though. Would the point just be to give Harry yet another person to forgive? Ginny would come out redeemed and recognizing her wrong? Harry would be heralded as a boy that a girl (Ginny) would use any means to get because he was just that brilliant of a catch? Sort of another means of praising Harry in the storyline, is that what you thought?



Mudblood and Muggleborn do not have the same meaning. Just like all racial slurs do not have the same meaning as identifying a race. The added factor is the negativity, inferiority and natural bashing of the entire group of people that is carried within the meaning of the word. That is why Harry, Ron, the Twins, James and others got all bent out of shape when it was used. Snape, who in the end of the series recognized this, also got bent out of shape when it was used by Sirius' uncle in his headmaster's portrait. So you can see it from both sides. Those who rejected bigotry (either from the start or in the end) did not try to defend the word 'mudblood' with your reasoning - because they realized that it had an inherent meaning that moved beyond a petty insult or alternative way of denoting Muggleborns.



We don't have Snape's POV to know his feelings. We can only go by what he said in canon. We could say the same of Draco - we don't have his POV either to know his inner feelings. However, both showed this same type of bigotry in calling others Mudblood. They knew what it meant, they knew how it would be taken, they knew what those hearing it from their mouths would think. Unlike Draco, Snape went on to become a full fledged Death Eater. This group was actually putting the muggles and muggleborns to death. Draco stopped short of being able to immerse himself in that aspect. But Snape immersed. So I would say that canon provides that Snape was racist enough against both to join a group that exterminated them. He remained a loyal and faithful follower for quite some time.



But it doesn't. Look at it this way: Any Muggleborn witch can be a "B-Word"; but everyone who is a "B-word" cannot be a muggleborn. Muggleborns are born that way and designated by those prejudiced against them as "Mudbloods" - inferior, dirty and to the DEs - to be exterminated. The DEs were dedicated to this project. You didn't get killed merely for being a "B-Word" or for any other stereotypical attribute. You got exterminated for something you had no control over - your birthright. That is why the rule that applies to "B words does not apply to Mudbloods.

I didn't say he killed or tortured anyone. I said he had a part in killing and torture. He was a death eater, which means that at best he is guilty by association, at worst he killed and tortured himself. We have no idea either way, but I don't see much difference.

We also don't have any canon to suggest he only joined cos his parents expected it. He was clearly a personal fan of Voldemort and his deeds. He kept newspaper cuttings of him. His parents didn't make him do this.

We've also had this argument before about how bad Voldemort was when Regulus joined, and you know that I disagree with your interpretation. Regulus joined the death eaters in about 1977/78. This is only about two years before Voldemort's downfall. The wizarding war had been going on since the late sixties. I find it extremely hard to believe that the wizarding world weren't fully aware of how bad Voldemort was and what kind of things he was capable of when Regulus joined up. Especially considering Sirius described the first wizarding war as a time of fear and terror, Arthur tells us everybody's worst fear was seeing the dark mark over their house, and the whole wizarding world was so scared of Voldemort that they wouldn't even say his name.

We also have no idea how intelligent Regulus was, or how sensible he was.

I don't think any death eater can be seen as one of the nicest characters in the books, especially when we have so many people who risked their lives to fight them. People who are quite clearly alot nicer than Regulus IMO.

He didn't make Kreacher drink the Cave Potion for starters, as SO many had theorized he had done pre-DH. I say that alone makes him leagues nicer then ALL the DE. We don't know how involved with the murdering and torturing of innocents. From what was gathered from Jo, he got much like Draco and didn't actually have the stomach for killing and torturing.

Still the fact remains we have the Cave scene as told by Kreacher, that Regulus drank the potion and then gave the Locketcrux to Kreacher to take. Leaving Regulus behind to die, that's a lot more noble then any of the other DE can take credit for.

The fact that Regulus could figure out that LV had a horcrux, what that Horcrux even looked like and how to get to it and get it out AND make a fake seems pretty damn intelligent to me. Then we have Sirius opinion at least that Regulus was doing as his mother and father would wand and I think Sirius would know his own brother enough to give us something to go on.

I'm with Wendell on this one. All of the DEs may not have realized how horrible it would be to actually take a life when they first joined up. But most grew accustomed to it and remained. Some may not have ever been able to grow accustomed to it, but the alternative to just leave was always there. They would be hunted and killed by Voldemort for leaving - but I have to ask you, which is better? I'd rather be hunted and killed than carry on with the massacre - and they could try to go to Dumbledore - the other big leader for help. The solution in that situation is not to just carrying on madly killing people - and "not liking it" makes little difference to those slaughtered.

Regulus finally pulled himself up by the bootstraps and decided to go out and try to take Voldy with him (in a sense, by making him vulnerable). That was an excellent decision. That he didn't kill another while doing so (Kreacher) doesn't make him "nice" or "great" or "wonderful" - it makes him equal to all the others in the HP Universe who would never even consider doing such a thing - like his own brother. It means he made a morally good decision in the end, that's all. But his initial killing and torturing, maiming - or assistance in all of this through aiding and abetting (which includes simply saying and doing nothing to stop it) is still a part of who he was during the course of the series - and that pulls him out of the race for 'nicest' character - although I would agree it might give him the title of 'most morally improved among those who were death eaters' - not exactly a stellar tribute. .

I am still unsure what I think about JKR's heavy focus on the flaws of males over females. I am not certain she did this purposely. It may have simply been a decision to make the series more male centric due to her hero being a male.

I'm not saying he's not nicer than most death eaters. I'm saying he's not one of the nicest characters in the books. Just like I wouldn't say Draco was one of the nicer characters in the books just cos he got disillusioned with Voldemort, couldn't kill Dumbledore and helped save Goyle from the fiendfyre.

Also, Kreacher told Regulus that Voldemort left a locket in the cave, he told him how to get there and he told him about the potion that had to be drunk to get the locket. And the locket Regulus left was nothing like the locketcrux, so he probably just bought one or took one from home. So all Regulus figured out was that Voldemort had made a horcrux, which we're told was by hints that Voldemort had dropped.

And Sirius said "I bet my parents thought Regulus was a right little hero for joining up at first". So not only did he not actually know what his parents thought of it, but even if he did, it wouldn't show that Regulus joined up to impress his parents, it would only show that his parents were impressed when he did join up.
Sirius left home when he was sixteen too, well before Regulus joined up. So I doubt he had any contact with him after this considering how much he hated him.

I never got the impression that Sirius hated Regulus, it comes across more as exasperation at his foolishness. I am not even convinced he hated his parents, though he couldn't stand some of their attitudes and beliefs.

I didn't say it made him wonderful, I said it made him better then the other Death Eaters. Why you might ask? Because of how all the other DE's treat their housewlves. They beat them and abuse them in every way, it was taken for granted that Regulus would feed him the potion (to explain Kreacher's mental state in the books). Then we find out he didn't do that, in other words he DIDN'T abuse his House Elf. I mean look at Wizards that aren't death Eaters like Hepzibah Smith who barely acknowledges her own house elf unless she needs her to do something. Crouch who humiliates her Winky even though she is fiercly loyal to the family. Even the Twins and Hagrid think it's ok to let the House Elves go on being Slaves.

So when I see a Death Eater actually considering his House Elf's wellfare before his own I think he's a cut above the rest. That doesn't make him a Saint and let me make it clear that NO ONE in the Potter's book is a Saint. I never said he was the nicest either, just maybe better then most of the Death Eaters.

It also doesn't sound like Regulus lasted very long in Voldemort's order, certainly not high enough for Voldemort to ensure that Regulus was even dead or not. Otherwise Voldy may have discovered his Locket missing years ago.

What's more is he's a Slytherin acting very un-Slytherin like having taking the potion instead of making Kreacher do it. So yes I think it is a big deal that he did this, it makes him different. It also shows that not all Slytherins are out for themselves.

To me that is entirely zoned. So what he's nice to his house elf from home - if he's at the same time helping to kill all the muggleborns and muggles he and his buddies can get their hands on, I fail to see him as all that much better. I do think he made a better choice in the end in trying to thwart Voldemort. The bread crumb redemption grows tiring.

In complete and absolute fairness, we don’t know what Ginny wanted because her view on this issue is conveniently left out. It does put Harry in a better light, though, if Ginny wanted the exact same Harry wanted when Harry wanted it (whatever else may be going on in her life) - rather than if we see him as someone (as a previous poster said) “selfishly” pestering Ginny while she was trying to study. I know that there is a desire to present Harry in the best light possible. Still, what Ginny thought of all this is a very strange omission.

We both agree that Ginny had wanted Harry for an awful long time and would want to spend time with him. However, Ginny seems also to have a certain amount of fondness for Bill and credits her desire to attend Hogwarts to him. Bill is, in Harry’s own words “cool” – very handsome with cool (rather than second-hand) clothes – but also seemed to take his studies seriously enough to take good grades. (Didn’t JKR say that someone thought that someone else was rockstar-like?). Ginny seems to like Bill even to the point of standing up to her mother and calling her “old-fashioned” when Molly tries to “convince” Bill to cut his hair. Ginny’s desire to come to Hogwarts predates her desire to be Harry’s one and only by a few years – and so do her reasons for wishing to attend Hogwarts:

p. 238 (COS 17) – ‘I’ve looked forward to coming to Hogwarts ever since B-Bill came and n-now I’ll have to leave and – w – what’ll Mum and Dad say?’

p. 30 (COS 4) – ‘Ordinary Wizarding Levels,’ George explained, seeing Harry’s puzzled look. ‘Bill got twelve too. …’

p. 228 (POA 17) – ‘My diary. Little Ginny’s been writing in it for months and months, telling me all her pitiful worries and woes: how her brothers tease her, how she had to come to school with second-hand robes and books, how –’

p. 50 (GOF 5) – “However, Bill was – there was no other word for it – cool.”

p. 50 (GOF 5) – “He was wearing an earring with what looked like a fang dangling from it. His clothes would not have looked out of place at a rock concert, except that Harry recognised his boots to be made, not of leather, but of dragon hide.”

A couple pages after chastising Harry for “distracting” Ginny when she was trying to study, Hermione makes the following statement. It could be just in reference to Harry’s insistence that the HBP was a wizard – or it could be more general (ie referencing other instances in the books). Hermione seems to be accusing Harry as underestimating the “cleverness” of witches (the word clever means resourceful and skilled rather than just intelligent). In his rebuttal he points to Hermione rather than to both Hermione and Ginny. As I said before, Ginny is a very skilled witch, and it is noteworthy that Harry’s acknowledgement of that doesn’t come up during his conversation with Hermione.

p. 503 (HBP 25) – ‘The truth is that you don’t think a girl would have been clever enough,’ said Hermione angrily.”



Ginny seemed awfully concerned about Veelas when she was kissing Harry. Strange that Harry was more apt to run into Veelas at the wedding coming up than on his travels - especially since he would be travelling with Ron and Hermione.

I think that you are right to the extent that Ginny probably felt that it would be harder to follow Harry this time than the time in OOTP when they went to the Ministry. For one thing, Molly seemed to always want Ginny under foot (so going with Harry from school would be much easier than going with Harry from home). I think that Ginny accepted that it would be unlikely that she would be able to go with Harry – whether she wanted to go or preferred to pursue her lessons I don’t know.



Strange how much that happens. It is almost like a tag team. So who do you think Sirius Black is more like as an action hero in his youth - Arnold Schwarzenegger or Sylvester Stallone? I wonder if you two will agree on that as well.



There are more male characters than female characters in the HP series, thus, you see more flawed males because there are more males. However, if you look at the average flawedness of the male characters and the average flawedness of the female characters – do you still see a difference? Or do you see the female characters as, on average, containing less personal flaws?

Margaret Atwood has been criticised in the past for male-bashing for making her male characters too pathetic – though these critics seem to forget that her female characters tend to be equally pathetic. There is a lot of sexism in some of her books – can Atwood still call herself a feminist after writing them? Margaret Atwood, Margaret Lawrence, Gabrielle Roy and Mordicai Richler are authors people tend to be exposed to (or suffer through) in high school. How does the sexism in HP compare to the other books you have read in school?



Agree with you that witch emotions and problems are taken less seriously by the wizards in the books than wizard emotions and problems. It does go back to the idea that a good woman makes herself unproblematic to men. Agree with you also that the degree that various wizards respond this way is greater than their proportion in the Muggle world.

Lupin seems more of a comfort to women as a friend than as a husband – I think because friends do not come with expectations he can’t meet. He presumably comforted Dora after Black died and comforted Molly after the Boggart – yet seems totally unaware about how much Dora worries about his well-being. Ron sends Hermione crying to the biffy, not once but twice, because of something hurtful he said or did (the first time she is visited by the troll and the next time she is visited by Luna). Harry says that he wants to comfort Ginny when Ron’s reaction to her actions makes her cry, but can’t seem to do that in front of Ron. Later, Ginny is crying again over the loss of her brother, and he can’t comfort her in front of her family? Why can he kiss her in front of a crowd full of people but can’t comfort her in front of people?

p. 99 (DH 7) – “He thought that she might have succumbed, for once, to tears. He could not do anything to comfort her in front of Ron.”

I can’t remember how many wizards cry in HBP. Harry rages and carries on and gets very upset and feels very sorry for himself but does he cry? Snape cries as a small child but does he as an adult?

I don't like to hear you cry
You just don't know how deep that cuts me
So I will cover up my eyes
And it will go away

(Alice Cooper’s Steven)

If there's a tear on my face
It makes me shiver to the bone
It shakes me, Babe
It's just a heartache that got caught in my eye
And you know I never cry, I never cry




WickedBoy – your argument seems to be that JKR is not as bad as other authors that you have read in the sexism department – that the sexism in the HP universe was not as blatant as elsewhere? How much was aggression valued in the books? If something is blatant (the universal) you notice it more than if it is more subtle – but if it is subtle then, because you don’t notice it, then it seems not as bad. The more something is noticed, the more you can react to it. Sometimes with clues, they are present but the author is skilled at having them there so when you reread the book you see it coming, but you don’t see the plot twist coming the first time you read it.



There are people who consider all women the “B” word (or related words) and others who only consider a certain category of women to be the “B” word. Some consider anyone who doesn’t behave like Rousseau’s Sophie to be the “B” word. However, other people seem to have a more transient view of the “B” word – it doesn’t describe all women or the majority subcategory of women – but anyone who pisses them off for the short time that they are pissed off at them. Likewise, there are some wizards (like the Malfoys) who consider all Muggle-borns Mudbloods, there would be others who may only consider Muggle-borns who insist of participating in the Wizarding world Mudbloods – and others who only consider a person a Mudblood for a brief transient moment.

Same with clock-head to denote a person with glasses – because the word divides a people based on whether or not they were glasses – and then places a judgement on them based on the category they are in, rather than the person.

Even if one only uses the “B” word or “Mudblood” as an insult when you are really angry and want to say the most hurtful thing that you can think of, it says something about the person that they have such quick access to the word. If a word comes to mind readily, it means that one has been in situations where the use of the word is quite common place – and that says something about the places one hangs out. If a racist word is easy to access, then it shows the degree that one is exposed to racism. The more exposed to racism one is, the greater the risk becomes that it will be come to be seen as normal. It is when racist or sexist words are so common place that they are perceived as normal that one runs the risk of accepting the ideology behind the words without question.

JKR said that she took the word “mug” and softened it by making it into “muggle” – but the word “mug” is British slang for “simpleton” or “gullible person”. So Hermione basically has to choose between being referred to as stupid-born or dirty. Although one is seen as more polite than the other – both have the same function – to distinguish between legitimate witches and other females with magical powers. Strange that we never hear a wizard being directly referred to as a Mudblood (even though some wizards have muggle parents).

p. 110 (GOF 9) – ‘Hermione’s a witch,’ Harry snarled. ‘Have it your own way, Potter,’ said Malfoy, grinning maliciously. ‘If you think they can’t spot a Mudblood, stay where you are.’




Hermione can decide whether or not to be ashamed of having muggle parents. To find the word offensive means to her at least, that she is ashamed of who she is – which she is not. This is why Hermione says (pp) “Mudblood and Proud of it.”

About proudly adopting a racist slur – that means that you feel proud when you say it and expect the people you direct it against to feel less proud (and /or “know their place” – which is usually beneath yours) – that is all wrong – more wrong even that letting a word slip when one is very angry and feeling very humiliated.

As far as I am concerned, the Mudblood/Muggle-born designation was not the most racist thing out there in HP land – it was the portrayal of people like Hermione as weeds or some other sort of disease that destroys plants. There is something beyond – words like vermin, cockroaches or as a weed or plant disease out to destroy the red roses – as in the present HP series. And think of it, we pull weeds and prune our plants without guilt and think that we are doing a good thing by doing so – and comparing a person to that! This is where it gets dangerous – these are the words that legitimise extermination:

p. 205 (DH 13) - “Beneath the title was a picture of a red rose, with a simpering face in the middle of its petals, being strangled by a green weed with fangs and a scowl.”

pp. 16-17 (DH 1) - ‘Many of our oldest family trees become a little diseased over time,’ / ‘You must prune yours, must you not, to keep it healthy? Cut away those parts that threaten the health of the rest.’

p. 17 (DH 1) – ‘And in your family, so in the world … we shall cut away the canker that infects us until only those of the true blood remain …’

Canker: originally a form of the word cancer, ulcers lesion or infection which usually form around the ears or mouth, fungal disease or fungal rot or necrosis in plants, something which pervasively corrupts societal thought and leads to the destruction of a society;

The other thing that goes beyond the two words used to describe a person of Hermione’s birth is the idea that people like Hermione are innately dangerous – that they pose a threat to others and must be stopped before they cause irreparable harm to others. We may question the portrayal of wizards as a peaceful group under threat from the violent scowling Hermionites – but there are people who actually buy into that BS. Conceivably, there are people who read this pamphlet and think that they are protecting the innocent (or that those who hunt down Hermionites are protecting the innocent). And note that the helpless rose being attacked by the weed is female – and, presumably the call is out to the gallant sunflowers to show some chivalry by protecting her).

p. 205 (DH 13) “Its pink cover was emblazoned with a golden title: MUDBLOODS and the Dangers They Pose to a Peaceful Pure-Blood Society”

Hermione names her daughter Rose – a simple name with a lot of meaning behind it. The kids are Hugo (starts with same letter as Hermione and means intelligent) and Rose (starts with the same letter as Ron and means red – as in hair). The name Rose originally came from “hros” meaning “horse” (which is Ginny’s patronus) before it became associated with “rosa” the Latin word for the flower. And, finally, there is the sense that the daughter of a Hermionite can be a “rose” too – not just purebloods. But didn’t the rose need protection? Didn’t the rose have a “simpering” look on her face – is “simper” a word that one would use to describe a facial expression a male would make?

Fair enough. The original comment about Regulus that I had responded to had said the Regulus was one of the nicer characters in the books, I thought you were agreeing with this. Sorry bout that.
I agree totally that he's alot nicer than most death eaters, I just disagree with the original opinion of Vaudree that he's one of the nicer people in the series.

ROONWIT:


Well he did say that he hated Regulus and that he hated his parents.

VAUDREE:


Well yeah, that's why I said we can guess what she wants, rather than we know what she wants.
Though the fact that she ran across the common room into his arms kind of suggest to me that she wanted to kiss him.
Also, if she didn't want to spend time with Harry then she doesn't have to. He can't force his company on her.



Actually Hermione tells Harry off for distracting Ginny when she "ought to be working hard". She doesn't say Ginny was trying to study.
There's no suggestion anywhere that Harry was the only one to blame for distracting Ginny.



Yeah, we both have this thing where we tend to like and admire good people and dislike bad people. We're kind of weird that way.
Personally I think Sirius is nothing like either Arnie or Sly. I wouldn't insult him by comparing him to either.

I don't think it is. The comment is made in the context of something Hermione might be about to tell Harry off for, so in that context Ginny's thoughts aren't particularly relevant.
Hermione is the archetypal academically clever witch, and therefore someone who might be able to improve on potions and invent spells like the HBP author. Ginny may or may not be clever in that sense (though it seems unlikely she is as clever as Hermione in this sense), but in any case Hermione is a much better example to quote because Harry has seen her abilities demonstrated much more.
Could you back that claim up with a quote please?

OotP p104 UK Edition The Noble and Most Ancient House of Black -


Although he said that he hated them, I always rather felt he still cared about his family to a certain extent; that as you said it was a sort of exasperation and frustration, that he couldn't relate to Regulus or them. I mean they weren't all bad: they didn't support LV when they saw how far he was willing to go to achieve power, which does distinguish them from the likes of the Malfoys.

I am immersed in fantasy/sci-fi/magical lore/adventure on many levels, so it is at times difficult for me to separate out books. I think of everything; books, films, video games, comics, tv series, etc. So in the genre I have seen extreme sexism against females, mainly in older works (not that old 60's/70/early 80's even)and a marked decrease in it over time. I also note a build up of the reverse in some media. I'm not old enough to have lived through it, but I have read, watched and played the older media a lot. So my idea is that JKR's work falls into the latter category, not as blatant, not as extreme in any regard. I think the series showed a lot of flaws in males - and these were derided. But there were flaws in females too. And I also feel there were many more males, so that could account for it to some degree. But overall, the female flaws were not characterized as markedly horrendous as the male's were, except on rare occassion (Trelawny's drinking problem). Again though, one has to take into account that the hero was male, many of his mentors, friends and those he related to were male also, which was realistic. So I cannot say for certain that JKR was pointedly attempting to make a general "gender" comment here.



Harry avoids crying females as some men do - but not all men do. As you pointed out, JKR didn't have Lupin avoiding them until it became personal. Whereas Harry avoided a tearful Hermione in DH, walking around her in circles and even when he followed a tearful Hermione when young because he felt she needed him (in the scene where she ultimately casts birds at Ron), he is at a loss as to how to comfort her. This is kind of a common response - really Lupin provides the only counter I can think of. But I am not sure it was proportionately shown in the canon. Still - a small matter, I am not sure that was a decided generalization JKR was trying to show. She was merely writing in character for her particular actors based on how she saw them.

It wasn't that Harry couldn't comfort her in front of family - he had other things to do at the moment and Ginny was already being comforted. JKR wanted to get on with the close of the adventure tale, not write in a love story bit - that to me is entirely understandable. I was not at that point at all willing to sit through a scene with Harry comforting Ginny. . But even from an emotional standpoint - the ideal does not mean that Harry should add further comfort where someone is getting it already. That is an option, a real one, and presented (imo) as a fine choice for him to make either way. That Harry was not comfortable with crying women is not a marr on his character - he was equally unable to comfort "crying" men (who were crying on the inside). Look at his fine attempt with Lupin in DH - not too good. His attempt with Ron got him punched. So Harry was just not good at this - neither was Ron. And in all fairness, we don't know enough about the others to generalize - those I named were not shown to do it, but to be fair, that doesn't mean they wouldn't if the opportunity arose (Arthur, et. al.) So I overstated that point.



You want to see males cry? Why? You want to see females cry? Why? Is this proof of some kind of human element you feel is necessary? Harry shed tears at his nightmarish vision of his parents deaths. I can't recall if he cried when Sirius died, but I'd imagine he shed tears then too. He simply didn't cry every time the milk bottle over turned, but so what?



Sometimes, what is called "sexism" I do not see as such. The things that warriors do, for example, are not common to females in my experience. So that there are fewer, makes sense to me. Certainly there are females who are as BA as males in all types of media - but fewer, which is in line with other ideas. In school, boys are apt to break out with fists more often than females. I dunno why - ask a psychologist. But in any case, if this is reflected in literature, why would I think it sexist? But if you try to topple the warrior on account of this difference, well yeah, I'll notice that. I don't think it is any fairer than toppling youngster females of age 6 who love to where colored ribbons in their hair. Males don't - but that doesn't make it a bad things for little female children to do, imo, and I wouldn't knock them for it.



You are missing the point. I don't care what the person making the bigoted statement is Thinking. That is wholly irrelevant. It is the LISTENERS who matter. Those hearing the comment and what they make of it - as well as the person who it is directed to. The speaker knows EXACTLY how it will be understood and taken by the LISTENERS. Badly, very badly. They are being called inferior, dirty, unworthy and of little merit by the speaker - regardless as to what multitude of thoughts the speaker might have. The speaker knows this.

You didn't hear one person in canon say: "You are a filthy Mudblood, but other muggleborns are not filthy Mudbloods - you know, those who remain among Muggles" - nobody talks like that. That ideology never gets across - the only idea that gets across is the bigoted meaning the statement carries with it.



I am wholly uninterested in the psychology of bigots. Why, how or when they became one is their concern alone. I give no quarter to a bigot merely because he adopted the behavior and made it his own without thinking. He or she understood exactly what the behavior caused upon the very first use (or witness of it being used). At that point there was no more excuses. All those using the term in HP were bigoted when they directed it in a derrogatory way toward muggleborns - it is that simple to me.



I am sorry - I don't recall Herimone saying that ever. That would be horrendous - atrocious - inescapably and terrifyingly insane. The premise and conclusion are completely incorrect to me. To find the word offensive does not in any way, shape or form mean that the listener is ashamed of who they are. To me, that is ridiculous. That would be like saying that referring to one's wife as "my little beer servant" and the wife being offended means she is ashamed to be a woman. That makes no sense. Your theory has her walking around saying "I'm my husbands little beer servant and proud of it!" Negating all of her worth and value as an individual (not just as a woman, but as an individual).



I disagree and I feel you are highly mistaken. "The most" I won't quibble with - all examples of racism were equally bad, and calling people Mudblood was a blantant example of racism.



I agree that prejudice behavior, actions, thoughts and even dreams are all equally as bad as the statements of prejudice. What I disagree with is your trying to differentiate. As Snape said in DH: "Don't use that word!!!!" Snape finally got it - this blatant form of racism was as bad as all the rest.