Dubmledore comes out, or is it more appropriate so say that Rowling outed him? The Potter series deals movingly with the age-old saga of the force of light and love that values each human life vs. the powers of darkness and inhumanity, including those who would degrade someone for being different. No matter, expect Christian conservatives, not at all happy with Potter-mania to begin with, to go a bit bonkers:
Not everyone likes her work, Rowling said, likely referring to Christian groups that have alleged the books promote witchcraft. Her news about Dumbledore, she said, will give them one more reason.
Burn the witch!
More. It's not only the rightwing that's reacting with snarky homophobia. Check out the festival of stereotypes Rowling's announcement has unleashed over at gossip site Radar and at left-friendly Salon .
21 Comments for “Revered Headmaster Outed”
posted by tim on
Actually I think go “a bit bonkers” is a bit harsh since Rowling also said:
It will be interesting to see how they react to both statements.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/arts/main.jhtml?xml=/arts/2007/10/20/bopotter120.xml
posted by Craig2 on
Yes, but why did she acknowledge it *after* she killed the character off in the books…?
Craig2
Wellington, NZ
posted by Samantha on
A main character in the Harry Potter series is gay. And yet, I still had to face my family this past weekend and be corrected on using the words lesbian or gay in front of the children, because they might “repeat” the words elsewhere. So we can get integrated into all the books and films we want, and straight folks can get all lovey dovey over the good gays like Ellen all day long,…but remember that when push comes to shove, we’re still identified mostly in sexual terms, still identified as something exotic, and still seen as a strange alternative which may warrent parental monitoring, moral judgment and careful judiciating. NOW you know how important gay marriage is. For those gays who feel it’s a contract that’s not all that important to them personally…know that until we have equality and parity with straight couples, we have no leg to stand on. And I am also denied a rebuttal to my family. But when legal rights are present, when equality exists, my brother cannot ask me to sit at the back of the bus, even in his own house, by outlawing the very words which identify me, and represent so many gay, unmarried parents. He cannot claim fear over getting a call from the school about the word, or any number of scenerios.
Gays should not fool themselves and become complacent, feeling satisfied that their interaction with most people is pleasant enough, and that we have sufficient rights to function in the straight world. No right which is not rooted in legal cement is worth its salt. If it can be taken away with the mood of the community, the church or the state, or come with astericks, it is worthless. We live openly only at the pleasure and tolerance of the majority. As that tolerance level fluctuates, so do our illusionary rights.
posted by John on
Gay marriage will not protect us from the cultural alienation which Samantha refers to. Her brother’s attitude, like those of many who know someone gay, will not be shifted by the mere legalization of our relationships.
I say this as one who, though he supports gay marriage knows its limits of changing theharts and minds of the people who live and work with us. Some will respect our relationships even if the state chooses not to recognize them. Others will shun us even if the state confers marital rights on us.
The alienation which Samantha refers to can only be defetaed by confronting the censorship (and self censorship) head on, in our schools and in the community at large. Removing the heteronormative assumptions grounding our sex education programs (both, “safe sex” and “abstinence-only”) in our public schools, supporting the gay-straight alliances that meet before and after school, and fighting censorship would directly contribute to this quest for cultural (and not just legal) dignity.
posted by John on
and back to the topic about Dumbledore’s outing.
Did anyone notice how Rowling immediately answered the question concerning Dumbledore’s love life by suggesting it was tragic and then explaining that by outing him as gay?
That might not have been her intention but she linked being gay with having a tragic love life.
posted by Matt on
Kind of a missed opportunity here – it would have been much better if she’d outed him either in the books or during their publishing.
posted by Bobby on
I’ve read all the books. If Dumbledore is gay, then Rowling certainly did not mention it in her books. I find it shocking that the Harry Potter series has racial minority witches and warlocks, and yet no gays.
But that’s ok, I still love those books. The last book does mention a friendship of Dumbledore and someone else, someone who later became a great enemy.
“but remember that when push comes to shove, we’re still identified mostly in sexual terms,”
—Well, visit the Folsom street fair, and your average gay pride parade, and you’ll see why. Watch Queer As Folk and you’ll think that the average gay man has sex with everyone and everywhere. Watch lesbian or gay comedians and see them do jokes about sex.
In fact, a lot of gay men relate to one another through sex. It’s a lot easier to fuck somebody than to get to know him.
The important thing is not how others define you but how you define yourself.
“my brother cannot ask me to sit at the back of the bus, even in his own house,”
—Actually, he can. It’s his house, it’s his property, he can tell you not to bring a gun, not to smoke, not to be gay in his presence. And you can choose not to come to his house. So unless he’s calling you a dyke everyday, I would try to mantain a close relationship with your brother. Madonna wasn’t right, she said “your family are your friends,” but it’s not true, friends come and go, but family stays forever, ideally at least.
posted by John on
“So unless he’s calling you a dyke everyday, I would try to mantain a close relationship with your brother. Madonna wasn’t right, she said “your family are your friends,” but it’s not true, friends come and go, but family stays forever, ideally at least.”
No one who is unwilling to accept you as you are is unfit to be considered family.
“So unless he’s calling you a dyke everyday, I would try to mantain a close relationship with your brother.”
In choosing to treat her relationship as something dirty and unmentionable Samantha’s brother treated her as if he would have called her a “dyke.”
posted by Brian Miller on
I still had to face my family this past weekend and be corrected on using the words lesbian or gay in front of the children
My sister and (now ex-)brother in law tried the same thing with me at family gatherings. I simply replied that if they were free not to show up at family events I’d be attending or, if other family members were going to impose those rules, they could enjoy family events without my presence.
They got the message pretty quickly.
Hilariously enough, sis ended up divorcing my now ex-brother-in-law because he was cheating on her with a dozen different women (that he could remember). Now he gets the kids every other weekend, in his dingy smoke-filled apartment where they sit and play video games all day.
Sis moved in a new boyfriend before the divorce was final, shacking up with him immediately, and has no immediate plans to marry the guy.
Yet these two folks were quite willing to lecture me on how they didn’t want their children “corrupted” by their monogamous uncle saying “gay” — while they were busy living The Jerry Springer Life.
I daresay the average monogamous gay guy or gal would be a much better role model than those oh-so-moral folks — and whenever they get a bit snippy at me, I’m happy to remind them of that fact.
Moral of the story: Nobody will stand up for you except you.
posted by Marc on
The important thing is your acceptance of who you are. It is naive to think everyone is going to like the idea that you are gay – even in 2007 when we have made important strides in making ourselves more open. I tell that to anyone who is struggling with the decision to tell their family, friends, etc. If your sister, brother in law find oyu unacceptable for political, religious or even just personal reasons, they are entitled to that opinion. You cna try to calm what ever fears they have, but some people simply have their opinions based on ideals that don’t stand up to reason. So be it. The whole penis/vagina thing doesn’t make me too comfortable either.
posted by ashpenaz on
Incidentally, it is supposed that Sirius Black is gay. I think it’s great she doesn’t spell these things out. Dumbledore doesn’t hide anything, but he doesn’t feel it necessary to put a pink triangle on his wand. What’s he supposed to do? Shout “Expecto Patronum, girlfriend!” (wand across chest, snap!)
Incidentally, when I worked at Borders, I played Dumbledore at the Potter release parties. How ironic. Or something.
posted by Bobby on
Sirius Black is not gay, he’s excentric. Just because a character doesn’t have a relationship doesn’t mean he’s gay. Otherwise, we might as well say that Voldemort is gay.
“In choosing to treat her relationship as something dirty and unmentionable Samantha’s brother treated her as if he would have called her a “dyke.””
—I don’t know how close she is to her brother. But I know that family is the one that supports you when you have a financial crisis, visits you when you’re sick, and are willing to sacrifice themselves for you. The fact that Samantha’s family actually has a relationship with her means they care about her, even if they don’t accept a part of her, which is her sexual orientation.
posted by Michael on
No one who is unwilling to accept you as you are is unfit to be considered family.
This is a foolish statement. My sister is a drug addict. The fact that I want her to change or don’t want her snorting heroin in front of me makes me unfit to be her relative? I think not.
And while I am not specifically comparing drug addiction to homosexuality, I do not doubt that in her mind her behavior is no more or less self-destructive than my gayness. We can quibble about whose viewpoint is more valid, but the fact remains that family does not have to accept you at all; they have to love you.
Also, from Samantha’s anecdote, we have no idea how old those children are. I would have no problem refraining from using the words “gay” or “lesbian” around four-year olds, who have little concept of sex or relationships or the link between them. That’s a far cry from calling your sister a “dyke” or treating her as dirty. It’s called navigating difficult family, cultural and political waters.
posted by Bobby on
Samantha needs to realize that in some families, they don’t simply reject your sexual orientation, they reject you completely. They kick you out of your house, they say they never want to see you again, they cut you out of the will, out of their lives, if you have nieces or nephews, you might not be able to see them until they’re old. And by then they might be brainwash to hate you.
So yes, there’s a big difference between rejecting a person and a sexual orientation.
posted by Brian Miller on
This is a foolish statement. My sister is a drug addict. The fact that I want her to change or don’t want her snorting heroin in front of me makes me unfit to be her relative? I think not.
A ridiculous comparison on 1,000 different levels.
Number 1: The obvious one, homosexuality isn’t drug use.
Number 2: The second obvious one, which is that knowing that uncle Bernie is gay isn’t equivalent of Uncle Bernie having sex in front of you. . . any more than knowing that Aunt Bernice uses pot is the equivalent of her smoking pot in front of you.
Number 3: It still isn’t any of your business what the drug-using or gay relative does behind closed doors outside of your home.
while I am not specifically comparing drug addiction to homosexuality, I do not doubt that in her mind her behavior is no more or less self-destructive than my gayness
That’s fine.
However, you’ve got to make a choice. Are you willing to accept the “love” of people who don’t love an important part of you — your family life?
If you are, I pity you. Life is too short to accept the contempt of others who don’t love you, but merely love the idea of making you into what they think you should be.
I would have no problem refraining from using the words “gay” or “lesbian” around four-year olds, who have little concept of sex or relationships or the link between them.
Me too.
Of course, I wouldn’t hesitate to call my partner “uncle Brian’s husband.” And I am betting your family not only would complain about that — but also wouldn’t allow your partner to even show.
Perhaps, in a concession, they’d let him show but only as a “friend.”
Like I said — life is too short for that.
Family is chosen to a large extent when you’re an adult — you can either indulge the stupidity of people who are genetically related to you, or you can seek out the companionship of people who accept you as you are. . . while letting the genetically-similar people know that they’re welcome in your life once they stop trying to change or denigrate your life.
posted by Michael Miller on
Accusing Rebecca Traister’s Salon article of “snarky homophobia” and being a “festival of stereotypes” is simply false. Traister matter-of-factly runs down the evidence from the books that Dumbledore was gay; draws parallels between Rita Skeeter’s scurrilous book and contemporary homophobic media rabble-rousing; compares the inclusion of a gay character to Rowlings’ deliberate inclusion of characters of varied races, classes and cultures; cheers when a nine-year-old happily passes on the news. What more do you want? Or did your analysis of her article begin and end when you characterized Salon as being “left-friendly”?
posted by Bobby on
“Are you willing to accept the “love” of people who don’t love an important part of you — your family life?”
—They do love you, just not all of you.
And frankly, I’d rather have a family that I fight with than no family at all. My parents have never agreed with my homosexuality, although they’ve learned to tolerate a bit of it. The fact is they have supported me my entire life, financially, sometimes emotionally and I could never betray them.
In fact, I call them 5 days a week and enjoy our conversations very much. This must sound shocking to you, I know people who rarely talk to their parents, but among hispanics the idea of telling your family to go to hell is unheard off. Maybe in your culture it’s ok.
posted by Brian Miller on
They do love you, just not all of you.
Nonsense. It’s like saying “I really like how you sing, darling, but boy are you an ugly motherf*cker!”
Real love is unconditional.
posted by Samantha on
Very interesting responses. Thanks also Brian, for sharing your story. (Sorry I haven’t checked back here, but this site usually moves slowly and I didn’t think there’d be any posts.) Yes, it was a surprising, new encounter at my older brother’s house, since I’ve been out for several years. The kids are getting to be school age. And they repeat everything they hear, so he had that concern, wholly misplaced in my opinion. And certainly this was one of those moments that represented the glass ceiling for gays. Yes I love you, yes I accept your orientation to a degree, I accept your partner if you have one, but you belong to a minority group which is unrespected and unequal in our culture. Therefore dear sister, you come with astericks.
My original point is that we need to remove the astericks. I don’t agree with John who asserted that gay marriage will not protect us against cultural alienation and that we should go the hearts and minds route. I maintain we need to do both. Did black americans wait for their Alabama neighbors to like them before they obtained legal rights? Did handicapped people think, oh it’s not necessary to get any protections built into the law because folks will lets us park right up front and employers will hire us in droves? Are immigrants right now trying to get voters to love them? – Or rather are they attempting to gain legitimacy through the political and legal process? Culture does not work the way you think. If you start out with an unlevel playing field, there’s no way to win. And each successive generation learns that there is a group of people less than the ideal, deserving of less rights than us, which ultimately ensures the status quo. You might say, well the younger generation supports us and is more tolerant. Tolerance goes as the wind blows, and these kids will be adults soon enough, with identically-painted houses, jobs in the establishment, and soccer ball stickers on the back of the SUV. Suddenly the open-minded 17 year old becomes a “values” voter, who will sit on that jury and judge your life, and whether that life deserves the same legal protections they enjoy. Try and get “Heather Has Two Mommys” in the school library with that crowd. You’re simply fooling yourself.
As to the question of love and acceptance within family, of course I’m on the side of acceptance along with love. And when I say acceptance I mean open respect and acknowledgment. That’s what I expect. True understanding, however, is another matter. Because unless they walk in your shoes it’s unlikely they’ll completely understand. And actually, many of our family members have had youthful experiences or thoughts, or have been unusually close to a friend. They can draw on that. Unfortunately if the culture tells them not to think about it, to banish if from their minds because it’s outside the norm, then they are robbed of that. Which brings us back full circle to realizing it’s the overall culture which needs to be changed. And we do know how to do that. We come out, we live healthy lives, and seek equality through the political and legal process, state by state. Then, rinse and repeat.
🙂
posted by Bobby on
“Real love is unconditional.”
—That does not negate the posibility of being loved even if they don’t agree with every part of you. I have friends that I love, do I love every part of them? Of course not! Nobody does.
My best friend in the world did not agree with my homosexuality when we first met. We used to have friendly arguments about what was natural, unnatural, etc. But eventually we ended up liking each other so much that we became best friends, and now not only does he think homosexuality is natural but he supports gay marriage.
posted by Samantha on
Bobby, I’m glad that your friend who started out not agreeing, began to accept you. But to me, that’s icing on the cake of life. There is, or should be, always a core group who accepts you unconditionally and centers your world – making he rest bearable. Maybe that’s a group of close friends, or maybe it’s mom or dad, or brother/sister. Everyone else – the rest of the relatives, co-workers, etc, are people you can decide to be patient with, or not, depending on how you feel about them. I choose to deal with my brother, but only because mom and dad have been so great. I too receive financial and emotional support. They have been super. In fact, it was my mother who first uttered the “L” word in my brother’s house – the word which precipitated a loud, multi-room fight. If they were ALL not in my corner, I would feel much less generous toward my older brother. I might have even moved away years ago, who knows.
I tried to explain to my brother that despite his assertion that “it’s nothing personal,” it was exactly that. It described me. It wasn’t something I did, it was something I was, and could not change. I made an analogy – suppose we were a very waspy (and bigoted) family, with one in-law perhaps, who was a jew. Should we outlaw the word jew, or say it in hushed tones? Should we be afraid, as he was, of my nephew going to school and asking a schoolmate if he was a jew? If a child does not understand a word, or uses it without context, then the word should simply be explained to him or her, not outlawed. There are children at school with same-sex parents, and that word is normal to them.