JK Rowling (Harry Potter Author) gives Westboro Baptist Church the middle finger

[Gawdzilla Sama]

stfu Harry potter was a childrens book for young readers and snowhite is a fairy tale aimed at children not  ADULT or YOUNG ADULT  READING MATERIAL

The books were meant to be read one a year over seven years. So the final book would have been aimed at young adults.

However, all please note that Dumbledore is not "gay" in the books.

[Draconic Aiur]

The books were meant to be read one a year over seven years. So the final book would have been aimed at young adults.

However, all please note that Dumbledore is not "gay" in the books.

She just added it. if she wanted him to be gay why not just say it in the fucking book series.I felt betrayed because i felt attacked personally because Dumbledore to me is like merlin knowledgeable and kind and was the main badass cool good guy in the series and i wouldn't mind if he was gay its just like authors shouldn't go fucking shock people like that  and social justice warriors shouldn't go parading that they think i'm homophobic for being shocked. You guys on this site are a bunch of dicks.I am not a homophobe because i disagree with an author because im a big fan that thought Dumbledore was asexual .

[trdsf]

Still cant believe she tossed that Dumbledore's gay. When she did I was pissed, I mean the character was so good and marvelous and i grew up thinking that such a character would be like a dream mentor. And then she threw and ruined it in the name of political activistness. I don't know i felt betrayed.

I was pissed off because it smacked of cowardice.  It was nowhere in the books, and after the ink hits the page, it's a little late to start filling in backstory.  If she meant it all along, she should have written it in, and I can imagine either a) her deciding not to because she didn't feel like dealing with the ruckus, or b) being talked out of it by a Bloomsbury editor (who, if this is the case, fuck well should've been fixing the glaring plot holes rather than the character development).

And we know it's something she'd known all along, since she had to stop the screenwriter from tossing in a reference to a past girlfriend for Albie.  What the hell he thought he was doing making up backstory without asking her, I don't know.

It was five and a half fun books, though.  Pity it all fell apart.

[Mr.Obvious]

I was pissed off because it smacked of cowardice.  It was nowhere in the books, and after the ink hits the page, it's a little late to start filling in backstory.  If she meant it all along, she should have written it in, and I can imagine either a) her deciding not to because she didn't feel like dealing with the ruckus, or b) being talked out of it by a Bloomsbury editor (who, if this is the case, fuck well should've been fixing the glaring plot holes rather than the character development).

And we know it's something she'd known all along, since she had to stop the screenwriter from tossing in a reference to a past girlfriend for Albie.  What the hell he thought he was doing making up backstory without asking her, I don't know.

It was five and a half fun books, though.  Pity it all fell apart.

She just added it. if she wanted him to be gay why not just say it in the fucking book series.I felt betrayed because i felt attacked personally because Dumbledore to me is like merlin knowledgeable and kind and was the main badass cool good guy in the series and i wouldn't mind if he was gay its just like authors shouldn't go fucking shock people like that  and social justice warriors shouldn't go parading that they think i'm homophobic for being shocked. You guys on this site are a bunch of dicks.I am not a homophobe because i disagree with an author because im a big fan that thought Dumbledore was asexual .

You see I disagree with both of you. Fact is; Dumbledore was always gay. He had been from the start, so she didn't just 'add' it at all. She didn't do it to shock, she only revealed it after someone who asked her a relevant question in a Q and A. And guess what, if you get a Q in a Q and A you're supposed to supply an A.

And she didn't need to point it out fragrantly in the books at all. How was that supposed to come up anyways?
Harry: "Hey Dumbledore, are you excited about the quidditch match next..."
Albus: "I'm gay, Harry."
Harry: "Wait.. wha... Okay?"
Albus: "I like men Harry. I like sucking d*** and I like having my d*** sucked by other men."
Harry: "That's... That's okay headmaster."
Albus: "Yeah, that's what I make those men call me too."

Sexual preferences and oriëntation don't need to come up explicitely. That's not a reflection of the writer's lack of gut. It's the story's lack for the need for that revelation. Sure, it brings a new dynamic to Albus and Grendlewald's relationship, but you didn't need to know it to enjoy Harry's story fully. As a matter of fact, I find it completely normal that it never obviously surfaced in the story itself. About his own personal life, Dumbledore, never said much. So why would this be the exception?

[Hydra009]

And she didn't need to point it out fragrantly in the books at all. How was that supposed to come up anyways?
Harry: "Hey Dumbledore, are you excited about the quidditch match next..."
Albus: "I'm gay, Harry."
Harry: "Wait.. wha... Okay?"
Albus: "I like men Harry. I like sucking d*** and I like having my d*** sucked by other men."
Harry: "That's... That's okay headmaster."
Albus: "Yeah, that's what I make those men call me too."

My fanfic!  How did you know?!

[trdsf]

You see I disagree with both of you. Fact is; Dumbledore was always gay. He had been from the start, so she didn't just 'add' it at all. She didn't do it to shock, she only revealed it after someone who asked her a relevant question in a Q and A. And guess what, if you get a Q in a Q and A you're supposed to supply an A.

And she didn't need to point it out fragrantly in the books at all. How was that supposed to come up anyways?
Harry: "Hey Dumbledore, are you excited about the quidditch match next..."
Albus: "I'm gay, Harry."
Harry: "Wait.. wha... Okay?"
Albus: "I like men Harry. I like sucking d*** and I like having my d*** sucked by other men."
Harry: "That's... That's okay headmaster."
Albus: "Yeah, that's what I make those men call me too."

Sexual preferences and oriëntation don't need to come up explicitely. That's not a reflection of the writer's lack of gut. It's the story's lack for the need for that revelation. Sure, it brings a new dynamic to Albus and Grendlewald's relationship, but you didn't need to know it to enjoy Harry's story fully. As a matter of fact, I find it completely normal that it never obviously surfaced in the story itself. About his own personal life, Dumbledore, never said much. So why would this be the exception?

Well, obviously it wouldn't have been done like that, but there were backstory scenes in which it could have legitimately come up (no pun intended) en passant.  Additionally, every relationship she showed was a heterosexual one, so it's very easy to make an charge of heteronormativity here.

If she wanted it to be a character point, it's one she very easily could have made, even subtly.  I'm not a big fan of authors loading up the details outside of their books -- if they meant it, they should have said it.  The only point in favor of her not including it in the books is that it wasn't a plot point -- but if it's a character point that she wanted to make, she should have made it therein, not later, and if it wasn't important to the story, why bring it up at all?

[Mr.Obvious]

Well, obviously it wouldn't have been done like that, but there were backstory scenes in which it could have legitimately come up (no pun intended) en passant.  Additionally, every relationship she showed was a heterosexual one, so it's very easy to make an charge of heteronormativity here.

If she wanted it to be a character point, it's one she very easily could have made, even subtly.  I'm not a big fan of authors loading up the details outside of their books -- if they meant it, they should have said it.  The only point in favor of her not including it in the books is that it wasn't a plot point -- but if it's a character point that she wanted to make, she should have made it therein, not later, and if it wasn't important to the story, why bring it up at all?

Well yeah, she probably would've handled Dumbledore's coming out scene with more grace than I did if she'd decided to put it in. And I don't think Dumbledore being gay is that much of a character point even, to be honest. It sheds more light on the relationship between him and Grindlewald, but that's about it. Dumbledore's sexuality is one of the least interesting things about him, in fact. More interesting is why he would keep that to himself, like so much else. And that's a facet that the last book really delves into. Dumbledore, the way I see him, is a very conflicted character. Guilt over his youthfull actions leading to the death of his sister and his selfish quest to fullfill his own desires to shine and be admired have scarred him emotionally for life. He sees himself as one of the least worthy people alive and tries to shy away from both positions of power and fame. His experiences in Godric's Hollow have affected him so much that he denies his own desires and put's his own happyness last.
Which by the way could be a reason as to why he at first 'appeared' asexual and why almost nobody, not even in the Harry-potter-universe, knew he was gay. He doesn't persue a happy, loving relationship because his youthfull infatuation and quest for happyness resulted in so much grief. So the character-point isn't his homosexuality, it's his fear to pursue his own desires and the consequent neglect of them.
Of course, that's partly speculation on my part. But it's fun to analyze and speculate.

As to why bring it up after, at all? When asked a Q in a Q and A you reply with an A.

[Draconic Aiur]

never was mentioned in books wheres your proof.

[Mike Cl]

never was mentioned in books wheres your proof.

If it was not mentioned in the books and there is no proof, why are you getting your panties in a twist?????

[Gawdzilla Sama]

She just added it. if she wanted him to be gay why not just say it in the fucking book series.I felt betrayed because i felt attacked personally because Dumbledore to me is like merlin knowledgeable and kind and was the main badass cool good guy in the series and i wouldn't mind if he was gay its just like authors shouldn't go fucking shock people like that  and social justice warriors shouldn't go parading that they think i'm homophobic for being shocked. You guys on this site are a bunch of dicks.I am not a homophobe because i disagree with an author because im a big fan that thought Dumbledore was asexual .

Then why are you a homophobe? /puttingwordsinyourmouthforachange

[Mr.Obvious]

never was mentioned in books wheres your proof.

Proof of what? That he's gay? The person that imagined, created and owns this fictional character says he is.

That he's always been gay? He's never been mentioned as belonging to a different group of sexual attraction, making gay dumbledore the default dumbledore. And not only that but if trdsf's story is true it shows she decided his sexuality long ago.

Proof that she didn't make him gay just to get on the social-justice bandwagon? Where is your proof that she did? Not once did she make a big deal about his sexuality, one way or another. If she had created him with the idea of rocking The boat, she could and would've made it a bigger deal. She would've pointed it out on her own, not waiting for someone to ask it.

[AtheistLemon]

Well, obviously it wouldn't have been done like that, but there were backstory scenes in which it could have legitimately come up (no pun intended) en passant.  Additionally, every relationship she showed was a heterosexual one, so it's very easy to make an charge of heteronormativity here.

If she wanted it to be a character point, it's one she very easily could have made, even subtly.  I'm not a big fan of authors loading up the details outside of their books -- if they meant it, they should have said it.  The only point in favor of her not including it in the books is that it wasn't a plot point -- but if it's a character point that she wanted to make, she should have made it therein, not later, and if it wasn't important to the story, why bring it up at all?

We're arguing about Dumbledore being gay in a book series called Harry Potter. Of course it's not going to be mentioned that Dumbledore's gay when the books aren't even about him. No one in Harry Potter says they're straight randomly, so why should J.K Rowling have to write down that a specific character is gay? Orientation really isn't a good character trait, just as race isn't a good character trait if oppression is no longer present in their culture.

It's not like Rowling wanted Dumbledore to have a romantic relationship throughout the course of the story, so why should it matter?

[drunkenshoe]

Thinking that it is something forced that a book character is defined gay later by his creator, is like thinking it is forced that the writer said the character is having sex. If you think it's something more or less than it is, it only means that your norms are set by heteronormativity. And that's how you percieve anything from the outside world, by the categories developed in your frame of mind. Because you automatically assumed he was heterosexual, while there was not one thing pointed out about Dumbledore being heterosexual. People assumed he was, because it wasn't pointed out otherwise. He wasn't made into some 'other'. And that is the first bullshit here.

Other bullshit is that Dumbledore is a very strong, solid character in the whole story; he is a genius, he accomplished a lot in his life, he is great authority, the saviour, almost the 'castle' of Hogwarts and because of that people tend to fit that in to a heterosexual male norm. The best Wizard ever lived has to be a heterosexual male, eh? Right.

This happens also when a director casts a nonwhite actor or actress to play a celebrated fictional character. Because people almost always likely to think -including nonwhite and gay people- that celebrated heroes or protagonists are white and heterosexual. That bullshit has to go.

What's more, if they are pointed to be something different than that stereotype, they do not even make to be the celebrated character of masses just because they are gay or nonwhite. So actually, Rowling probably chose to put no clues for his homosexuality or any romantic relationship as being subtle in putting his homosexuality, so Dumbledore would easily be taken as the strong character he is without any prejudice. Otherwise people wouldn't see him as the anchor of that as he is. You seriously think she doesn't know that?

(But personally I think his first love was Gellert Grindelwald and at that young age, the conflicts they went through about magic people and muggles and the Grindelwald's obsession with power is a strong force in Dumbledore's life to fight against racism of the magic people. He is the only character we know he had passionate relationship. Love and hate. It must be horrible for Dumbledore that has to confront him in the end and probably postponed it for a time. So much that what came out from those conflicts became his obsession, why he led a life of the sort and saw anything expandable in the path way of revolutions. Even a boy's life who saw him as a father figure. Dumbledore is an idealist and a real revolutionist in the old school sense who are tied to their notions and ideals with their whole lives and take their life force from that fight, see everything in that light. Room for nothing else.)

Rowling created a world and a struggle based on discrimination of the fundamental sort and build a genius premise to show that to children -and to adults- between a fantastical race and a real one. It's basically the Nazi Germany. The whole book is about racism, discrimination and bigotry. Judging a group of people 'inferior' because of the natural traits they bring from birth. And people read that if you put it the way she did. Adult or children. They do not read some novel that shows the struggle between real world human races. We have hundreds of them. How fucked up the world is about this subject, besides the ongoing politically correct convictions of the Western culture. Racism is everywhere and everybody is racist up to a point. (If you are so fucking sure that you are not, take the Harvard test(s) -racism and sexism...etc.- and be honest to yourself. You'll be very surprised. More than 80% of the people who took that test reported to be racist against nonwhites, including nonwhites. Sexism test results are not that different. It's briliantly designed and yeah it sucks. And yes if you are not aware of this ancient bullshit ruling the world, probably you are white and male.)

I do not automatically think that anyone I meet in real life is heterosexual, because I don't expect anyone to act in some stupid stereotype. because I don't. Why would I assume a fictional character to be one? I have known gay men that looked and acted more 'straight' or 'manly' than the average John and I have known gay men more 'feminine' and 'domestic' than a prize winning Suzie home maker. They are all very different people, all they had in common was that they were gay. That's it. Being gay or nonwhite or any gender don't define somebody's personality, has nothing to do with their accomplishments. It's like saying "Dumbledore's eyes are blue?! How is that possible I am sure they were brown! They have to be brown!"

Besides, characters are alive in their writers' heads.  There is no such thing Rowling 'should have done' or 'written' to prove anything to anyone. She doesn't have to prove anything. She created a world and rest is 'came' with it. There are probably a lot of details about other characters Rowling didn't share with readers, or even didn't put in the books.  This is the thing with writers. Same with Ursula Leguin as she has said about 'creating' her characters. That they come out of nowhere and tell their story to you that sometimes they do thing even their writers didn't expect. Well, this is not one of them, but pretty much natural as the way it goes.