J.K. Rowling reveals in a recent interview that in addition to being gay, Dumbledore also roots for the Mets, and supports abortion in the choice-life controversy. And prefers cats over dogs (and phoenixes over both of them). Conservative Yankee fans and dog affectionados everywhere are outraged at this sudden revelation and point out that it contributes not at all to the rich tapestry of Harry Potter canon.
I love you Cless.
:kissy:
I think that J.K. Rowling just said it to keep the hype and controversy up. I don’t think it was a good choice on her part, because it isn’t important to the character. But thats just the thing, if it isn’t important enough to put it in a book, why mention it now? For the reason stated above really. And it doesn’t make him a freaking pedophile either. Where is that even coming from?
Pro-choice? I think it’s time for me and my HP books to have a fireside chat.
Not to mention all the witchcraft
Slash fanfiction.
Don’t listen to this insane woman! :eek: She doesn’t know what she’s talking about!
How many new ones since the announcement?
It fucking pisses me off that people are still so… retarded, because I don’t know how else to put it, about homosexuality. I don’t even like labeling it, because I think people love people, not any certain type.
I don’t know what else to say right now besides fuck you.
I am of the opinion she did it “for the lulz” and that many “lulz” will be obtained from the bunch of shit fanfiction that bursts out with this.
Besides that, I don’t see how this adds or takes away from the character. Since it does neither, leaving it out makes sense, there’s no reason for it to be in there. And, as the fifth book taught us so well, if there’s no reason for a thing to be there, it shouldn’t be there.
I still think this is hillarious though.
It changes the story not at all and is entirely in keeping with the author’s inclusive spirit (werewolves? Oh my!). Kind of cool to tweak the noses of the same folks who made a hullaballoo about witchcraft.
I don’t think Dumbledore was so nice to Harry because he secretly wanted to screw him. Just that gay men in general seem a little nicer, kinder, more yielding than straight men(no sexual innuendo intended).
Though, I know a lot of people get pissed if you say there are personality differences between gays and straight. Even though there obviously are.
There’s a rather large difference between saying someone is gay and saying they’re a pedophile. I should hope Rowling never intended him to want to “screw” Harry.
I don’t know what kind of gay people you’re talking to, but the gay guys I know always judge people and are only nice to attractive people.
Yeah, I don’t really think there’s evidence that being gay makes you nicer or more yielding than if you were Jewish, or bald, or receiving an annual salary above the national average. It’s easy to be biased from limited personal experience.
And in related news- The sun is hot.
Yeah it is
Pretty darn hot.
I love you Eden. :3
It’s easy to be biased from limited personal experience.
Yeah, it is. That being said, Dumbledore being gay didn’t really surprise me, though I have no idea why.
The whole thing is really a copout since she revealed it after the novels ended. It actually would have had an impact if, say, Dumbledore came out in 6th or 7th novel.