OMG! Dumbledore is GAY?!?

[danadoll]

Why do people have to be that stupid, though? Here's an idea...If they don't like the books or what they have in them...Don't buy them, don't check them out of the library and shouldn't let their children watch the films.

Dana

[ABMAC]

As for folks saying they like their story book characters asexual, guess what....You're all missing something...The fact that almost everyone of them throughout history is portrayed as heterosexual! Were Snow White, Sleeping Beauty, Cinderella, The Little Mermaid and any other storybook lass and their respective princes living "happily ever after" together, all asexual? Something to think about.

All of the characters you cited fell in love in their respective stories. What about the seven dwarves, the fairy godmother, et al? They are asexual and should remain so.

[johnmiic]

Dumbledore was already a character worthy of respect before this announcement, right? It shouldn't change anything, but Rowling knows that people will rethink the character now, this time filtered through their prejudices and phobias. For some, it'll change their level of acceptance of gay characters, whether positively or negatively. It's sensationalism at its worst because it will do as much harm as good. I'm sure it will sell more copies of the books.

I agree with Anthony on this point except that rather than sell more books accross america copies of Harry Potter books will be removed from library & bookstore shelves and burned/banned. When the series first became popular many Christians in the USA took a hard line against the books trying to say they violated their religious beliefs by teaching black arts, aka magic. Now that a major character who is respected and loved by kids is revealed to be gay-they won't stand for it. I hear grumblings from friends of mine about Captain Jack on Doctor Who being bi-sexual. This wont survive in certain parts of the country.

[Chris DVM]

Hey,
To me, it's not the fact that she wrote him as gay, but that it has come out now that the series is over, as an afterthought almost. Like many have said, I could care less what his preferences are. But now that the last words have been written, what is the point of bringing it up?
Does it really forward the books? Not really. Does it help to wrap up any loose ends? Not really. Does it enhance or change the way people will read the books? Maybe, but I dought it seriously.
So then why? It is her perogative to do anything she wants with the characters, before or after. However, she knows that this will probably alienate more people to her books than will make fans. Why then do this as an afterthought?
Regardless of the reasons, it doesn't change anything about the books with me. They are a fantastic read and I plan on enjoying them with my kids as they grow up.
Chris DVM

[danadoll]

Hmmm...I don't have a problem with Dumbledore's sexual preferrence.

As for folks saying they like their story book characters asexual, guess what....You're all missing something...The fact that almost everyone of them throughout history is portrayed as heterosexual! Were Snow White, Sleeping Beauty, Cinderella, The Little Mermaid and any other storybook lass and their respective princes living "happily ever after" together, all asexual? Something to think about.

Dana

[Daremo]

Since we're currently in the business of explaining our posts: Daremo, I failed to realize that your initial post was meant to be sarcastic and/or humorous. I had a knee-jerk response to what seemed like anti-gay rhetoric ('OMG!'; 'SHOCKED!'), for which, having now been made to understand the irony involved, I heartily apologize.

Signed, 'Mr. Serious Pants'

It was my fault. I need to remember the emoticons!

Like I said, I know the series is huge and popular, but I can't believe this makes front page news, and stirs up controversy. It's 2007, and I think gay relationships are more openly accepted today, more then ever (even though there is a long way to go) I'm just not sure what the motive was behind releasing this information now. It has to be some sort of marketing scheme, but I guess I just don't get why.

[Vortigern99]

Since we're currently in the business of explaining our posts: Daremo, I failed to realize that your initial post was meant to be sarcastic and/or humorous. I had a knee-jerk response to what seemed like anti-gay rhetoric ('OMG!'; 'SHOCKED!'), for which, having now been made to understand the irony involved, I heartily apologize.

Signed, 'Mr. Serious Pants'

[dumbldor]

Paul, thanks for clearing this up.

[Daremo]

Paul, thank you for the explanation. I was hoping that this was the explanation. I will edit my posts.

Just one more thing you might want to clarify, though, Paul. I have been told that the mods changed the title of the thread from 'OMG! Dumbldor is GAY?!?' to 'OMG! Dumbledore is GAY?!?'. Any reason that you spelled Dumbledore: 'Dumbldor'?

Maybe I will see you around Lyons sometime. Cheers, Paul.

Honestly? I'm a fan of the movies, and have not read the books. I didn't even realize it was spelled with an "e" until just now. The only spelling I'm used to seeing is your name on the boards, and I though it was the correct spelling. Sounds like a lame reason, but it's the truth!

[dumbldor]

Paul, thank you for the explanation. I was hoping that this was the explanation. I will edit my posts.

Just one more thing you might want to clarify, though, Paul. I have been told that the mods changed the title of the thread from 'OMG! Dumbldor is GAY?!?' to 'OMG! Dumbledore is GAY?!?'. Any reason that you spelled Dumbledore: 'Dumbldor'?

Maybe I will see you around Lyons sometime. Cheers, Paul.

[Daremo]

Daremo is Paul, except when Austin logs in to his account.

Paul, change your password. If Austin logs in to your account again, I'll suspend both of you.

Why is it that this post has to be involved in some grand conspiracy theory?

I was over at Austin's house on Saturday, as he is a friend, and I do visit his house from time to time. I was using his computer when I saw the news about the CHARACTER in the book, and checked to see if anyone here mentioned it yet. Knowing there are a lot of Harry Potter fans on the board, I decided to post the link to the article! How the hell was this a dig at Dan? I do not know Dan, I have NO ISSUES with Dan, and there was absolutely ZERO malicious intent, or a cheap dig at anyone!

A personal message or email next time, asking about intent, before jumping to conclusions might be a good idea, to avoid something, unjustified, and WRONG. I actually had to go back and re-read your post where you mention Dan and Austin in the first place. I would have contacted you about it to begin with if I saw it.

Dan, seriously, this was not aimed at you in any way, and I never even thought of the connection until it was mentioned early on by someone else. I even responded in this thread a couple times ON TOPIC. This entire thing has been invented by someone else, causing you to attack someone who is being wrongly accused. I have nothing to do with your past encounters, they don't involve me, and I certainly am not the kind of person to insert myself into a situation to cause trouble for a friend, and someone I don't know at all. Austin has nothing to do with this, other then me posting on his computer. Perhaps edit your posts out of fairness?

I guess this is what I get fro trying to post a topic I felt many here would respond to, and create a decent conversation.

[Wee67]

You know, there are millions of background facts good writers use as backstory that never make it into storylines. Usually because they have nothing to do with the particular plot or do not develop the character in a way that forwards the theme or storyline.

Perhaps this was simply the way Rowling created Dumbledore in her world and that was it. This may not be something juast to generate publicity. I don't think the series really needs (nor the merchandising this particualr type).

BTW, Dan, I love the fact that you changed your tagline. You truly are a Potter fan!

[dumbldor]

If it ends up in a compendium, then I would consider it canon. If her intention was to prepare the public for it, then it may prove to be a good move on her part.

With how book 7 is written, my opinion is that there is nothing there that would lead someone to believe that Albus' attraction to Grindelwald was a man-crush. It could 'fit' the story, but it never crossed my mind.

[Vortigern99]

I also agree that anything verbalized by the author that is not actually in the books is not canon and is therefore completely moot. I applaud her for the diversity of characters in her books, but anything new she throws out there now is irrelevant unless she is going to publish more books in which these revelations are included.

Dumbldor, don't you think Rowling's revelation casts light on Albus' motivations for siding with Grimwald in their youth? And since a 'monstrous encyclopedia' of the Potterverse is forthcoming, that perhaps it's best to prepare the public for this controversial element of said compendium?

[Adam West]

There are a lot of good discussions on the subject. I just saw this article and thought it was interesting that almost the same points mentioned on this thread are in the article

http://www.abcnews.go.com/Entertainm...3762036&page=1

The article has a good point. The books are written basically from Harry Potter's perspective and kids don't go around thinking about their teachers' sexual orientation.

I readily admit that I am conservative in my political leanings and am a Christian but even I think the Christian Coalition is a bit off its rocker. My kids have seen every movie and are allowed to read every book and I encourage it. As far as this latest revelation, my kids don't even know, nor would they care.