I think if Voldemort was meant to have been like Hitler he would have made a special enemy of the goblins rather than muggle born witches and wizards.
It is rather bold of the author to make Dumbledore's sexuality explicit. It's not difficult to see it implied in the text, but the difference of the author making it explicit will excite alot of hostility that would not have been an issue otherwise.
Rowling get's a Phail in my opinion, just a stupid childish attempt to gain some minor publicity and raise the hopes of all the yaoi fangirls out there.
I guess what it boils down to is this: do you think any less of Dumbledore because he is gay? Are any of the great things he did throughout the series diminished because you now know he is gay?
If you answer yes, then that is a real world issue outside of the Potterverse. If you answer no, then you are quite likely part of the tolerant folk that Rowling believes creates a better world.
__________________ Death, but not for you Gunslinger. Never for you.
I don't think it's fair to simplify this down to the extent of "If you disagree with this you're clearly homophobic." If Dumbledore was a straight character, do you think there would be hundreds of people arguing for gay rights complaining to Rowling? If Rowling's main theme behind the books was equal rights (Which is a theme but by no means the main theme) then she would not feel the need to state Dumbledore was or wasn't gay.
But clearly because I feel that this is just a terrible and unnecessary attempt to revive publicity for the Harry Potter franchise, I'm sure the next set of posters will now brand me as Homophobic
Who cares a persons sexual preference doesn't matter, unless of course Ron walkin in on Dumbledore and Harry going at it.
I just think it is sad that she even brought it up she said and I quote, saying she didn't feel the need to be explicit about Dumbledore's sexual preferences because she wanted to focus on character and plot development. If you want to focus on that then don't bring it up at all let the readers figure it out on their own.
She is just trying to be politically correct and get free plubicity.
She answered a question. What do you want her to say, "moving on"? Then people, maybe even the same people hounding her now, would be hounding her for not answering questions that fans asked.
__________________
The only thing thats with you your whole life is complete and utter darkness.
Gender: Female Location: When in Doubt, Go to the Library.
Goodness!
She was at a question and answer session as a part of her open book tour of the US - Someone asked a question about Dumbledore's true love.... and then she said that he was gay. She's built up the character with that quality - he's been gay throughout all seven books. It's just she didn't come out and say "Professor Dumbledore is gay" in the books, and someone's asking about it, and so now she's revealing it.
In another interview she told what Dudley heard when he was attacked by the dementors - something that wasn't told in the books. Does that mean she was just looking for publicity there, too?
__________________
It does not do to dwell on dreams and forget to live.
Gender: Female Location: every which way but loose
What exactly is the issue if she does think highly of herself as an author? If you believe Rowling can't rightfully have a high opinion of herself following the success of the series then who, in your mind, does have the right?
I don't believe it's an attempt to build on the success, not in the slightest. She answered a question directly and honestly, so what if it's not what you wanted to hear? If she had said that Dumbledore had a secret wife, or had sworn celibacy, would you all have reacted the same way? Just because *shock horror* she's said Dumbledore's a homosexual, everyone's jumping to conclusions.
Makes sense to me. Overlooking Grindelwald's more unsavoury character traits, for a start. They do say that love is blind.
Well, I'm not sure whether Dumbledore's character was built as a gay from the very start, or throughout the books. I have't seen or read anything in the books that would indicate that DD is gay or he is not straight.
I think JK is using her influence and publicity to pursue a political agenda. On one side its a good effort to promote tolerance from someone as influencial as JK. On another side it feels a bit weird DD and the fans to be used like that.
We might not have seen, or read anything in the books to show that Dumbledore is gay. At least not anything that would be obvious (some will say that Dumbledore's reluctance to fight Grindlewald was down to love, and thus a more subtle hint) However, even though we havn't seen any "evidence" this doesn't mean to say that Dumbledore wasn't always designed as gay, or didn't always exist as gay in JKR's mind. Jusr because hes not depicted as swanning around with limp wrists and a love of pink or any of the other stereotypical gay traits doesn't really amount of anything. To say that shes using it and the fans to persue a political agenda is unfair. A random question was asked and she answered honestly, she had no idea that question would be coming so her answer couldn't be so false. It is hardly suprising that one of her main, and most loved characters would be of an alternative sexual preference seeing as the entire book has undertones of tolerance and/or the lack of it in society.
__________________ Yet the making of things is in my heart from my own making by thee; and the child of little understanding that makes a play of the deeds of his father may do so without without thought of mockery, but because he is the son of his father.
Ahh but remember his plum coloured suit? Like that of former Prime Minister Blair Also some might suggest that it is effeminate to shed tears infrount of a boy, like when Harry says that he told Scrimgeour that he was 'Dumbledore's man through and through.'
I don't think that she was not expecting a question to Dumbledore's love to pop up honestly. Because that is among the few questions that was never asked. Dumbledore she presented as the greatest beliver in love and it is only natural that such question will come.
Despite everything, I still think that this was plannedm JK is not someone that would leave matters to the occassion.
I don't beleive that she did that to increase the popularity of the books, they are famouse anyway. I think she acts this way because "is the choice we make"
I heard a lot of stuff about this, but I thought everyone was lying.
Seeing that it's true still doesn't change the way I see the book though. I don't think she even had to say that he was gay, it wouldn't have made much of a difference in the story.
__________________
thanks for the sig tylerTOXICITY
Let's just face it, that it shouldn't matter what sexual preferance a person is, and in this case it doesn't change the story one bit.
unless of course Ron walked in on Dumbledore and Harry going at it.
KMC Community Forums
Oct 21st, 2007 08:38 AM
I totally hope not!
Like that of former Prime Minister Blair 
