[deleted]
You’re right, that was hyperbole. What I should’ve written is “every character that expresses traditionally feminine interests”, save for of course, the tradwife, like Molly Weasley whose entire character is just being a mother. Does she have interests beyond being a mother? No, with seven children who has time to be a person?
Hermione doesn’t engage with anything traditionally feminine, she’s a “not-like-other-girls” type character, hell she doesn’t really have any friends that aren’t boys. Even so, she’s often not taken seriously. She’s mocked for studying hard, and she’s mocked for her anti-slavery coalition, which people only really join half-heartedly in order to placate her.
There’s obviously Dolores Umbridge. She’s into cute, frilly, fluffy, pink things. She’s also a sadist. Her punishment for being bad is to be carried off by centaurs to get raped in a forest.
Luna Lovegood was introduced as another character to be bullied, and she remains on the outskirts throughout the book, but Rowling softened up on her once she got extremely popular with the fans of the series.
Just a couple of years ago “people with massive noses” having kahoots with Hitler would be oxymoron.But now, after genocide of Palestinians…
Ah right, the massive genocide of Jews, disabled people, LGBTQ+ people, and other minorities back in the mid 1900s was okay because the Israeli state is now running a genocide of their own. Rowling was correct to be antisemitic actually!
kolmaskommentoija@sopuli.xyz 1 month ago
Dojan@pawb.social 1 month ago
Ah yeah, I’d forgotten about that. Pulled up the book to that chapter, and came across this
“Can Dobby give Harry Potter his present?” he squeaked tentatively.
“’Course you can,” said Harry. “Er . . . I’ve got something for you too.”
It was a lie; he hadn’t bought anything for Dobby at all, but he quickly opened his trunk and pulled out a particularly knobbly rolled-up pair of socks. They were his oldest and foulest, mustard yellow, and had once belonged to Uncle Vernon. The reason they were extra-knobbly was that Harry had been using them to cushion his Sneakoscope for over a year now. He pulled out the Sneakoscope and handed the socks to Dobby, saying, “Sorry, I forgot to wrap them. . . .”
[…]
Dobby now handed Harry a small package, which turned out to be — socks.
“Dobby is making them himself, sir!” the elf said happily. “He is buying the wool out of his wages, sir!”
The left sock was bright red and had a pattern of broomsticks upon it; the right sock was green with a pattern of Snitches.
“They’re . . . they’re really . . . well, thanks, Dobby,” said Harry, and he pulled them on, causing Dobby’s eyes to leak with happiness again.
A boy with a vault full of gold, couldn’t give his supposed friend something better than his uncle’s knobbly, “oldest and foulest, mustard yellow” socks. His slave friend appreciates it nonetheless, but like, surely he had nicer socks?
I can’t with this author. The fact that at the end of all of this, nothing has changed; people’s worth is still determined by breeding and bloodline, the slave race is still enslaved, just kind of makes the entire journey seem pointless to me.
Oh yeah, you killed wizard-Hitler but the wizard-nazi ideology is not just at large, but commonly practised by everyone, including by the good-guy rich-orphan turned wizard cop and his friends.
kolmaskommentoija@sopuli.xyz 1 month ago
[deleted]Dojan@pawb.social 1 month ago
Yeah. I enjoyed these books as a kid, which makes sense because I was oblivious to the prejudices of society. One could argue that maybe Rowling was too, but given her actions I just don’t believe that.
Viceversa@lemmy.world 2 months ago
Hermione doesn’t engage with anything traditionally feminine, she’s a “not-like-other-girls” type character, hell she doesn’t really have any friends that aren’t boys. Even so, she’s often not taken seriously. She’s mocked for studying hard, and she’s mocked for her anti-slavery coalition, which people only really join half-heartedly in order to placate her.
There’s obviously Dolores Umbridge. She’s into cute, frilly, fluffy, pink things. She’s also a sadist. Her punishment for being bad is to be carried off by centaurs to get raped in a forest.
Luna Lovegood was introduced as another character to be bullied, and she remains on the outskirts throughout the book, but Rowling softened up on her once she got extremely popular with the fans of the series.
Ah right, the massive genocide of Jews, disabled people, LGBTQ+ people, and other minorities back in the mid 1900s was okay because the Israeli state is now running a genocide of their own. Rowling was correct to be antisemitic actually!
Excuse me, but I can’t agree with your position here.
Is a woman not allowed to realize itself through motherhood?
Also Molly was smart and fierce (remember flight with Bellatrix Lestrange?
Dojan@pawb.social 2 months ago
Of course. And according to Joanne KKK Rowling, that’s the only way you can be a woman; if you can produce children. Women are the ones with the large gametes! That’s the definition of woman, nothing else. Screw all cis-women who don’t fit the mold.
You’re not allowed to be too feminine, but also if you don’t adhere to white-feminine beauty standards you’re also bad.
I do! “NOT MY DAUGHTER YOU DON’T!”
No matter what, Molly is nothing but a mother. There’s no character there beyond that.
You’ve missed my point. My point is, there are many ways of being a person, and many ways of being a girl or a woman. Rowling doesn’t believe that, and the narrative she pushes explicitly defines what is and isn’t from her perspective, an acceptable way of being a woman. She very clearly values men over women.
Ember Green did an excellent video essay that touches on this topic.
There’s a Wikipedia entry on Jewish sterotypes. You could turn it into a drinking game, if you’d like to die of alcohol poisoning.
Image
Viceversa@lemmy.world 2 months ago
Harry Potter books don’t have that assertion to me. There are different positive female figures in the books.
wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz 1 month ago
Book: has one character whose main sense of identity is being a mother
Critic: “THIS BOOK IS SAYING THE ONLY VALID WAY TO BE A WOMAN IS TO BE A MOTHER!!1!!1!1!1!”
It’s obnoxiously close to this broader view in society:
Woman: is a mother
Society: "SO YOU THINK A WOMAN’S SOLE PURPOSE IS TO BE A MOTHER?!?!?!?!!?!
Also, are we just going to ignore Professor McGonnagal (no clue how to spell her name) being childless and devoted to her career in academia in which she thrives and holds the respect of her peers and pupils?
Dojan@pawb.social 2 months ago
Sure. If it makes you feel better, then whatever.
Feathercrown@lemmy.world 1 month ago
“Character” as in personality, not other fictional people.
Viceversa@lemmy.world 2 months ago
Viceversa@lemmy.world 1 month ago
Downvotes on the deleted comment?
There wasn’t any vote on it before deletion.
Feathercrown@lemmy.world 1 month ago
Are you for real right now
Viceversa@lemmy.world 1 month ago
English isn’t my first language and certainly isn’t my best
Feathercrown@lemmy.world 1 month ago
Ah, sorry