Comment on

• wonderingwanderer@sopuli.xyz ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  And according to Joanne KKK Rowling, that’s the only way you can be a woman; if you can produce children.

  Harry Potter books don’t have that assertion to me. There are different positive female figures in the books.

  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?

  source

  • Dojan@pawb.social ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    Also, are we just going to ignore Professor McGonagall being childless and devoted to her career in academia in which she thrives and holds the respect of her peers and pupils?

    You know what, that’s fair. McGonagall is a mostly unproblematic character, I feel. There are some moments where I feel like she meted out very strange punishments, like sending the kids out into a dangerous forest they were prohibited from being in because it’s potentially lethal, or when she locked Neville out of the Gryffindor common room while a murderer was on the loose.

    That said, Caroline Easom did a video on the female characters that appear in the top 100 characters by mention in the books and there are some less savoury patterns in how Joanne portrays women.

    source
• Dojan@pawb.social ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  Sure. If it makes you feel better, then whatever.

  source

  • Viceversa@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    That’s your argument? Ok.

    source

    • Dojan@pawb.social ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      There is no argument. You’re allowed to believe what you wish, wrong or not. I just don’t have the energy to waste on apologists and supporters of such heinous politics. Rowling’s politics are apparent in all of her writing, she’s always championed outdated eugenicist beliefs. If you choose to ignore that, that’s your prerogative and I don’t think anything I say or show you will convince you otherwise.

      Ergo, this conversation here is just a waste of time for the two of us.

      source

      • Viceversa@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

        If you’re under the impression that I support Rowling - I’m not. Fuck her.
        I’m protecting the books.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
• Feathercrown@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  There’s no character there beyond that.

  Did you read my comment? There were examples of characters beyond that.

  “Character” as in personality, not other fictional people.

  source

  • Viceversa@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    What do you mean?

    source

    • Feathercrown@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      “Character” can mean:

      1. A person in a story

      2. The nature of someone’s personality, beliefs, etc.

      The person you were replying to was referring to Molly’s “character”, as in, her personality etc.

      source

      • Viceversa@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

        Ah, ok. L

        Anyway, persons from the books had different personalities.

        source