we live in a world where the pizza arrives faster than the police
Well the pizza driver faces consequences when their job isn’t done right.
Every time you say “It’s good that Dumbledore’s sexuality wasn’t mentioned in the books because it means he wasn’t defined by it,” you are saying something horrible about the queer people in your life. You are saying something horrible TO them. You’re telling them that once you know they’re gay—once you know a guy has a boyfriend or a woman has a wife or whatever—that’s ALL they are to you. You’re announcing that the knowledge of a sexual orientation other than what you expect as the default will completely dominate every aspect of a person’s existence in your mind.
So keep saying it. We need to know who to avoid.
She wrote him as a believable (albeit magical) character. Real life people generally don’t work like this: “blah blah blah oh yeah I’m gay blah blah blah…
Do you know any straight couples? Did they have to tell you they were straight? No. But they introduce you to their significant others. They wear wedding rings. They have pictures of their families up at work (or on their computers/phones as wallpaper). They talk about their weekend plans, which include doing things with their partners (or looking for one).
The entire Harry Potter series is FULL of people who reveal that they’re straight (or at least in/looking for heterosexual relationships). Think about how weird and unrealistic it would be if Ron was still a character and his family was still there and Harry still stayed with them, but the book bent over backwards to hide everything that would make it explicitly clear that Molly is married to Arthur and they’ve had children together.
"Real people" who are straight have their orientations affirmed a thousand times a day. They reveal their own orientations casually without ever thinking about what they’re doing, because that’s what normalcy looks like to them.
"Real people" don’t live their lives in a way that obliterates every external trace of their sexual/romantic orientation.
Well, sometimes queer people do… when it’s not safe for us to do so. When we have to fear the consequences of being out.
So maybe the lesson is that the Wizarding World is homophobic? But even when they’re alone—and Dumbledore is dead—and even when the subject of Dumbledore’s past with Grindelwald (the man Rowling says he was in love with) comes up and Harry is basically begging him to explain himself, to reconcile how he can be the good man that Harry knew and do all this bad stuff, and Dumbledore doesn’t even say, “I was in love.”
Is that “realistic” to you?
They’re alone, Dumbledore can’t be hurt by anything any more, he’s unburdening himself of his last secrets, and he still holds back this last piece for no other reason except that this way there’s no canon gay in this book to alarm the kiddies’ parents.
Dumbledore’s youthful love was so critical to the plot, it’s part of the explanation for why Voldemort died in his last duel with Harry (because it explains how the elder wand’s chain of custody ran through Dumbledore). But it’s glossed over, not for story reasons or believability but because of a editorial/marketing decision rooted in homophobia. That’s not realism. That’s not believability. That’s not treating gay characters the same as everyone else.
What you’re saying—whether you realize it or not—is that for a gay character to be “believable”, they have to be so deeply closeted that it never comes up.
Try to defend that.
you can be a fan of a show and point out its flaws
you can enjoy something and still criticize it
discussing issues which are necessary to be talked about is as much part of a fandom as anything else and has nothing to do with fighting
the idea of a fandom is that you are more than a passive consumer who accepts things mindlessly
idealizing things is unhealthy and gives you a skewed view of reality
"When you finally get to the point where you can afford multiple grocery trips and fresh ingredients and have the time to prepare them, your taste buds freak the fuck out. They’re not used to it. The flavors and textures are all wrong, and there’s a real temptation to keep eating the same shit until it stops your heart at age 43." — John Cheese #CrackedClassic
Every time I read this article, I promise I will keep this info in the back of my mind so I can try to break these habits. Turns out, it isn’t easy.
Definitely too much snow. According to the internet, we currently have eight inches accumulated. It will only get deeper from here…
His body isn’t even cold yet and the New York times has already put out a shameful article declaring Nelson Mandela to be an “icon of peaceful resistance”. News outlets around the Western world are hurrying to publish obituaries that celebrate his electoral victory while erasing the protracted and fierce guerrilla struggle that he and his party were forced to fight in order to make that victory possible. Don’t let racist, imperialist liberalism co-opt the legacy of another radical. Nelson Mandela used peaceful means when he could, and violent means when he couldn’t. For this, during his life they called him a terrorist, and after his death they’ll call him a pacifist — all to neutralize the revolutionary potential of his legacy, and the lessons to be drawn from it.
Don’t fucking let them.
Okay, also wrong.
1) Nelson Mandela WAS an icon of peaceful resistance, but not in the simplistic way the NYT article (and, I’m sure, many that will follow) believe he was. You see, when Mandela was arrested in 1962, he was, indeed, the leader of the ANC’s armed forces. That is not a fact that people should forget.
However, when he started negotiations with the apartheid regime in the late 1980s, South Africa was in the midst of what was basically an undeclared civil war. Violence was everywhere and often very unfocused; don’t think for one second that it was all between anti-apartheid fighters against people upholding the apartheid regime. The deaths/beatings/tortures/rapes were largely civilian-focused, and everyone was hurting everyone else (with white-on-white, black-on-black, black-on-Indian, Indian-on-coloured, coloured-on-black, so on and so forth). For an example, Google anything about “necklacing”.
It was b a d.
In order for the country not to collapse completely, someone needed to emerge as a leader who favored political negotiation and peaceful tactics over the violence that was ravaging the country, and Nelson Mandela, whose release had been advocated for over the past few years, found himself thrust into that position to the point that he started negotiating for the fall of apartheid from prison. He did what he needed to do because any more violence would have completely destroyed South Africa. He chose ending apartheid over saving face with the already-emerging anti-apartheid politicians, chose negotiating with the enemies that he hated over seeing more of his people die because of an ego or power trip or an extreme ideology (see: most of the leaders of both sides at this point). He chose making peace over expressing his anger, or (an even bigger issue now), his racial/ethnic affiliation. If he isn’t an “icon of peaceful resistance” for this, I don’t know who is.
2) “He and his party” Hahaha no. There were different parties and different voices and different races who fought together against the regime, not just the ANC. The ANC is one part of a MUCH LARGER MOVEMENT, one that included the people who would become the DA (the ANC’s biggest political rival), one that included not only the black Africans (mainly Zulu) that the ANC represents but also the Xhosa and the Tswana and the Sotho and the Coloureds and the Indians and The Black Sash and the Jews. IT WAS NOT JUST THE ANC.
Also, the ANC is actually largely why the country is so fucked up right now, because the party wants to keep power over actually doing anything good for its people (see: President Robert “Yes I raped that lesbian HIV-positive AIDS activist but I’m getting acquitted because I’m in power and I’m not HIV positive because I took a shower afterwards” Zuma; see: President Thabo “yeah I committed crimes against humanity but come on hear me talk more about how HIV isn’t a real thing and what all my people are dying of AIDS because I refuse to provide any knowledge or treatment LALALALA I can’t hear you LALALA” Mbeki)
3) “Don’t let racist, imperialist liberalism co-opt the legacy of another radical.” Don’t let your ignorant, imperialist liberalism co-opt the legacy of a man who is recognized as an amazing leader of a country and continent seriously lacking them. Don’t let your lack of knowledge of contemporary African politics let you think for one goddamn second that praising someone’s violence is a good thing. Don’t let your Western all-blacks-are-same ideology not recognize the true radicalism in his ideology, which is that ethnic groups should not matter and people should work together regardless.
4) “Nelson Mandela used peaceful means when he could, and violent means when he couldn’t.” Hahahaha take this, reverse it. He started violent and ended peaceful.
5) “For this, during his life they called him a terrorist,” Nope. They called him a terrorist because he fought against the apartheid regime, and the apartheid regime was allied with the West during the Cold War. He would have been a terrorist regardless of the amount of violence he actually used.
"and after his death they’ll call him a pacifist" Yep. Because he was (kind of) in the end. Although the Truth & Reconciliation Commission was totally Desmond Tutu’s brainchild, so don’t listen to anyone crediting him with that.
"All to neutralize the revolutionary potential of his legacy," hopefully by now you realize that if you mean "revolutionary" to mean "violence is okey-dokey" you are full of shit. His revolutionary act was to be a Xhosa leading a largely Zulu resistance-cum-political party; his revolutionary act was to negotiate with a racial/ethnic enemy. His revolution rested in whom he dared to talk to, not whom he dared to hurt.
"and the lessons to be drawn from it." Yeah, the wrong lessons will be drawn from it, but not for the reasons you think. People will just think his thought process was "peace at any cost" instead of "w o w having a violent revolution was a super stupid idea because everyone is dying. Let’s take a different approach that doesn’t involve my wife directing her own band of assassins and me being imprisoned for almost 30 years that sounds grand".
An Actual Fucking (Half) South African
P.S. This is still super-simplified (I could literally spend hours explaining all the ins and outs of apartheid/the anti-apartheid movement/Mandela himself), but I think it does its job at least somewhat okay.
Thank you for bringing the info-smackdown! I was pretty sure the OP was wrong, but don’t know enough to debunk off the top of my keyboard.
THIS HURT ME MORE THAN I WAS EXPECTING…
do i even have a sexuality at this point or is it literally just “oh yes i’d kiss you”
Nelson Mandela was a freedom fighter and I really hope they don’t push that warm and fluffy non-violence shit with him because they JUST got him off the terrorism watch list in 2008.
things ppl say that alerts you to them being the actual worst:
- john was my favourite beatle
- abolishing religion would solve a lot of problems
- i’m not a racist i hate all races equally
- disliking someone because of their political affiliation is ridiculous
- but if you think about it stereotypes do exist for a reason
- god, can you believe people on welfare own iphones
- but what about mens rights
- why can’t white people say the n-word
- i’m just being the devils advocate
do you ever just get a vibe that someone has a crush on you and then you’re not sure if they actually do or if you’re just really really self-absorbed
Sometimes Finn and Jake display the most healthy and positive friendship I’ve ever seen and sometimes it makes me really happy that they don’t pull tropey bullshit and they have lines like this that show just how much they get each other.