Dumbledore is.... GASP!

[JSBIRD 1]

I always thought it was rather obvious...After all, he is 'Head' Master

BASE359

"Now I've settled down,
in a quiet little town,
and forgot about everything"

[tbrown 26]

Actually, Dumbledore is dead, Rowling is saying he WAS gay.

I'm disappointed. This was a stunt for the benefit of a trendy audience who couldn't wait to get on their feet with a standing ovation, and what for ? I really don't care if Dumbledore WAS ever gay, anymore than I care about my real fleah & blood friends who are. But there was never a word about it in any of the books, and it was never made an issue in any of the stories. The series is now complete, so why this post script, unless it's to generate some "buzz" and a few more sales.

These are supposed to be children's books. I don't object to portraying a gay teacher as a positive role model to children, but Rowling never did that in any of the books. Just in front of a trendy PC audience in NYC, Very disappointing....

And NO, I'm not a homophobe either, so don't even start.

Your humble servant.....Professor Gravity !

[SpeedRacer 1]

I don't know what the ovation is about. There was a time when if a man felt sexual attraction to another man, he just did what he had to do, but did not make his entire identity revolve around it. They didn't used to even have a word for "gay".

Why can't we do that now? What's the big applause about identifying someone as "a gay"?

WTf? It's called a "private life" for a reason. Fuck who you want to fuck, but why does your personal identity have to revolve around it? Why should we celebrate homosexuality as a personal identiity any more than we should celebrate heterosexuality?



OK, I'm putting on the asbestos underwear now.

Speed Racer
--------------------------------------------------

[LloydDobbler 2]

Here's the People magazine cover story.

Signatures are the new black.

[jakee 1,594]

Quote

WTf? It's called a "private life" for a reason. Fuck who you want to fuck, but why does your personal identity have to revolve around it? Why should we celebrate homosexuality as a personal identiity any more than we should celebrate heterosexuality?

You seem to be confused. JK Rowling says she saw Dumbedore as being gay, but she absolutely did NOT make his identity revolve around it. The fact that she thinks of him as gay is completely incidental to his personality, right? So unless you think that homosexuality is something that should never ever be mentioned exactly what is your objection?

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[SpeedRacer 1]

I wasnt thinking about the author.

I was just surprised (as was the author when she saw the audience's reaction to her statement) at the audience getting so excited & gleeful over the revelation that Dumbledore was gay.

Speed Racer
--------------------------------------------------

[turtlespeed 226]

Quote

I wasnt thinking about the author.

I was just surprised (as was the author when she saw the audience's reaction to her statement) at the audience getting so excited & gleeful over the revelation that Dumbledore was gay.

maybe they were all Gay Bashers and glad he was now dead.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[billvon 3,111]

>I'm disappointed. This was a stunt for the benefit of a trendy audience . . .

?? The last book has been published. She's done. She's not going to sell more books; heck, the last book she sold has Dumbledore already dead.

She was replying to a question about who he was in love with. She saw him as gay. She never made it explicit in her books; she didn't feel it important. But she made it pretty clear that he had an intense relationship with another man early on in his life, and that it ended badly.

Should she have lied when asked about his love life?

>But there was never a word about it in any of the books.

See above.