Harry Potter discussion

246 views
Characters > dumbledore: a gay???!!

Comments Showing 1-50 of 63 (63 new)    post a comment »
« previous 1

message 1: by Anj_bookster (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:16PM) (new)

Anj_bookster alcala | 22 comments yup! acording to a newspaper that ive read, J.K. Rowling, on one of the interviews, revealed that dumbledore in the story harry potter is gay! that's why he is so fond of harry potter.


message 2: by Meghan (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:16PM) (new)

Meghan | 686 comments That is wierd! ok, I don't really think that Dumbledore only cared about Harry because he was gay.I think that Dumbledore really cared about him like a parent. It just doesn't seem like...you know, possible that, nvm.


message 3: by Peng (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:17PM) (new)

Peng | 317 comments i though this was the topic in that other post "rowling outs dumbledore"? why the redundancy? i agree, meghan. dumbledore did not look at harry "that" way!


message 4: by Steph (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:17PM) (new)

Steph (kitsune_chan) | 47 comments who really cares if he is gay or straight? dumbledore's one of the BEST characters


message 5: by Hazalee (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:17PM) (new)

Hazalee | 2 comments yep.I'm agree with meghan here.dumbledore care about harry just like a family or maybe just like his own grandson.


message 6: by Marlo (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:17PM) (new)

Marlo | 6 comments According to the article I read JK Rowling stated that Dumbledore was in love with Gellert Grindelwald. Here is a quote from that article.

"Falling in love can blind us to an extent," Rowling said Friday of Dumbledore's feelings about Grindelwald, adding that Dumbledore was "horribly, terribly let down."

Dumbledore's love, she observed, was his "great tragedy."


message 7: by Tracey (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:17PM) (new)

Tracey *deep breath*

it's unfortunate that the news of Dumbledore's outing means some folks will immediately assume that his mentorship of Harry was inappropriate. PLEASE DO NOT ASSUME THIS. looking at or thinking of someone in *that way* is not an automatic behavior that is only conducted by gay people. if i hit a punching bag every time i was looked at in *that way* by straight men, my arms would be chisled.

regardless of one's orientation, everyone is capable of falling in love. everyone is capable of falling for someone who may later prove to be unworthy of that affection. and when hurt, everyone is capable of responding to the hurt in different ways. my view/take on Dumbledore's response to his hurt can be read in the "Rowling Outs Dumbledore" thread. but for right now, before the runaway train bounces off the track, please take a moment to look past the automatic assumptions of what "a gay" will do. before JR's announcement, Dumbledore was probably one of the most beloved characters in the series, second only to Harry. now that he's out, ask yourselves...do you still hold Dumbledore's character in high regard? if not, why did you let it change? other than the announcement that Dumbledore is gay, what has changed about him? not. one. thing. the *only* thing that has changed about Dumbledore's character is OUR INDIVIDUAL PERCEPTION OF HIM.


message 8: by Tracey (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:18PM) (new)

Tracey Lavyx, in the long run, these are characters of JKR's creation, and according to the transcript from her appearance at Carnegie Hall (http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/200...) ), JKR "always thought of Dumbledore as gay". no, the character doesn't *have* to be gay in order for anyone to be happy. and no, you don't *have* to like the fact that Dumbledore is gay. the simple fact is that we now have a little more information about one of the characters JKR created. at it's core, it doesn't change the depth & strength of Dumbledore...hopefully the new information helps us understand his character better. i worry that the negative perceptions of being gay will keep folks from seeing (or continuing to see) that Dumbledore's character flat-out ROCKS. is Dumbledore such a strong, caring character *in spite* of being gay, or *because of* being gay? only JKR can answer that. but please, everyone, let's not automatically assume that the character is now and forever creepy/sick/bad/horrible simply and *solely* because he's gay.


message 9: by Sarah (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:18PM) (new)

Sarah (songgirl7) Just because a person is gay does not mean they like little boys. Homosexuality and pedophilia are completely different. Maybe if some people took their heads out of the sand and tried educating themselves this world would have a lot less hate.

Also, the phrase "a gay" is offensive. Are you "a straight?" No, you're a person who is straight. Please do not label.


message 10: by Caroline (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:18PM) (new)

Caroline >< Why on earth would this have anything to do with Dumbledore's relationship with Harry Potter? There's a world of difference between being attracted to me and being attracted to little boys. Dumbledore has been a mentor and adopted parent to Harry, and it's a bit crazy to think that him being attracted to mature adult men would have any bearing on his relationship to Harry. I doubt anyone things anything of a straight woman teaching high school boys, so why should a gay man teaching a boy be any different?

Anyway, the revelation didn't change the way I view Dumbledore much--it softened my opinion of his actions, since people in love seem to be more likely to do stupid things, so I find some of his actions to be a little more understandable. I'll always love Dumbledore as an excellently flawed mentor figure, and him liking men or women doesn't really factor into that.


message 11: by Meghan (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:18PM) (new)

Meghan | 686 comments I really didn't like what J.K said about Grindelwald being Dumbledore's "tragedy" because I would think that would have been his sister's death. I mean she was his family and if the only thing Dumbledore cared about when she died is that Grindelwald left then I have to say he is really mean and insensitive! (But I still like the Dumbledore I thought he was) Doesn't mean I like the books any less though.


message 12: by Tracey (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:18PM) (new)

Tracey Meghan, the Dumbledore you thought he was is still the same Dumbledore. that part of his character hasn't changed...the way in which you now view his character has changed.

and his brief association with Grindelwald can still be considered his "great tragedy" because he suffered multiple losses as a result of it -- the death of Arianna, estrangement from Aberforth, the departure of Grindelwald (whom he mistakenly grew to care for), and the shake-up of everything he had believed in up until Arianna's death. Dumbledore spent the rest of his life making sure that he learned valuable lessons from those events.

Caroline, Sarah & Brianna, very good point...being gay doesn't automatically make someone a child molester or a sexually loose person. it's maddening to know that this is the immediate conclusion that's being drawn.

and Sarah, you said it much more succinctly than i did, so thank you. the word "gay" isn't offensive to me -- like Brianna said, to each their own -- but to use the phrase "a gay" dehumanizes a person, so that really set me off.


message 13: by Sarah (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:18PM) (new)

Sarah (songgirl7) No, it's not the word gay, it's the phrase "a gay." "A gay person" is different than "a gay." Like Tracey said, it's dehumanizing.


message 14: by Cathy (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:20PM) (new)

Cathy | 50 comments THANKS Sarah and Tracey and others for your wonderful words that speak such volumes. Our society is condoning denying civil rights to a portion of the population due to their sexual orientation. It is appalling, and in years to come, we will feel deep shame.
No, a gay man is not a pedophile simply because he is gay. Neither is he a sexual predator or molester. It is an orientation, not a disorder.
My gay friends (and do I ever adore them!!!) are hurt by this assumption -- that they are wanting to have sex with every man, boy, or dog that they see. It is a preposterous notion!! Also, my lesbian friends say the same thing -- they will not attack you simply because you are a girl.
Ask yourelf, whether you straight or gay: Do you want to have sex with EVERYONE of the gender you prefer? I am a straight woman and I happen to ADORE men. But I am not turned on by every man in the world. In fact, I am only turned on by one man. Other men?? yeah, they are pretty and beautiful and wonderful. But the one I love is here with me, and that is all I want.
Sarah said it most succinctly -- "PLease do not label." This goes for sexual orientation, physical traits, race, disabilities, ANYTHING. Just be respectful, that is the easiest thing.
I LOVE that tracey said Dumbledore "FLAT OUT ROCKS"!!! Exquisite.


message 15: by Meghan (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:20PM) (new)

Meghan | 686 comments Tracey
That is exactly what I ment by saying the Dumbledore I thought he was. It's the difference between the charactor and our opinions. Some people think that "gay" is just part of life while others think it is something horrible. Just depends on th piont of view.


message 16: by Dayna (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:20PM) (new)

Dayna | 8 comments Thank you, Sarah, for pointing out that homosexuality and pedophilia are two completely different things! And thanks to everybody else who has reiterated that!


message 17: by Marlo (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:20PM) (new)

Marlo | 6 comments Sarah, Tracy, Cathy....Please excuse this very simple message as I am really horrible at expressing myself in writing but I just had to say that you guys are absolutely awesome!
To say that I agree with you all is a total and complete understatement.
=)


message 18: by Michele (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:20PM) (new)

Michele | 20 comments curious about people's reactions to this article:

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedconte...


message 19: by Ashley (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:20PM) (new)

Ashley (samuraigurl91) | 106 comments nah. i don't think just because dumbledore was gay he cared abt harry. cause JK said dumbledore was gay and he nvr got any love because his true love for grindelwald and he was disappointed and broken hearted. so he nvr you know..

but i think dumbledore really cared abt harry as a person close to him, responsible for him, and as a parent, and not because he's gay.

and yeah true i agree with Sarah. a gay person IS different from a gay. if someone says he's a gay person, it means he's happy or you could put it like that. but if you say he's gay then it means he's a gay. Lol. or something like that.

"gay is happy" =P


message 20: by Tracey (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:20PM) (new)

Tracey thanks for the link, Michele. to post a few quotes from it:
" As a reader, I get to decide, because the author left those details untold in the books. Which is one reason that a book is almost always better than the movie based on it. More explicit backstory is not always better....

Based on what you decided to put in the books, I can imagine that Dumbledore once had a girlfriend or that he was so emotionally crushed by guilt that he sealed himself off from romance or that he was one of those rare men for whom romance never really came up – or that he was gay.

I can consider any of those possibilities as I read – or I can mull over all of them at the same time. Talk about magic.

Is Dumbledore gay? He is for you, apparently. But unless you said it in the actual books, must he be so for me? Your saying so now makes it harder for me to imagine anything different. Do you really want to limit your fictional world that way?
"

i can agree with the writer about the magic of books over movies. sure, any movie can have stunning visual effects, but then those specifics get set in the viewer's mind. with a book, you get to create your own way of seeing things, based on the author's initial descriptions. however, i disagree that Dumbledore being gay now means that he's limited. going back to what several folks have already said, this just gives us another way to see him, and it can explain some of the roads he's traveled in his journey.


message 21: by Sarah (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:21PM) (new)

Sarah (songgirl7) Apparently, I'm not communicating clearly. Ashley, I did not mean that saying "a gay" is different than gay as in happy. Gay is a completely appropriate descriptive term for a person who is sexually or romantically attracted to members of their own gender. It is an adjective, not a noun. The noun is the person, it is not their orientation. And that person is so much more than just their sexual preference. So to label them in anyway by just one aspect of their being is inappropriate. I don't know how I can get this point across, so I guess I will just leave it alone.


message 22: by Caroline (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:21PM) (new)

Caroline Interesting article, Michele! Overall, I'd say I agree with the writer of the article--I would have much preferred these kinds of details to be in the books themselves, not to be tacked on as if an afterthought. I know that J.K. Rowling, in a previous interview, mentioned she's thinking of doing a type of encyclopedia explaining all the extra details about characters. While that's an interesting idea, I think it's weak in comparison to giving it to us in the actual text.

Of course, I'll be listening to any details Rowling gives us and will read anything she releases, but it does seem like this is a cheap way to give us details about the series.


message 23: by Scott (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:21PM) (new)

Scott (ScottAK) | 4 comments NO WAY!!!! that is total BS there is no way... Wow bad pictures in my mind.


message 24: by Scott (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:21PM) (new)

Scott (ScottAK) | 4 comments love doesn't always have to be intamint, you can love a brother or sister or parent


message 25: by Tracey (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:21PM) (new)

Tracey thank you to everyone who has at least attempted to see this as just another piece of information about a character. for those of you who just can't hear or see the word "gay" without automatically thinking something sexual or negative, i hope that in time you'll be able stop reacting from that misinformed place.


message 26: by Tor (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:22PM) (new)

Tor | 8 comments I think Dumbledor being Gay is only an excuse because JK was too lazy/tired to think of anyone for him.

I refuse to believe it, and even if it is true, he never showed any sign of being so, so no one, except really perverted people, would even think him as being gay. No hints or anything any where.


message 27: by Anj_bookster (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:23PM) (new)

Anj_bookster alcala | 22 comments whoah! i never expected that the gay issue bout dumby would make such great fuss in here..anyways.. its actually just a work of the mind..the story, the characters and all..we don't actually know what J.K was thinking while she made the character of dumbledore..u dnt actually believe that he's gay, do u?? or will u?..it all depends on how u see it..


message 28: by Tracey (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:25PM) (new)

Tracey "I refuse to believe it, and even if it is true, he never showed any sign of being so.... No hints or anything any where."

you don't *have* to believe it, Tori. it's JKR's imagination & energy, and she followed the flow of that energy as she saw fit. if the idea of a gay character repulses you so much, write a letter to JKR. or write your own story and leave the gay characters out. but before you do so, please take a moment to educate us, Tori. what ARE the signs of gayness? what are the specific traits/characteristics/mannerisms that brand someone as gay?
***********************
"...so no one, except really perverted people, would even think him as being gay."

according to the transcript of the event at Carnegie Hall, JKR was asked...
Did Dumbledore, who believed in the prevailing power of love, ever fall in love himself?
...and JKR's answer to the question was...
My truthful answer to you... I always thought of Dumbledore as gay.
so Tori, with the combination of her statement and your reasoning, J.K. Rowling is a pervert.

*shaking head in disbelief*

i just don't get it. i know that many folks won't like the idea of Dumbledore being gay, but the depth of that discomfort...bordering on vehement agitation...that's an energy that i no longer choose so surround myself with.


message 29: by Meghan (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:26PM) (new)

Meghan | 686 comments Look people, Dumbledore was made up by Rowling so she can make him whatever she likes. We may not agree, but we aren't the author.
Some people might get mad at me for saying so, but this is getting depressing. Don't get me wrong, I like depbats, but this one is a little wierd.


message 30: by Shifa (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:26PM) (new)

Shifa Lateef | 27 comments I don't really think that Dumbledore was fond of Harry in that sort of a way, but really I could have lived without knowing Dumbledores sexual statis.


message 31: by [deleted user] (new)

I think this is complete BS! Even if he was gay, it really doesn't matter, because in the books it never really said anything. I just think it is definately not important whether he is gay or not. It doesn't add or detract to the novel. who cares.


message 32: by Meghan (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:27PM) (new)

Meghan | 686 comments Wait, Bre, I'm a little confused.
Who wrote that people are perverted? Was it an interview or someone on here?


message 33: by Jordan (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:27PM) (new)

Jordan (jordieheartsbooks) I don't understand why this is causing such an uproar. So what? Dumbledore is gay. Fine with me. It doesn't affect the books or the stories or any of the wonderful worlds JK created for our reading enjoyment. When I heard it on the news (CNN no less), I thought "Oh, ok. That's interesting." That was the extent of it. I didn't think that it lessened Dumbledore or made him a dirty old perv for taking Harry under his wing. It's not like JK had Dumbledore doing inappropriate things to or with Harry. He's gay, not a pedophile. When will people stop freaking out at the mere mention of the word gay as it pertains to referring to homosexual men? I mean seriously, it's 2007 and very nearly 2008. The Greeks and Romans had openly gay relations with no problems and we can't deal with it in the 21st century? I'm at a loss.......


message 34: by Meghan (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:27PM) (new)

Meghan | 686 comments Okay no longer confused.
None of this changed what I thought of the books either.


message 35: by Jordan (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:28PM) (new)

Jordan (jordieheartsbooks) I wasn't confused why you were upset, Bre. I was at a loss why Tori would think gay equals a pervert. I merely issued my diatribe in response to Tori's comment.


message 36: by Meghan (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:30PM) (new)

Meghan | 686 comments Does this mean that this subject is over? Or is it just no hard feelings?


message 37: by Meghan (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:30PM) (new)

Meghan | 686 comments lol, bre


message 38: by Ashley (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:31PM) (new)

Ashley (samuraigurl91) | 106 comments ok. i think that when JK said Dumbledore is gay, it wasn't s spurr of a moment thing. i mean, she could have seen Dumbledore as a gay but never mentioned it anywhere because she said, if she had said it earlier, there won't be any suspense to it. so she said she had to wait for all her books to come out b4 telling the truth. and when the girl who went up interviewed her "what about Dumbledore's love life?" , she can't exactly lie "err...its alright..".

and i still don't see whats wrong. why its still such a big deal and a huge blow to everyone. there's even this old lady to wrote an e-mail and said someone should slap JK or something because she said those words and now she can't read the books anymore because of that and she has to pretend JK never said those words in order to be able to read the books again. and some parents are actually stopping their children from reading HP books because its bad. i mean wtf? its ridiculous. JK is the author and she can say whatever she wants about the characters because she created the story.

and the christians are now proving their point that HP is bad. even though i'm a christian myself, i really don't see whats wrong with HP. its a fantasy for God's sake. its not to pollute the children's mind into thinking that magic really exist. i mean, we did grow up listening and reading abt fairy tales and stuff. elves doesn't exist, goblins doesn't exist, and unicorns don't exist. do we still think Santa exist? of course not! there's actually moral in those books and there's nothing wrong with it.

if Dumbledore is gay then let him be. it doesn't affect my thinking of him at all that he's still the same headmaster i love so much. and gays really aren't pervert. i mean, its not their fault that they have hormones like that. they didn't ask for it. they just have it in their blood the day they were born. its life. we just have to deal with it.


message 39: by Cindy (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:31PM) (new)

Cindy (supercin721) | 26 comments Honestly, this is probably why JK never brought it into the books or cut it out. The uproar that conservative, religious individuals would have about it would only detract from the story. Controversy sells books but it's really sad, a disgusting commentary on our society, when parents would have their children no longer read this beautiful story of love, friendship, courage, loyalty, because a mentor is a homosexual. Whether it's a choice or genetic, I could care less. Love who you love...find it anywhere...and enjoy your life. It's a sad day when this still causes so much tension.


message 40: by Sarah (last edited Aug 25, 2016 01:31PM) (new)

Sarah (songgirl7) Just one comment, Ashley... the problem that some religious conservatives have with HP is that witchcraft really does exist. Maybe not in exactly the same way it exists in Harry's world, but some children may not know the difference.

I really do not want to start another debate, here. I'm just letting you know what some people think.


message 41: by Tya (new)

Tya | 2 comments Hmmmm, just one question? do any of you follow Pottercast (can be found here: http://pottercast.the-leaky-cauldron....)? I wanted to ask this on the book 8 thread last week, but I thought it might be redundant seeing this IS the HP group... but after reading some comments here, it is clear that some may not have heard the JKR interview or the gay Dumbledore discussion before it on Pottercast.

Well, anyhooo... I just wanted to let you guys know (based on the interview) that it was never JKR's intention to hide Dumbledore's sexual orientation, it was only by chance that no one ever asked about D's love life before. She made it clear that she would never lie to her fans about anything, especially now that book 7 is out.

I have to say, that any unkind message posted on D's orientation only shows someone's ignorance of the whole situation. Gay does not equal pervert, that is the same thought pattern that goes into muggle-born = stupid, sniveling thieves. Dumbledore being gay brings into light why he was turning a blind eye on Grindelwald's dark side. Dumbledore was infatuated by him... Dumbledore being gay however does not hint in anyway that his love for Harry contains anything inappropriate or perverted, that would be a pedophile your thinking of there dear. You must be really young Tory, to make such a statement, and apparently not very updated on HP news, since Dumbledore's outing occurred October last year.




message 42: by [deleted user] (new)

I know this is an old topic, but just watched "the order of the pheonix" so refreshed this all for me, and I remember hearing JK say that there are references to Dumbledore's being gay, and again, not that it matters.... we ALL LOVE DUMBLEDORE!! but can anyone point out these references for me? I have to admit I've completley missed them....


message 43: by Nikki (new)

Nikki Boisture Christy, I think the references can mostly be found in book 7. Particularly the letter Dumbledore wrote to Grindelwald. He said something along the lines of "I'm not complaining (that Grindelwald had been suspended from Durmstrang) because it has brought us together." And there is the concept that Dumbledore never would have been interested in using magic to rule over muggles. His brain was basically muddled, I think, by his infatuation with Grindelwald. He wasn't able to clearly see what Grindelwald really was.


message 44: by [deleted user] (new)

Ah Ha! As I've yet to read 7 - that might explain it - thanks


message 45: by Nikki (new)

Nikki Boisture Hope that wasn't too much of a spoiler!


message 46: by Rainy (new)

Rainy when i found out that dumbledore was gay i wasnt really that shocked. when i found out i said that explained a lot of things though out the books, the connection dumbledore had with harry but before we knew dumbledore was gay i saw him as more of a father figure than a lover but i guess that was a surprise to all of us.


message 47: by [deleted user] (last edited Jan 28, 2008 05:48PM) (new)

Nikki, not at all...

and I'm sorry but just in NO WAY, do I buy that whole Dumbledore as a lover not a father figure thing. We first have Dumble and Harry meeting when he is 10! He has a special connection with Harry because of who he is, he needs to be looked after and nurtured and strengthened in a different way than any other wizard. Of course he's a father figure to him. If JK meant for Dumble to be gay, fine, but I in no way think that that influences his relationship with Harry!


message 48: by Tess (new)

Tess | 134 comments WHO CARES IF DUMBLEDORE IS GAY???
WHOOPDIE DOO!
Harry's straight, lets go talk about that now, becuase it really matters.
McGonnagal could've liked Harry, she was straight.
The point is, Rowling was only doing it for the publicity, but people shouldn't even care anyway.


message 49: by Maya (new)

Maya (numerounochewylover) | 270 comments I completely agree. There's nothing wrong with it. Dumbledore was a great man; this doesn't change anything! Let's MOVE ON!


message 50: by [deleted user] (new)

wanted to reiterate, that I said " not that it matters.... we ALL LOVE DUMBLEDORE!!" in my first post on this topic.... I was simply trying to find some evidence that JK was alluding too.... there is, a whole topic created about this subject after all...


« previous 1
back to top