Welcome to Gaia! ::

gonk gonk gonk AAAAAAAhhhh! Nooooo!!!! Dumbledore's gay!!!!!???? What will happen next? The LOTR characters were gay!?! My cousins were really shock of hearing about this now. eek

(*has a sudden mental image of Dumbley acting like Jack from "Will and Grace"*) gonk

Seriously, to show that he's gay, it's either that or have him openly in a relationship with another guy - the first method is so much a stereotype that it's dumb, and the second probably would've hurt sales. Yeah, there'd be the people buying the books just to see if there was any hawt old-man-on-man action, but I'm guessing that more people would stay away from it (and keep their kids away from it) if they feared seeing any old-man-gayness or creepy ***** stuff in it.

I kind of suspected it a little, especially with the Grindelwald backstory, but it really didn't matter. Gay or not, Dumbledore was Dumbledore. They didn't show him in a relationship, so to me his sexuality was irrelevant. Sure, with them seeing each other, it makes their duel more poignant, but for me, just the fact that they were best friends was painful enough.

I think she probably wrote it into the books as much as she could with the least amount of uproar (openly gay guy + being old + position of authority over many, many young boys = *****, in a lot of people's minds, especially with the Catholic priest/Boy Scout master/etc. incidents), but the announcement was completely unnecessary, IMO.

Yeah, now gay people have someone to identify with in the books, and ideally this would make any homophobic fans open their minds a little, but in reality, the type of fear and hate that comes with being a homophobe isn't going to go away just because a character in a book you like "comes out of the closet" post-humously. Likely, the people who have no problems with gays already had their own theories on who was really gay or not, and anyone who's homophobic or otherwise "no, Dumbley's not gay! It's not possible!" is going to either ignore the announcement (if they're a fan of the books) or burn their books (if they're sufficiently homophobic).

It's a total marketing ploy - I agree with Lily, et. al on this one. Now people who've only seen the movies are gonna be like "omg, does it say that in the books?!" and will buy more copies of it. People who already have the books will be like, "does it say this in another country's version?" and buy more copies. Some of the people who weren't interested in HP for the magic will buy books looking for scenes of Dumbledore prancing around, swishing his wand in an effeminate fashion, etc.

Plus it's guaranteed to keep the fanfics churning out, now that it's "canon" (o'course, knowing the fanfic world intimately, they will be set back when D. and Grindelwald were young so that the writers can make them bishie, because lord knows, all gay guys are young, skinny, and pretty >.<).

Seriously, when your series has already been plagued by book-burnings by fundamental Christians who view it as Satan's teachings, are you really going to add to your "people who hate my books" list by creating more controversy when it's not necessary? I guess if you're insecure as to how your books will hold up to the test of time, and feel the need to stir up s**t to sell your books (because, yes, controversy sells too), then you would. confused

I'm just disgusted by this, I really am. Not that he's gay, but the announcement of it, and...

Now, if the question had been something along the lines of "does he find true love with McGonagall/Hooch/any other female?", then that'd be an acceptable answer. With how it's quoted (which is all I have to go on right now), her answer is a non sequitur made just for attention.

Now if you all will kindly excuse me, I must go bang my head against a wall. gonk

My friend said the JK probably atteneded to have Dumbledore gay from the very begining but was too scared to write about it. Could be a possibility.

Either way, we keep joking about wool socks and the mirror now dramallama

As a writer, I know that when you come up with a character you come up with an entire person. You know things about them that are not necessary to the book and can weaken it. There was no part of Harry Potter where you needed to know he was gay. She just had it in her head and it affected his character and how he reacted to stuff. When asked about it she just said what she had already thought of. I don't really think it's for attention and I think it's stupid that now people are like "he was trying to get in Harry's pants." There is a difference between being gay and *****. Older gay men aren't into children/teenagers in the same way that older straight men aren't. People are just homophobic so they twist things around.

I know that; I write quite a bit myself. It was just a weird way to answer.

I also think it's stupid the way some people are reacting: he wasn't into Harry/Ron/Draco/whoever! I can't remember the article completely, but I got the impression that Grindelwald WAS his only love and that because he was so hurt by Grindelwald, he never dared give his heart out again. I find that rather sad, especially because all along Dumbledore was the one saying that love is the power that Voldemort knew not.

Hmmm. I think there's a double meaning in J.K's words.

She said Dumbledore is gay (which could mean that he's happy)but did she say dumbledore is A gay?

I frikkin love your sig pic! It's hilarious!!!!

I was actually kinda hoping not to see a thread about this. They are beating it to death on CNN scream scream scream scream