Because DD was gay... - Page 3

I think Dumbledore being gay doesn't really have a major effect on Harry Potter's story itself. Like Jane said, it just adds another side to Dumbledore's character specifically--it brings something darker, deeper.

I personally feel people should be free to do whatever there is in their hearts. Though judging others and stereotyping is natural, if it doesn't affect you personally, what's the problem?

And like, lucky_lakshmi says--at the end of everything, it's J.K. Rowling's call. If she says Dumbledore is gay. He's gay. What you think in your head may want to be different. But the reality of the fact is that it's true.

Originally posted by: SugarNSpice615

I think Dumbledore being gay doesn't really have a major effect on Harry Potter's story itself. Like Jane said, it just adds another side to Dumbledore's character specifically--it brings something darker, deeper.

I personally feel people should be free to do whatever there is in their hearts. Though judging others and stereotyping is natural, if it doesn't affect you personally, what's the problem?

And like, lucky_lakshmi says--at the end of everything, it's J.K. Rowling's call. If she says Dumbledore is gay. He's gay. What you think in your head may want to be different. But the reality of the fact is that it's true.

Thank you SugarNSpice615. If only everyone else had the same reasoning as you.

Originally posted by: SugarNSpice615

I personally feel people should be free to do whatever there is in their hearts. Though judging others and stereotyping is natural, if it doesn't affect you personally, what's the problem?

I agree in there...😊

Originally posted by: *Jane*

Fighting is not the same as debating and I felt we were debating. If you still feel uncomfortable saying anything on this thread, I would still like to hear what you have to say. If you're interested, PM me and we'll have a debate. I think you're the first person (who disagrees) on this forum (bar Debate Mansion) that is willing to debate me on this.

OK....i will PM u soon, we will have a debate there. But no here.😛

Originally posted by: *Jane*

Thank you SugarNSpice615. If only everyone else had the same reasoning as you.

hey jane..chill yaar..see,u may feel u r not fighting,par wen other ppl read the discussion,they feel its a war goin on..i too agree tht has no affect on the story but everyone doesnt..i have frndz who r gayz n lesbians but tht doesnt change them..they r as normal as we are..if u wana debate or fight..plz pm each other..ths is not d place..and homosexuality is not bad,its just not accepted,especially by most indians..

Originally posted by: aromal

hey jane..chill yaar..

Kindof hard to do when people deem it appropriate to say certain things about others without a seconds thought as to their consequences.

see,u may feel u r not fighting,par wen other ppl read the discussion,they feel its a war goin on..i too agree tht has no affect on the story but everyone doesnt..

I never said that DD's sexuality has no impact on the story. DD was/is and always has been gay. His sexuality is a part of him thus something that has had a role in building his character and in essence the his contribution to the story.

i have frndz who r gayz n lesbians but tht doesnt change them..they r as normal as we are..

Thank you.

if u wana debate or fight..plz pm each other..ths is not d place..

Debating is very well allowed in these forums, however, it looks like stranger@mirror has opted to do a PM debate.

and homosexuality is not bad,

Of course, it's not.

its just not accepted,especially by most indians..

Why should a homophobic comment be allowed while my defense of it is not? Is it OK for a person to call someone such horrible things (and then have the gull to say that it's my fault for getting offended when it was that person who felt it necessary to bring up the idea of LGBT's being dirty criminals-how does one not get offended?)? Should one not demand an explanation when someone unjustly accuses them of something they did not do? Should one not defend themselves when someone calls them things without cause and simply because? Should I just let people go around badmouthing others, without understanding the consequences of their words, simply because the human population (or that part of the human population) doesn't want to accept?

The fact that Dumbledore is gay has absolutely no implications or changes in the story line of Harry Potter. As a matter of fact if Dumbledore is gay then he was right from the beginning of the series till the end.

Dumbledore's homosexuality however, has implications on society in general. It is a reminder that people are people. Dumbledore was a great wizard, he was intellectual and creative. He was one of the best headmasters Hogwarts had and he was an excellent guide, teacher, philosopher and supporter to Harry. Dumbledore molds and influences Harry to be the hero that he is. Whether a person is black or white, religious or atheist, gay or straight, young or old holds no bearing - what is of utmost importance is their character, the kind of people they are and what they say and do in life.

In an ideal world the fact that Dumbledore is gay should not have created any reaction at all. There is no need for LGBT groups to celebrate a gay hero and there is no need for others to feel upset that a hero is gay. Ideally we all would accept, he was gay - its part of who he was, but in the end he was just another man, just another wizard, just another headmaster, just another hero.

This kind of reminds me of the whole issue with Serena Southerlyn in Law and Order.

Originally posted by: stranger@mirror

And about ur last question i will say visit this links, u will definitley understand why i dont support it...here are the link (do visit it):

https://www.narth.com/docs/whitehead.html

😛

NARTH - National Association of Research and Therapy of Homosexuality, the name itself suggests that the group considers homosexuality to be a mental illness that needs curing. When the premise itself is flawed how can the logic be right. Why not cite a source that is neutral, a source that neutrally identifies what is a disorder and what is not, perhaps like the American Psychiatrist Association that specializes in identifying mental illnesses. Probably because the APA and Psychiatrists across the world have decided that homosexuality is not any mental illness that needs to be cured.

How would you feel if everyone constantly told you were sick and attempted to cure you, or exorcise demons that have possessed you - chances are that even if you have no illness you would become mentally unstable with the pressure around you working against you. Same thing with homosexuals, when people constantly tell them they are sick, try to cure them, pressurize them to be heterosexual and force changes on them - the negative forces against them are usually the ones that cause breakdowns, suicides etc not homosexuality itself.

However, according to your premise that homosexuality is a mental illness that must be cured the implications are that Albus realized that he was twisted and sick, while Snape was a member of order of Phoenix he was also a valuable member whose task was to brew a potion that would cure unnatural sicknesses like lycantrophy, vampirism, dwarfism, giagantism, homosexuality and left handism. When he realized that he could not cure homosexuality despite all the potions he tried, he decided to kill Dumbledore in a vengeful hate crime.

Originally posted by: return_to_hades

NARTH - National Association of Research and Therapy of Homosexuality, the name itself suggests that the group considers homosexuality to be a mental illness that needs curing. When the premise itself is flawed how can the logic be right. Why not cite a source that is neutral, a source that neutrally identifies what is a disorder and what is not, perhaps like the American Psychiatrist Association that specializes in identifying mental illnesses. Probably because the APA and Psychiatrists across the world have decided that homosexuality is not any mental illness that needs to be cured.

How would you feel if everyone constantly told you were sick and attempted to cure you, or exorcise demons that have possessed you - chances are that even if you have no illness you would become mentally unstable with the pressure around you working against you. Same thing with homosexuals, when people constantly tell them they are sick, try to cure them, pressurize them to be heterosexual and force changes on them - the negative forces against them are usually the ones that cause breakdowns, suicides etc not homosexuality itself.

However, according to your premise that homosexuality is a mental illness that must be cured the implications are that Albus realized that he was twisted and sick, while Snape was a member of order of Phoenix he was also a valuable member whose task was to brew a potion that would cure unnatural sicknesses like lycantrophy, vampirism, dwarfism, giagantism, homosexuality and left handism. When he realized that he could not cure homosexuality despite all the potions he tried, he decided to kill Dumbledore in a vengeful hate crime.

Very nice metaphor and thank you. Posts like yours mean alot to me.😊

Originally posted by: return_to_hades

The fact that Dumbledore is gay has absolutely no implications or changes in the story line of Harry Potter. As a matter of fact if Dumbledore is gay then he was right from the beginning of the series till the end.

Dumbledore's homosexuality however, has implications on society in general. It is a reminder that people are people. Dumbledore was a great wizard, he was intellectual and creative. He was one of the best headmasters Hogwarts had and he was an excellent guide, teacher, philosopher and supporter to Harry. Dumbledore molds and influences Harry to be the hero that he is. Whether a person is black or white, religious or atheist, gay or straight, young or old holds no bearing - what is of utmost importance is their character, the kind of people they are and what they say and do in life.

In an ideal world the fact that Dumbledore is gay should not have created any reaction at all. There is no need for LGBT groups to celebrate a gay hero and there is no need for others to feel upset that a hero is gay. Ideally we all would accept, he was gay - its part of who he was, but in the end he was just another man, just another wizard, just another headmaster, just another hero.

This kind of reminds me of the whole issue with Serena Southerlyn in Law and Order.

It shouldn't, but, for some reason, it does to people. We don't live in an ideal world, unfortunately.