Jennifner.com

We interrupt this broadcast to bring you a special report.

Dumbledore’s gay. There, I’ve said it. Is your world radically different than it was a minute ago? Neither is mine.

Before discussing the matter further, here are some quick answers to most of the questions I’ve received throughout this week. My basic thoughts come down to:

1. Yes, I was initially surprised.
2. No, it doesn’t really bother me.
3. No, I don’t think it’ll have any long-lasting effects on the overall popularity or legacy of the book.
4. Yes, I think it’s okay for Rowling to “make him be gay.” They’re her characters, for heaven’s sake, she’s ultimately in control, and we’re just lucky she’s shared them with us.
5. No, it doesn’t change how I feel about the books. I like them as much as I always have.
6. No, I don’t think she waited until after book 7 to “out him” for any monetary reasons. (Nor do I think that any cowardice on her part caused her to hold her tongue until after its release.)
7. No, it doesn’t change my perspective of the Dumbledore-Harry relationship. (Nor any relationship Dumbledore had with any of his other students, for that matter. For heaven’s sake! He’s gay, not a pedophile or sexual predator.)
8. No, if you look through the book, I don’t think you’ll find any gay undertones. (So consequently, I don’t think it will have any effect on the kids who read it. I definitely don’t think it will “make them gay.”)
9. No, I don’t think she’s pushing any “gay agenda.”
10. Yes, I really am sick of hearing people be upset about it.

(Note, if you’re unsatisfied with my brief responses, let me simply echo the words of a more in-depth Mugglenet editorial. Amen, brother.)

The response to this press report uncovers a lot of fascinating issues in our twenty-first-century public consciousness, including the nature of character creation, author ownership of characters, religion, prejudice, age-appropriate themes in literature, morality, and (obviously) the way we deal—publicly and privately—with the issue of sexuality.

She was asked a direct question at an event. Why shouldn’t we expect her to answer it honestly?

(Incidentally, the premise of honesty here is based on the idea that, while authors may be the ultimate “creator” of a character, in many cases the characters become persons in their own right that can, at times, develop in ways that surprise their creators. This is a perspective Rowling herself has expressed. Knowing this, I am convinced that Dumbledore’s sexuality was one of those developments.)

So, getting back to the question, why are people unhappy with Rowling’s full and honest answer? Because it doesn’t align with our values? Because we’re uncomfortable with the topic? Because it’s not something we want to hear? Ultimately, the answer to this question reveals some form of prejudice. While we may not support homosexuality, it is downright silly of us to pretend that it isn’t a real issue in our twenty-first-century consciousness; the homosexual segment of the population is a real section of our society, and they deserve to be treated with humanity and kindness.

The golden rule still applies, regardless of one’s sexuality.

Furthermore, to those who claim that a discussion of sexuality has no place in a children’s book, let me point out that there is, in fact, no discussion of Dumbledore’s sexuality inside any of the Harry Potter books. However, to address the topic, I agree that elementary school students are too young to fully understand the implications of homosexuality. Nevertheless, children are never too young to be taught to recognize the good in others. What harm could possibly come from teaching children to see that someone who is homosexual can also be wise, strong, respected, and loving?

Truly, in the long run, what is more damaging to a child (or a society, for that matter): cultivating tolerance or perpetuating prejudices?

We now return to your regularly scheduled program, already in progress.