Lemmy Shitpost
Welcome to Lemmy Shitpost. Here you can shitpost to your hearts content.
Anything and everything goes. Memes, Jokes, Vents and Banter. Though we still have to comply with lemmy.world instance rules. So behave!
Rules:
1. Be Respectful
Refrain from using harmful language pertaining to a protected characteristic: e.g. race, gender, sexuality, disability or religion.
Refrain from being argumentative when responding or commenting to posts/replies. Personal attacks are not welcome here.
...
2. No Illegal Content
Content that violates the law. Any post/comment found to be in breach of common law will be removed and given to the authorities if required.
That means:
-No promoting violence/threats against any individuals
-No CSA content or Revenge Porn
-No sharing private/personal information (Doxxing)
...
3. No Spam
Posting the same post, no matter the intent is against the rules.
-If you have posted content, please refrain from re-posting said content within this community.
-Do not spam posts with intent to harass, annoy, bully, advertise, scam or harm this community.
-No posting Scams/Advertisements/Phishing Links/IP Grabbers
-No Bots, Bots will be banned from the community.
...
4. No Porn/Explicit
Content
-Do not post explicit content. Lemmy.World is not the instance for NSFW content.
-Do not post Gore or Shock Content.
...
5. No Enciting Harassment,
Brigading, Doxxing or Witch Hunts
-Do not Brigade other Communities
-No calls to action against other communities/users within Lemmy or outside of Lemmy.
-No Witch Hunts against users/communities.
-No content that harasses members within or outside of the community.
...
6. NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.
-Content that is NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.
-Content that might be distressing should be kept behind NSFW tags.
...
If you see content that is a breach of the rules, please flag and report the comment and a moderator will take action where they can.
Also check out:
Partnered Communities:
1.Memes
10.LinuxMemes (Linux themed memes)
Reach out to
All communities included on the sidebar are to be made in compliance with the instance rules. Striker
view the rest of the comments
You're right, that was hyperbole. What I should've written is "every character that expresses traditionally feminine interests", save for of course, the tradwife, like Molly Weasley whose entire character is just being a mother. Does she have interests beyond being a mother? No, with seven children who has time to be a person?
Hermione doesn't engage with anything traditionally feminine, she's a "not-like-other-girls" type character, hell she doesn't really have any friends that aren't boys. Even so, she's often not taken seriously. She's mocked for studying hard, and she's mocked for her anti-slavery coalition, which people only really join half-heartedly in order to placate her.
There's obviously Dolores Umbridge. She's into cute, frilly, fluffy, pink things. She's also a sadist. Her punishment for being bad is to be carried off by centaurs to get raped in a forest.
Luna Lovegood was introduced as another character to be bullied, and she remains on the outskirts throughout the book, but Rowling softened up on her once she got extremely popular with the fans of the series.
Ah right, the massive genocide of Jews, disabled people, LGBTQ+ people, and other minorities back in the mid 1900s was okay because the Israeli state is now running a genocide of their own. Rowling was correct to be antisemitic actually!
She actually does, in the ballroom party thing - a beautiful dress and hair, taking a feminine role as a beautiful lady, and all that. That does not invalidate your point though, since there being a single instance (I could think of), just highlights what you said.
Ah yeah, I'd forgotten about that. Pulled up the book to that chapter, and came across this
A boy with a vault full of gold, couldn't give his supposed friend something better than his uncle's knobbly, "oldest and foulest, mustard yellow" socks. His slave friend appreciates it nonetheless, but like, surely he had nicer socks?
I can't with this author. The fact that at the end of all of this, nothing has changed; people's worth is still determined by breeding and bloodline, the slave race is still enslaved, just kind of makes the entire journey seem pointless to me.
Oh yeah, you killed wizard-Hitler but the wizard-nazi ideology is not just at large, but commonly practised by everyone, including by the good-guy rich-orphan turned wizard cop and his friends.
That sort of stuff just flew past, when you were a kid at the time. I always hated how the house elves were treated, but never could put it into words... But yeah, the more you look into the series as an adult, the worse it just gets. And that whole quote... y i k e s.
Fuck Rowling, I hope that piece of trash hits her toes in the sharpest corner.
Yeah. I enjoyed these books as a kid, which makes sense because I was oblivious to the prejudices of society. One could argue that maybe Rowling was too, but given her actions I just don't believe that.
If she did not see them, and when she finally did, instead of aknowledging bad things as bad, she just jumped head first into embracing the prejudices herself. Either way, it does not paint a good picture of her character.
Excuse me, but I can't agree with your position here.
Is a woman not allowed to realize itself through motherhood?
Also Molly was smart and fierce (remember fight with Bellatrix Lestrange?
And I personally know such girls.
It's perfectly normal for a girl to be like that.
Also her persona and stance evoke respect in the reader, as well as a sense that she is being treated unfairly.
Haven't you met cruel teachers / persons in power who acted all nice?
And it's not like Dolores was the only villain in the books.
And her persona was revealed as a kind and brave hero.
It's important for quirky children to feel represented.
Goblins didn't strike me as jews exactly because they were friends with Harry Potter's world Hitler.
A big nose and banking isn't enough.
Are you for real right now
English isn't my first language and certainly isn't my best
Ah, sorry
Of course. And according to Joanne KKK Rowling, that's the only way you can be a woman; if you can produce children. Women are the ones with the large gametes! That's the definition of woman, nothing else. Screw all cis-women who don't fit the mold.
You're not allowed to be too feminine, but also if you don't adhere to white-feminine beauty standards you're also bad.
I do! "NOT MY DAUGHTER YOU DON'T!"
No matter what, Molly is nothing but a mother. There's no character there beyond that.
You've missed my point. My point is, there are many ways of being a person, and many ways of being a girl or a woman. Rowling doesn't believe that, and the narrative she pushes explicitly defines what is and isn't from her perspective, an acceptable way of being a woman. She very clearly values men over women.
Ember Green did an excellent video essay that touches on this topic.
There's a Wikipedia entry on Jewish sterotypes. You could turn it into a drinking game, if you'd like to die of alcohol poisoning.
Edit: As a child I looked past these things. I didn't see them, I lacked the cultural context. I'm no longer a child, and now it's blatantly obvious.
These books were written by a grown-ass woman who couldn't possibly be so stupid as to name the only fucking Chinese character Cho Chang on accident. Her name is almost Ching Chong!
She couldn't have been ignorant to the nazi rhetoric she spewed out, or the pro-slavery bits.
The books are soaked with racism, ableism, and misogyny and I don't understand how anyone can go back to them as an adult, having obtained the cultural context, and still think the stories are okay.
Downvotes on the deleted comment? Interesting.
There wasn't any vote on it before deletion.
Such is the nature of voting on forums
Harry Potter books don't have that assertion to me. There are different positive female figures in the books.
Did you read my comment? There were examples of characters beyond that. Your own examples, in fact.
Hermione is opposed to slavery, even though elves themselves don't consider it so (who knows why - they are magical creatures).
And Hermione is a positive figure. I was sympathetic with her goal when I read the books.
Chang is a common Chinese surname. Cho - was a miss.
Overall it looked like the author wasn't really bothered to choose some real real name and chose to construct one to emphasize the character's origin.
By the way: Cho Chang was a positive figure also.
"Character" as in personality, not other fictional people.
What do you mean?
"Character" can mean:
A person in a story
The nature of someone's personality, beliefs, etc.
The person you were replying to was referring to Molly's "character", as in, her personality etc.
Book: has one character whose main sense of identity is being a mother
Critic: "THIS BOOK IS SAYING THE ONLY VALID WAY TO BE A WOMAN IS TO BE A MOTHER!!1!!1!1!1!"
It's obnoxiously close to this broader view in society:
Woman: is a mother
Society: "SO YOU THINK A WOMAN'S SOLE PURPOSE IS TO BE A MOTHER?!?!?!?!!?!"
Also, are we just going to ignore Professor McGonagall being childless and devoted to her career in academia in which she thrives and holds the respect of her peers and pupils?
You know what, that's fair. McGonagall is a mostly unproblematic character, I feel. There are some moments where I feel like she meted out very strange punishments, like sending the kids out into a dangerous forest they were prohibited from being in because it's potentially lethal, or when she locked Neville out of the Gryffindor common room while a murderer was on the loose.
That said, Caroline Easom did a video on the female characters that appear in the top 100 characters by mention in the books and there are some less savoury patterns in how Joanne portrays women.
Sure. If it makes you feel better, then whatever.
That's your argument? Ok.
There is no argument. You're allowed to believe what you wish, wrong or not. I just don't have the energy to waste on apologists and supporters of such heinous politics. Rowling's politics are apparent in all of her writing, she's always championed outdated eugenicist beliefs. If you choose to ignore that, that's your prerogative and I don't think anything I say or show you will convince you otherwise.
Ergo, this conversation here is just a waste of time for the two of us.
If you're under the impression that I support Rowling - I'm not. Fuck her.
I'm protecting the books.
Given that Rowling is still making money and is actively using that money to harm people, you cannot extricate the art from the artist.
If one want a whimsical world of magic, I'd recommend Terry Pratchett's Discworld series. If one wants a little darker story about a magical school, I'd recommend the Scholomance series by Naomi Novik.
By the way: you can pirate those books.
Pirating Harry Potter media is the only ethical way of consuming it. When I quoted the books here it was from an epub I obtained the same way the big corpos do it.
Yet you can. The books (plot) themselves don't become bad because of that.
No, they're bad entirely on their own merit.
That's separate from whether you separate them from the artist
I'm getting pretty tired of this tirade, honestly.
Rowling's hateful and bigoted ideology is reflected in the books, it's right there for anyone to see. You cannot extricate that from the story she tells. The story is bad, because her ideology is bad.
That's not to say that there aren't redeemable moments. Hitler treated most anyone badly, but he was pro animal-rights. I somehow don't find that redeems him or his works as a whole. Apply the same to Rowling.
I agree with you fyi I'm just saying that your response didn't make a lot of sense