this post was submitted on 16 Aug 2024
994 points (100.0% liked)

196

16440 readers
1507 users here now

Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.

Rule: You must post before you leave.

^other^ ^rules^

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
all 35 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Transporter_Room_3@startrek.website 167 points 2 months ago (2 children)

They joke, but I legitimately know people whose parents were the super Christian "any book about controversial topics is the devil and so are video games and TV" to the point where when she found out her daughter had Harry potter book, she burned every book of hers that wasn't directly religious.

Well guess who decided to "give them a try" since "the author clearly has the right ideas about life" since all her children are out of the house and the only ones who bother visiting are the two with kids (who would never admit it but they're only there for free babysitting and future help) and one who just doubled down into the religion despite witnessing the same bullshit as her siblings....

So yeah, this may have been intended as a joke, but they're closer to the truth than they might know.

[–] SkyezOpen@lemmy.world 50 points 2 months ago (1 children)

The best satire is rooted in reality. The issue the onion is facing is that right wing nuts are genuinely beyond parody at this point.

[–] hOrni@lemmy.world 25 points 2 months ago (3 children)

Maybe they'll learn something. Despite the authors current opinions, the books messages are about tolerance.

[–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world 28 points 2 months ago (3 children)

With the Gringotts bankers being grotesque antisemitic stereotypes, the only black character being named Shacklebolt, and the only character who's against slavery being laughed at by everyone else and then dropping the subject forever, sure!

Knowing all that along with how much of a bigot she is IRL, it requires a HIGH bullshit tolerance to be able to stomach it all.

That's what you meant by tolerance, right?

[–] SkyezOpen@lemmy.world 21 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Two Indians named Patel. Black kid named brown. You'll never guess the heritage of Seamus Finnegan. She just has stereotypes and nothing else.

Related:

[–] hOrni@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago

I think that's only in the movies.

[–] hOrni@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I don't get Your point. Your last name usually reflects where Your family comes from. I'm Polish, and half of the people I ever knew had last names ending in "ski".

[–] SkyezOpen@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago

I will name a character pierogi polanski in your honor.

[–] hOrni@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I don't agree. The only thing about goblins is that they are bankers. If you hear bankers, and think Jews, that may be that You are stereotyping. Shacklebolt and Cho Chang I consider just poorly though through names. As for the elves being slaves, that has depth. It's not just, elves want to be slaves so we keep them as slaves. The characters in the books ask them, if they like what they are doing. They like it, they talk about it, we see the point of view of elves. It may be my childhood innocence talking, but I never took it as malicious writing. Maybe unconscious stereotyping. But it was the 90s, she didn't know better. But all in all now she is a shit human being and I despise her views.

[–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world 6 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

The only thing about goblins is that they are bankers.

That's categorically NOT true.

If you hear bankers, and think Jews, that may be that You are stereotyping.

Or maybe the fact that you see figures modeled after a Nazi stereotype of Jewish people and think "just bankers" is a You ignoring the obvious to defend the indefensible thing.

Shacklebolt and Cho Chang I consider just poorly though through names

Nobody forced her to give them racist names. That she did so anyway is lazy stereotyping at best, intentional racist belittling at worst.

As for the elves being slaves, that has depth.

Here we go with the slavery apologia..

The characters in the books ask them, if they like what they are doing. They like it, they talk about it, we see the point of view of elves

Just because they've been institutionalized to think that slavery is the only way of life for them doesn't make it ok.

She could easily NOT have had slaves in a world where everything they're forced to do can be accomplished with magic. But no, she CHOSE for there to be slaves and then endorse slavery by making the slaves "want it"

It may be my childhood innocence talking, but I never took it as malicious writing

Definitely you missing it at first, yes. Which is understandable for a child. You should know better than to defend it now, though.

Maybe unconscious stereotyping. But it was the 90s, she didn't know better

That's bullshit. She had full control of an entire magical world and CHOSE to inject unchallenged and lampshaded bigotry into it.

Whether the 1990s or the fucking 1890s, it's her job to know better and do better.

But all in all now she is a shit human being

[–] hOrni@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Thanks for the comments, Man. I appreciate the fact, that You want to talk about it. If You let me, I Will respond later, as now I'm after a night shift and drunk. Would You be willing to tell me Your age? I think that is an important thing in analysing HP and the authors views. I was born in 87,but I'm polish, so the books got to me a little bit later than most st of the world.

[–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago

If You let me, I Will respond later, as now I'm after a night shift and drunk

Sure, enjoy your night lol

Would You be willing to tell me Your age? I think that is an important thing in analysing HP and the authors views. I was born in 87,but I'm polish, so the books got to me a little bit later than most st of the world.

I'm 41 but didn't read them as they came out but rather well into my twenties.

Embarrassingly, I missed a lot of the more problematic stuff back then in spite of not being a child, but I thought harder about it later when learning from others spelling it out for me heh

[–] hOrni@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

And also. Pleas explain me, how are Rowlngs goblins a Jewish stereotype, but Tolkiens dwarves aren't? And what about the Doppler in The Witcher?

[–] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world 9 points 2 months ago

So you're saying that 3 wrongs make a right?

For all his brilliance, Tolkien was a first half of the 20th century devout Catholic, so yeah, he was also a bigot. See also the "dark-skinned savages" from the south with the oliphants.

As for The Witcher, same thing: the author is from Poland, the most Catholic country in the world and one of the whitest so yeah, it's predictable that he'd be kinda bigoted too. Not justified at all, though, just to be clear.

Rowling, on the other hand, doesn't even have the flimsy non-excuse of growing up in a time and place where bigotry is still normalized. She's just a bigot for no other reason than her own ignorance and prejudices.

Maybe, but I'm not holding my breath.

The one who originally had the HP books came out a few years ago and her mother disowned her.

Her dad doesn't seem to care as long as she's happy, but he is standing by his wife's shitty decision. I can only hope he's trying to talk sense into her behind the scenes instead of being totally hands-off.

[–] primrosepathspeedrun@lemmy.world 14 points 2 months ago

when a character starts being an abolitionist about literal slavery, it becomes a running joke. the goblins are antisemitic stereotypes, up to and including being bankers, and all the characters who aren't white are named in ways that would have been considered 'kinda racist' a century earlier.

[–] Pencilnoob@lemmy.world 29 points 2 months ago (3 children)

Witchcraft is fine. Every evangelical I know was allowed to read Hobbit, LOTR, Dune, Narnia.

The problem is witchcraft written by women

[–] Fester@lemm.ee 37 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I grew up in a very religious conservative home. My parents love LOTR, Narnia, Marvel, Star Wars, etc.

But we weren’t allowed to read Harry Potter. The reason given was that “fictional magic is usually ok, but HP is teaching you that anyone can go to a magic school and learn witchcraft.”

Now, you have to understand that they believed in real-life witchcraft. Real people apparently draw pentagrams, contact demons, and get effective results. They had cautionary tales about Ouija boards gone wrong, and that sort of thing.

But imagine my surprise when I grew up and married someone who is a huge HP fan, and I finally watched all the movies and listened to the audiobooks. And guess what? It’s literally the fucking opposite of “anyone can learn witchcraft.” It’s literally about people who are born with or without the ability do magic and the fascist villain wants to torture, enslave, and kill non-magic people.

So where did my parents get their entirely wrong idea? From some Satanic Panic fearmongering fundamentalist/evangelical leader. Maybe it was the same one who told them that “any music with drums is basically pornography.”

So nah, I don’t think it’s about women authors - that’s probably another issue. It’s whether the works are popular enough and have enough buzz words that some religious leader is able to latch onto it and scare people into being outraged by it, banking on the assumption that they won’t actually read it.

In fact, that’s a running theme - assume people won’t think for themselves or learn any facts about anything they’re told be outraged about.

[–] Pencilnoob@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

Yeah, TBF I was really just making a snarky dig at the misogyny in the evangelical world.

I can immediately think of a counter example: the Golden Compass. It's written by a man, but basically takes the stance that the devil is the good guy and has a main character whose best skill is the ability to lie so well she can pretty much always get what she wants. The church equivalent abuses children and looks the other way about it when confronted 💀

Unsurprisingly that series isn't too popular among fundies

[–] inbeesee@lemmy.world 17 points 2 months ago

My evang parents justified LotT and Narnia with "they were Christians" and "they're Christian allegories". But it was never a strong defense for their reactionary tendencies

[–] HowManyNimons@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago

Go further up and further in. There is a deeper level of fundie where anything with magic is evil. It's wild.

[–] JusticeForPorygon@lemmy.world 22 points 2 months ago

I'm pretty sure the best way to make sure your kid grows up to practice witchcraft is to raise them evangelical.