Wizarding Toleranance of Homosexuality
Dec. 16th, 2005 12:03 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
tsukinofaeriiI seem to be doing a lot of these things, don't I? What I'd really like to know is why people grab at the little things I mention that are completely side-points to my argument, rather than staying in topic?
Arguments for absolute tolerance based on the isolation of the wizarding world are kind of tricky. With the influx of Muggleborns and the prevalence of half-bloods, there must be some Muggle influence on society. It won't reach pureblood elitists like the Malfoys or the Blacks, but it will still be there. Like Christmas. My theory there is that Wizards don't celebrate the religious aspect of the holiday as much as they do the secular, because there's so many Muggleborn/half-bloode who celebrate the religious version that it makes no sense to ignore it completely, and after a long enough you'd be hard pressed to find a Wizard or Witch who doesn't celebrate one way or the other. The same would go for Valentines and similar holidays.
Similarly, opinions have probably filtered down, but into a diluted form, and only where they don't directly contradict wizarding society. Most suppression of women, homosexuals and the like are caused by religion. Religion has probably filtered down with everything else, but it would be much harder to integrate into the Wizarding world. It's probably changed beyond easy recognition. What a religious person of the Middle Ages would call a miracle, a Wizard of the same time period would think of as nothing special. So when various forms of bigotry popped up, it would have to not interfere with common wizarding practices of the time to get a toe-hold. We don't see strong suppression of women or racial minorities (if any) because most of the propoganda passed around on those was that they were/are weaker, less intelligent, less holy (more prone to sin) and actually dangerous if left unchecked. As someone already mentioned (I forget who, sorry!), in a world where muscle-strength is replaced by a flick of the wand, where it's easily visible that a woman/black man is better of a witch or wizard than the next person, religion never caught on with the fervor it did in Muggle areas and the best way to be dangerous is accessible to everyone with the same ease (hexes and jinxes), trying to push unfounded prejudice on wizarding society would be difficult, to say the least. This would keep general Muggle-based prejudices out through religious terms, and probably blocked a lot of homosexual bigotry as well. Not all, of course, but enough that most people won't bat an eye for a man/woman to sleep with a member of the same gender, as long as they're meeting other societal standards of their times. (Wife, children, job, et cetera.) So bigotry is there for someone who's openly homosexual and makes no pretense at being heterosexual, but not because it's "wrong" so much as because they're not meeting expected standards.
(In a little note that is on a bit of a tangent, black vs. white bigotry based on slavery as we mostly saw it in the USA wouldn't be an effective argument for intolerance either, since historically most of the slave trade outside the USA was Slavic, and not really based on race at all.)
That's probably the main reason why we don't see homosexuality in the books. It's there, but it's not talked about in polite society. Sex in general isn't discussed as far as we see (and I am making allowances for these being childrens books!), and as something that is effectively "in the closet" it wouldn't be something that comes up casually.
I think J.K.R. (whatever the truth is) is trying to focus on one form of prejudice at a time. The real focus of the books is racism (Muggle vs. Wizard), and to bring in sexism/heterosexism/color-based racism/et cetera would be confusing an issue that doesn't need the muddling. She can make her point about stupid, thoughtless bigotry quite well without resorting to hauling every bit of dirty laundry out of the hamper. For a happy slasher like me, it's sad that slash isn't going to make a sparkling appearance, but I can understand the reasons. Besides, any point she makes about racism (bad bigot, no biscuit!) will apply obliquely to homophobia, and that's a heartening thought.
My answer: They're more tolerant than Muggles, but still have a long way to go before it's acceptance and support. (Closeting is incredibly unhealthy, for anyone who's interested.)
Arguments for absolute tolerance based on the isolation of the wizarding world are kind of tricky. With the influx of Muggleborns and the prevalence of half-bloods, there must be some Muggle influence on society. It won't reach pureblood elitists like the Malfoys or the Blacks, but it will still be there. Like Christmas. My theory there is that Wizards don't celebrate the religious aspect of the holiday as much as they do the secular, because there's so many Muggleborn/half-bloode who celebrate the religious version that it makes no sense to ignore it completely, and after a long enough you'd be hard pressed to find a Wizard or Witch who doesn't celebrate one way or the other. The same would go for Valentines and similar holidays.
Similarly, opinions have probably filtered down, but into a diluted form, and only where they don't directly contradict wizarding society. Most suppression of women, homosexuals and the like are caused by religion. Religion has probably filtered down with everything else, but it would be much harder to integrate into the Wizarding world. It's probably changed beyond easy recognition. What a religious person of the Middle Ages would call a miracle, a Wizard of the same time period would think of as nothing special. So when various forms of bigotry popped up, it would have to not interfere with common wizarding practices of the time to get a toe-hold. We don't see strong suppression of women or racial minorities (if any) because most of the propoganda passed around on those was that they were/are weaker, less intelligent, less holy (more prone to sin) and actually dangerous if left unchecked. As someone already mentioned (I forget who, sorry!), in a world where muscle-strength is replaced by a flick of the wand, where it's easily visible that a woman/black man is better of a witch or wizard than the next person, religion never caught on with the fervor it did in Muggle areas and the best way to be dangerous is accessible to everyone with the same ease (hexes and jinxes), trying to push unfounded prejudice on wizarding society would be difficult, to say the least. This would keep general Muggle-based prejudices out through religious terms, and probably blocked a lot of homosexual bigotry as well. Not all, of course, but enough that most people won't bat an eye for a man/woman to sleep with a member of the same gender, as long as they're meeting other societal standards of their times. (Wife, children, job, et cetera.) So bigotry is there for someone who's openly homosexual and makes no pretense at being heterosexual, but not because it's "wrong" so much as because they're not meeting expected standards.
(In a little note that is on a bit of a tangent, black vs. white bigotry based on slavery as we mostly saw it in the USA wouldn't be an effective argument for intolerance either, since historically most of the slave trade outside the USA was Slavic, and not really based on race at all.)
That's probably the main reason why we don't see homosexuality in the books. It's there, but it's not talked about in polite society. Sex in general isn't discussed as far as we see (and I am making allowances for these being childrens books!), and as something that is effectively "in the closet" it wouldn't be something that comes up casually.
I think J.K.R. (whatever the truth is) is trying to focus on one form of prejudice at a time. The real focus of the books is racism (Muggle vs. Wizard), and to bring in sexism/heterosexism/color-based racism/et cetera would be confusing an issue that doesn't need the muddling. She can make her point about stupid, thoughtless bigotry quite well without resorting to hauling every bit of dirty laundry out of the hamper. For a happy slasher like me, it's sad that slash isn't going to make a sparkling appearance, but I can understand the reasons. Besides, any point she makes about racism (bad bigot, no biscuit!) will apply obliquely to homophobia, and that's a heartening thought.
My answer: They're more tolerant than Muggles, but still have a long way to go before it's acceptance and support. (Closeting is incredibly unhealthy, for anyone who's interested.)
