Is there room for sexuality in children´s books? - Page 11 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 10-23-2007, 06:49 PM   #151
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,997
Local Time: 01:00 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by anitram

Gayer than a picnic basket.


Tolkien never stated that- and people read the books and saw the movies in droves. Alas he died before his gay agenda was exposed.

That was such a lovely relationship, whatever you want to read into it about sexuality- if anything. Because people do that all the time, so what's wrong with an author just saying that was her intent?
__________________

__________________
MrsSpringsteen is online now  
Old 10-23-2007, 07:08 PM   #152
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 04:00 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by MrsSpringsteen
Does anyone think Frodo and Sam were gay? Just sayin...
No, mateship does not imply homosexuality.
__________________

__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 10-23-2007, 08:35 PM   #153
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 01:00 PM
After reading this thread in its entirety, coupled with the comments written in this CNN.com article, I find myself completely shaking my head, wondering not only where everything went wrong, but also where the hell do you start?

Perhaps ironically, the first thing I thought of was neoconservative academic Allan Bloom's 1987 book, "The Closing of the American Mind." While I take great issue with much of Bloom's "pontificating," which reeks of an old man yearning for some romanticized "good old days," I do have to wonder what the hell happened to Western education. The fact that we have grown men and women today with a level of discourse that doesn't even follow the basic levels of logic or reason is increasingly quite shocking to me. What do people even learn anymore today?

What it really comes down to is the fact that all this anti-gay rhetoric is so incredibly nonsensical and illogical that I'm astonished that any fully sentient being can even believe this shit with a straight face. And for me to respond to all of this with the proper level of discourse...I think it would literally take me an entire novel to do it.

And I am, frankly, considering writing it.
__________________
melon is offline  
Old 10-23-2007, 08:37 PM   #154
Blue Crack Addict
 
MrsSpringsteen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 24,997
Local Time: 01:00 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by A_Wanderer
No, mateship does not imply homosexuality.
It was more of a tongue in cheek question. Maybe the real question is why it might be so uncomfortable for some to see straight men display a love like theirs and why that would be considered "gay". And why anyone would care if he meant them to be gay, of course.

But someone please tell me that Johnny and Orlando are gay in Pirates. Please, please, please..That would be better than Christmas

__________________
MrsSpringsteen is online now  
Old 10-23-2007, 10:25 PM   #155
Blue Crack Addict
 
Moonlit_Angel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In a dimension known as the Twilight Zone...do de doo doo, do de doo doo...
Posts: 19,271
Local Time: 12:00 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by melon
While I take great issue with much of Bloom's "pontificating," which reeks of an old man yearning for some romanticized "good old days," I do have to wonder what the hell happened to Western education. The fact that we have grown men and women today with a level of discourse that doesn't even follow the basic levels of logic or reason is increasingly quite shocking to me. What do people even learn anymore today?
Excellent questions, and ones that I think we all need to be asking a lot more often.

Quote:
Originally posted by melon
What it really comes down to is the fact that all this anti-gay rhetoric is so incredibly nonsensical and illogical that I'm astonished that any fully sentient being can even believe this shit with a straight face. And for me to respond to all of this with the proper level of discourse...I think it would literally take me an entire novel to do it.

And I am, frankly, considering writing it.
Go for it . I'd read that .

Angela
__________________
Moonlit_Angel is offline  
Old 10-23-2007, 10:39 PM   #156
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: London/Sydney
Posts: 6,608
Local Time: 07:00 PM
I can't quite fathem the depths of BrownEyedBoys stupidity. And I know saying that is probably borderline for trouble as per the rules here, but it's in response to logic like this: If a character is gay, it's part of a political agenda. If a character is black, it's only as a token. But if a character is Latino, it's because that reflects society. BrownEyedBoys posts in this thread are, quite frankly, the most fucking ridiculous things I've read in months, here or anywhere. And to be honest, if there's one singular attitude or type of person or agenda even that I hope my kids are never, ever influenced by, it is the one that is most likely lurking behind those comments and beliefs.
__________________
Earnie Shavers is offline  
Old 10-23-2007, 10:55 PM   #157
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,697
Local Time: 12:00 PM
__________________
BVS is offline  
Old 10-23-2007, 11:33 PM   #158
Forum Moderator
 
yolland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,471
Local Time: 07:00 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Earnie Shavers
I can't quite fathem the depths of BrownEyedBoys stupidity. And I know saying that is probably borderline for trouble as per the rules here, but...BrownEyedBoys posts in this thread are, quite frankly, the most fucking ridiculous things I've read in months, here or anywhere.
'Borderline' would be an understatement, especially since I've already asked in this thread for the personalized epithets to be dropped. And as debate material, the above bits didn't improve your post one iota.

Occasionally erupting in outrage over something you feel passionately about is one thing. This is a topic that affects many people in here directly and personally, and not for the better--I understand that makes for more heat than other topics. That doesn't make it 'anything goes' or open season on the unpopular ( " " ) where replies are concerned. Ideas you find to be outrageous do not justify personal attacks, and there'd be no point in having this forum at all if we were to allow people to proceed as if they did. We can't make exceptions to that based on type of viewpoint.
__________________
yolland [at] interference.com


μελετώ αποτυγχάνειν. -- Διογένης της Σινώπης
yolland is offline  
Old 10-23-2007, 11:40 PM   #159
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
BrownEyedBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: San Pedro Sula, Honduras
Posts: 3,510
Local Time: 12:00 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Earnie Shavers
I can't quite fathem the depths of BrownEyedBoys stupidity. And I know saying that is probably borderline for trouble as per the rules here, but it's in response to logic like this: If a character is gay, it's part of a political agenda. If a character is black, it's only as a token. But if a character is Latino, it's because that reflects society. BrownEyedBoys posts in this thread are, quite frankly, the most fucking ridiculous things I've read in months, here or anywhere. And to be honest, if there's one singular attitude or type of person or agenda even that I hope my kids are never, ever influenced by, it is the one that is most likely lurking behind those comments and beliefs.
I don't mind your comments at all, I hope you know, I even encourage you to speak your exact mind as you have because only through complete honesty will we have an ideal forum. So don't worry about calling my posts stupid. You are entitled to your opinion as much as I am.

I do understand that it seems biased when I say that the incidence of a black person in a movie as a token, and the appereance of a latino person as a result of society's evolution, and on the opposite end a gay character as part of a political agenda.

The difference between these three apearances is in the way that these characters are presented. The token black guy is visible in Abercrombie and Fitch ads where the lone african american model sticks out like a sore thumb. You can tell right away that the creators of these ads included him to be politically correct. I'm against this just as much.

When someone mentioned the Latino occurence that's been growing lately, I immediately thought of George Lopez's sitcom, don't ask me why. And it just seems like a totally different and natural approach in presenting someone who just so happens to be a minority.

The difference between the Latino characters someone mentioned and this move by JK Rowling is that the first one looks a little more legitimate, more honest, if you will, whereas Dumbledore being gay seems out of the blue and with nothing to do in the books. I know it's a huge assumption to think this way, but there was no reason for her to add this little "footnote" besides her trying to pick a side in the whole homosexuality vrs. tolerance battle. That's what I'm against. Not being sincere about something and using it to further your political views and above all, using children's books to do it.

My posts have not been against homosexuality itself. They have been against the unnecessary inclusion of a political stance in something that was just as good without it.
__________________
BrownEyedBoy is offline  
Old 10-23-2007, 11:49 PM   #160
ONE
love, blood, life
 
indra's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 12,689
Local Time: 02:00 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by BrownEyedBoy
They have been against the unnecessary inclusion of a political stance in something that was just as good without it.
You do know that many people feel that every piece of literature ever written and every movie or tv show ever filmed would be "just as good" with only white characters, don't you? And maybe those people are correct, but wouldn't NEVER seeing anyone who looks even remotely like you feel strange? Wouldn't that make you wonder why your looks/your culture weren't good enough to be written about or filmed?


As for the thread title question: Is there room for sexuality in children´s books? Of course there is. Sexuality is a part of every person and every person's life and it does affect every person and their lives. Besides, it's not as if the book depicted Dumbledore banging anyone.
__________________
indra is offline  
Old 10-23-2007, 11:52 PM   #161
Blue Crack Distributor
 
VintagePunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: In a dry and waterless place
Posts: 55,732
Local Time: 01:00 PM
Coincidentally, while reading this thread, a clip of Rowling's Toronto appearance from earlier today came on the news. There was a press conference, and then a book reading and Q&A for fans (which I tried to win tickets to but didn't - boo! ), and she addressed the Dumbledore issue. Parts of the press conference can be found in this article:

http://www.thestar.com/entertainment/article/269527

Quote:
On Tuesday, the author said she knew "very early on" in the writing process that Dumbledore was gay, but didn't feel the need to spell it out for readers.

The Dumbledore bombshell has stunned Potter fans around the world and left many wondering why Rowling waited until the conclusion of her seven-book series to reveal the sexuality of the Hogwarts headmaster.

Asked about the timing of her revelation, Rowling said: "I was asked a very direct question at Carnegie Hall."

The U.K.-based author, stylishly dressed in a brown dress and matching boots, grew impatient with reporters who pressed her on the issue, saying she didn't feel the need to be explicit about Dumbledore's sexual preferences because she wanted to focus on character development.

"If you were an author then you would understand that when you write the ending it comes at the end," she said.

Dumbledore, Rowling has now revealed, was once in love with the dark wizard Grindelwald, something that some canny Potter fans had long suspected.

"The plot is what it is," said Rowling. "(Dumbledore) did have, as I say, this rather tragic infatuation, but that was a key part of the ending of the story so there it is. Why would I put the key part of my ending of my story in Book 1?"

Rowling said Tuesday she found it "freeing" to out Dumbledore, adding that the passages about him will mean different things to different readers.

"I think a child will see a friendship and I think a sensitive adult may well understand that it was an infatuation," she said.
Not included in this article, but from the news clip I just viewed, she was also asked why she chose to comment on Dumbledore's sexuality, besides the obvious "answering a question." She replied, quite bluntly, "he's my character, and I can think and say whatever I want about him."

Good for her. I've always found her endearingly frank and open in interviews, or when interacting with fans.

Also, I just found a transcript from when the fan asked Jo to elabourate on Dumbledore's brother and the goat. She didn't ignore the question, as someone posted earlier. Here is how the exchange went:

Quote:

FAN: In the Goblet of Fire Dumbledore said his brother was prosecuted for practicing inappropriate charms [JKR buries her head, to laughter] on a goat; what were the inappropriate charms he was practicing on that goat?

JKR: How old are you?

FAN: Eight.

JKR: I think that he was trying to make a goat that was easy to keep clean [laughter], curly horns. That's a joke that works on a couple of levels. I really like Aberforth and his goats. But you know Aberforth having this strange fondness for goats if you've read book seven, came in really useful to Harry, later on, because a goat, a stag, you know. If you're a stupid Death Eater, what's the difference. So, that is my answer to YOU.

[loud applause]
She's awesome.
__________________
VintagePunk is offline  
Old 10-24-2007, 12:04 AM   #162
Rock n' Roll Doggie
ALL ACCESS
 
BluRmGrl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Leather Heaven
Posts: 7,808
Local Time: 02:00 PM
OK... I read up to page 9 of this thread & then I just couldn't take it anymore.

Am I the only one scratching my head over why this is an issue at all??? We're talking about a fictional character in a series that's over...finished...done...kaput....

(Sorry, HP fans... you may want to look away now.) What does it matter? Dumbledore doesn't exist!
__________________
BluRmGrl is offline  
Old 10-24-2007, 12:11 AM   #163
Blue Crack Distributor
 
VintagePunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: In a dry and waterless place
Posts: 55,732
Local Time: 01:00 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by BrownEyedBoy

The difference between the Latino characters someone mentioned and this move by JK Rowling is that the first one looks a little more legitimate, more honest, if you will, whereas Dumbledore being gay seems out of the blue and with nothing to do in the books. I know it's a huge assumption to think this way, but there was no reason for her to add this little "footnote" besides her trying to pick a side in the whole homosexuality vrs. tolerance battle. That's what I'm against. Not being sincere about something and using it to further your political views and above all, using children's books to do it.

My posts have not been against homosexuality itself. They have been against the unnecessary inclusion of a political stance in something that was just as good without it.
Everything she has said to this point indicates that this has always been a facet of this character of hers, it was not just thrown out there to pander to liberal political correctness. So either you'll have to drop your objection, or admit that you don't believe her, if that really is in fact your only objection.

I don't see any reason not to believe her; in fact, I think it's very cynical not to. It's her character, she created him, so she's sort of the boss of him, in my view - what she says goes.
__________________
VintagePunk is offline  
Old 10-24-2007, 12:46 AM   #164
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 01:00 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by BrownEyedBoy



My posts have not been against homosexuality itself. They have been against the unnecessary inclusion of a political stance in something that was just as good without it.


so the mere depiction of a gay character is a political statement?

you know, i might be inclined to agree with you, though i don't think Rowling gave this the political ramifications the slightest bit of thought.

it becomes political, you see, when people like you complain about it and thusly think that it's political or evidence of an agenda. for everyone else, it's merely a reflection of what life is like -- that life is filled with people of all different shapes and sizes.

i just find it sad that the depiction of difference is somehow controversial. but when there are political forces that would see to it that every character in fiction is a perfect reflection of the word as the wish it to be, and that the government is a perfect reflections of whatever subjective values they might hold, then i suppose we can't get away from the fact that it's not the character who's political, it's you.

and, yes, once upon a time someone would have said exactly what you said. only replace the word gay with "black" or "latin" or "jewish."
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 10-24-2007, 12:48 AM   #165
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 01:00 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by A_Wanderer
No, mateship does not imply homosexuality.


the Aussie i dated, briefly, had interesting things to say about mateship and being gay.

but that's for another time.
__________________

__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:00 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com