Ok, here is why I am ticked off at J.K. Rowling and the brouhaha surrounding the announcement about Dumbledore.
Act 1 – Coming out.
First of let me say this: I do not care if Dumbledore is or isn’t gay. It wouldn’t make a difference to me even if I found out that he at one time was attracted to Mrs. Norris. For that matter, I don’t care whether McGonagall prefers girls, whether Umbridge is into S & M, or why Hagrid is obsessed with dragons. This is not why I read Harry Potter. I am quite sure that parents who brought their kids to the Q&A with J.K. Rowling didn’t bring them in for the enlightening sex ed talk either. Most of them came to talk about wizards, spells and magic, and instead were treated to a coming out party for Dumbledore. It is not about homosexuality at all; I would be just as upset if she revealed to the audience full of children that Dumbledore had an affair with a female professor. By doing this, Rowling robbed parents of the decision only they should make: when and how to talk to children about sex because I am sure many a conversation, for which adults might not have been prepared for, happened on the way home. All in all, this was not appropriate for the audience and the setting. The same info could have been revealed on Rowling's website, but then it might not have generated as much media attention, which brings us to...
Act 2 – The media reaction.
And then media jumps on this news as if there is nothing else to report and milks it for weeks. 17,000 children, who have died of starvation on the same day Dumbledore came out, didn’t make the news (that is already mundane), but the new antics of Britney Spears have, and so have the outing of a fictional character. Again, for days! (By the way, all of this is based on the CNN news website coverage, maybe some other sites exercised more common sense, though I doubt it). And all those pro-gay rights orgs’ praising Rowling's heroic fight to stop prejudice? Seriously, if the fictional character’s coming out helps to further your cause, then I… I don’t even know what to say then, other than DUMBLEDORE IS A WORK OF FICTION, NOT A REAL PERSON! PEOPLE GET LIVES!!!!
Act 3 – Innocence Lost (This is where I get preachy).
I think this entire Carnegie Hall episode is just one event in our society’s trend. We no longer treasure innocence. Just yesterday, I went clothes shopping for my kids in Children’s Place and Baby Gap where many shoppers come with their children. What kind of music did the stores play? I was there only for two songs, but one of them was mainly made up of one sentence, “I’m not the kind of girl who give it up just like that.” And the second one was “These boots are made for walking,” about a guy who is/was cheating. What did Baby Gap play? “I think we’re alone now” about teenagers hooking up. Why, why is that appropriate for young under-teen ears??? And it is not accidental, because last time I was in these stores, they were playing the same songs over and over again. Since those are chain shores, someone up there in corporate decided that this music fits the stores’ images and attracts young shoppers and their parents. What else did I see on my shopping spree? Low-rising jeans and low-rising underwear for 9 and 10-yr-old girls. Any surprises that some kids start being sexually active before they hit teen-age years? (in case you are wondering, I find this VERY disturbing.)
Epilogue
One of the main achievements of modern age, at least in the industrial world, was introducing idea of childhood, that children have special psychological needs and are not simply small adults. Now we are ruining this achievement by introducing them to things that are too adult, like violence and sex, way too early and see nothing wrong in that. And I think this is a loss, a tremendous loss.
As usual, my friend, you have hit the nail on the head with your usual wisdom, pragmatism, and dry wit. What can I say? Even though I am not a mother, I agree with you 100%: the loss of innocence is a terrible tragedy. The sad thing is that I am sure that whoever approved of that junk for music and clothes will probably not approve it for his or her kids; but the perception is that society at large demands it, so society at large will get it, and nobody has guts to stand up to it.
ReplyDeleteGreat post, although I am forced to disagree. Here is my take on it - there is only one clear line - to expose your kids to the world outside of your very clearly defined set of values (Torah in my case), you are dumping them in to a friggin' Pandora's box. You never know what will jump at you next, and how deep it will penetrate the mind of your poor kids. So either go there or don't but face the fact that the world is not values friendly.
ReplyDeleteI am not sure I understand your post. Do you suggest exposing them or not? In any case, I do not see where we disagree.
ReplyDeletemy point is - either don't expose them to Potterlike creations, or expose and be ready for Dumbledore to be a perv
ReplyDeleteAgain, I don't think we disagree. My point was that not so long ago, most people in the society agreed that some things were inappropriate to expose to children, regardless of people's religious affiliation or lack of it. Some things were taboo everywhere (I mean industrialized world), and certain places were reasonably safe both outside and inside your "bubble". Nobody thought that going to a CHILDREN'S clothing store or a CHILDREN'S book sighning would force you to introduce the bees and birds topics to your kid. That is what the post is about - the loss of "safe" places, innocense and what is appropriate.
ReplyDeletehaving watched my first porn at 10 and loosing the innocence at 12, I really don't know if the world was ever a safe place for inappropriate influences.
ReplyDeleteIn responsa written 150 years ago you could see the rabbis talking about how walking outside the walls of the houses of study means exposing yourself to immodesty ... and I bet even in their wildest fantasy they couldn't picture Midtown on a Halloween eve - I couldn't believe the outfits people wore tonight - and you know my standards :)
Again, if you are looking for smut, you will find it. Now, probably, easier than ever. However, I am sure your first porn wasn't handed out to you in Babies R'Us in efforts to ensure your customer loyalty. And yes, going outside is potentially exposing yourself to bad influences. Yet, I think that even twenty years ago people were more concerned with what's appropriate at least in regards to LITTLE children.
ReplyDeletei hear ya. we basically agree, except that i feel that you don't have to look for smut - it finds you.
ReplyDeleteWell, yes and no. If you are looking, you will be a lot more likely to find it a lot faster. However, you are right. Smut is everywhere: at the newsstands, on the internet, in the office, on your blog...
ReplyDeletewell, my blog is the home of the smut, but that's purely because i try to keep it natural :)
ReplyDeleteThank you! Though my question was partly rhetorical, your answer is eloquent and to the point.
ReplyDelete