#jk rowling defense squad

[where-they-are-just-and-loyal]

It's kind of remarkable to me how people will condemn Marietta's loyalty to her family while simultaneously condemning Percy for the exact opposite. There's no consistency here in the narrative judgment of wrongdoing, except that it involves prioritizing anything over Harry and his goals.

[vivithefolle]

You seem to be really against Hermione for the bird incident, but don’t seem to care much about Harry sending Hedwig to claw at Ron and Hermione during the summer preceding fifth year, why is that?(/gen) You also seem to ship Ronarry. Is it just because she’s the canon love interest that you’re so upset? I know Harry regretted telling Hedwig to do what she did afterwards, but I don’t remember him ever apologizing to Ron and Hermione. How can we know that Hermione didn’t apologize to Ron after he came back in Deathly Hallows but before the battle of hogwarts?(I agree with your opinions on Hermione in general, I’m just curious.)

If you don't know, I've made some jokes about how Harmony shippers are right about Harry and Hermione having something in common, which is that they both sent birds to attack Ron.

Harry doesn't interest me nearly as much as Hermione because to be frank he's pretty much just... the most boring character in the series to me. I like him for his Ron-loving potential which is pretty off the charts when Rowling isn't actively using Ron as a stepping stone for Harry and Hermione to look better.

I'm actually a pretty big Romione shipper even if I myself get confused about what I'm mad about sometimes. Honestly, it's just that I've kinda had it with people constantly writing Ron fucking up and having to make it up to Hermione, I want her to be fucking up and making it up to him and it not being considered a Crime Against Women Everywhere because yeah, women fuck up and hurt men too, men also get abused or shat on by women, it happens. Hermione as she is has a pretty toxic mentality, what with her often using violence completely casually (her first "big heroic moment" in the series is to set a man on fire) coupled with that shitty tendency of Rowling to use "Hermione on the verge of tears" as a kind of sedative to make the average reader go "who cares what Hermione did before, she's crying NOW and that's UNFORGIVABLE, PROTECT HER".

But, Harry himself also has a system like that, by virtue of being Our Poor Orphan Protagonist. Honestly, I hate to say it but Potterheads read another book because yes, Harry is nothing new, when an author wants you to root for their protagonist they give them a backstory that makes you want good things for them, yes Harry's suffering is just all destined to make you attached to him and meant to make you think everything that ever happens to HIM personally is automatically The Most Horrible Thing Ever To Happen To Anyone Ever and I'm kinda done with that as a whole because of fandom experience. I can only tell people to pay attention to what Ron goes through only to be rebuked by a "but look how hard Harry had it, in comparison Ron is a baby" so many times before I get completely soured and decide that the character they feel so sad for doesn't need any more people to feel sorry for.

... I don't know if I'm being clear. But yeah I function mostly through pure spite nowadays.

I know Harry regretted telling Hedwig to do what she did afterwards, but I don’t remember him ever apologizing to Ron and Hermione.

He did say a token sorry to Ron specifically:

He showed Harry the index finger of his right hand, which sported a half-healed but clearly deep cut. ‘Oh, yeah,’ Harry said. ‘Sorry about that, but I wanted answers, you know –’

(I say "token" because yeah it's not really an apology given how it's immediately followed by a justification.)

Hermione however?

‘He seemed to think it was best,’ said Hermione rather breathlessly. ‘Dumbledore, I mean.’ ‘Right,’ said Harry. He noticed that her hands, too, bore the marks of Hedwig’s beak and found that he was not at all sorry.

WOOP WOOP FEEL THE HARMONY YET

How can we know that Hermione didn’t apologize to Ron after he came back in Deathly Hallows but before the battle of hogwarts?

Honestly she can have apologized anytime, I'd just like it to be shown to me, and I'd like it to mean something.

While for example @divagonzo believes that after Malfoy Manor Hermione realizes her own mortality and blunts her sharper edges, I still remember the scene where Ron isn't sure they can trust Griphook and Hermione immediately insult him for being racist. Yeah, if that's blunting her sharp edges then I sure hope she's got other ways to do it otherwise she's gonna need a lot more Malfoy Manors.

As it stands, Harry and Hermione are really underdeveloped and bare-bones. If Harry has a character arc then I've missed it entirely because while he does realize that Snape has reasons and shit he's still kinda hating on him all through OOTP, HBP and DH until the Epilogue pulls the rug from beneath our feet. Hermione has moments indicating there's some things happening - her arc with Luna in OOTP is neat, in DH she finally learned to thank Ron for complimenting her - but aside from that she never is confronted to actual failure, to actual dilemnas, to actual problems without a true "I'm right you're wrong" solution - we only see her "being right" without anything exploring what she COULD be beyond "being right".

Which leaves Ron to shoulder the burden of having to do character development for two static characters that amount to "male role model" and "female role model". Ron IS confronted with failure, with actual dilemnas to which there's no easy answer or solution, Ron IS confronted with his personal character flaws... in pretty much every book, he's kept in a loop of "complete character arc" -> "oh no JKR needs drama to happen and she can't have Role Model 1 & 2 do it because they're supposed to be Above Mere Mortals" -> "backtrack on Ron's character arc so he can cause the drama so she doesn't have to strain her brain too hard", which is pretty obviously a disservice to Ron's character. And sadly, the fandom picks up on it but takes the wrong message from it: instead of realizing "wait, Rowling is violating the rules of good storytelling by constantly backtracking on her one good and complex character's development all so she doesn't have to risk Harry and Hermione's popularity by using their character flaws to create conflict", the fandom instead goes "ugh Ron is always causing messes while Harry and Hermione always have their hearts in the right place and always want what's best and anyway if they ever did something bad it's because they were forced by the situation".

It's... upsetting.

[silalcarin]

^ This is literally Harry and Ginny in The Cursed Child

@scousegrrl @thegirlwhowrites642

i like how all the ginny-haters were like ‘oh man i hope they get divorced in this lmaooo bet they do’ and then, in actuality, it turns out that they (harry/ginny) are the only couple that’s together in every reality lmao 

[valeriesolanasapologist]

[thepinkseat-askthemoonbunny]

Once again, you got people calling JKR and Dumbledore shitty people and ableist for not letting Squibs into Hogwarts because “they’re ableist and don’t think Squibs are good enough, Dumbledore didn’t like them so he didn’t use his influence to help them. He’s a disgusting ableist. And JK is horrible for not doing something about their treatment.”

Alright, listen. This whole keeping Squibs out of Hogwarts thing...Dumbledore didn’t start that shit. But yet once again, he’s the one who’s expected to fix it. I will never get how people can direct all of their anger at ONE man for not somehow magically fixing the discrimination that has been going on in his world for tens of thousands of years before he was even born, and suddenly decide that it was his fault that it happened in the first place (the House system, anyone?) Dumbledore is the only one who gets treated that way. He did SOMETHING though, many people have said this. He did try to improve his society at least somewhat in a way that’s canon confirmed which is more that can be said for most. There have been hundreds if not thousands of headmasters and headmistresses of Hogwarts BEFORE Dumbledore, and there will be tens of thousands after him. But they don’t get the shit he does for not fixing everything. Why’s that?!

Anyway, if somehow Dumbledore DID let the Squibs into Hogwarts...they still wouldn’t be able to do much. Because almost everything requires magic, except maybe Muggle Studies, History and Runes. But that’s about it. This is a school for wizards, that isn’t Dumbledore’s fault. And the way they would be treated by the students, even if Dumbledore was harsher on bullying people still do it when the teachers aren’t looking. They would hardly be able to do anything there...and if any of these Squib children have a complex or mental breakdowns or even go into depression and suicide because of being placed into a setting which they’re entirely unsuited to be in, guess whose lap they’d drop the blame in? That’s right, Dumbledore. For letting them in to begin with. Same thing if Petunia had been let in.

And JK Rowling. Why are you calling HER a terrible person?! Seriously, that’s stupid. Unlike Dumbledore, JK is a living and breathing human. Someone who is immensely talented and a great writer; but still human. Anyway, that doesn’t make any sense! Calling her “ableist and terrible and discriminatory”, attacking her real-life moral character over what she chooses to write in her own fictional setting. Who does that?! Oh I know...fucking Tumblr.

Anyway, JK isn’t stupid. She wrote the wizarding world the way it is ON PURPOSE, it’s not supposed to be this magical happy utopia Funtime world. It’s supposed to suck, it’s supposed to be just like our own world with how dark and nasty and violent it can sometimes be. And she left it that way, she didn’t fix it overnight because change doesn’t fucking happen overnight! Rome wasn’t built in a day. And if everything was magically fixed, they’d be attacking her for lack of realism. Real life JK has done a ton of good in the world. Can I say she’s perfect? No, because nobody is plus I don’t know the woman personally! But neither do any of you...yet you attack her morality over what she chooses to WRITE? Really?! This isn’t some thing about how the Queen is so perfect and angelic and nobody should be mean because she’s perfect, this is about how STUPID it is to attack somebody’s real life character over what words they put on a page in a fictional setting. This goes for anyone.

People. Write. Dark. Things. Way darker than JK has ever written. You have people who will reach into the deepest darkest corners of the human imagination and write something so soul-shatteringly dark and terrifying you’re wondering how anything like this can even exist on paper let alone in real life. And they don’t deserve to have their PERSONAL character assaulted because they write those things! What subject matter you choose to write has jack shit to do with your personality. It means you’re a damn good writer. Fiction does not equal reality. Never has, never will. And I don’t get why some people don’t get that.

[hchollym]

What are your thoughts on all the deaths in deathly hallows?

Short Version: I hate them, thanks. 👎

Long Version: Get ready for a rant...

I get that JKR wanted to show the cruelty of war and how innocents suffer. However, her choice of characters that suffered was suspicious and problematic (to put it mildly).

Remus = A werewolf (which JKR said was a metaphor for HIV/AIDS)

Tonks = A Metamorphmagus (a pretty obvious example of a nonbinary character, whether JKR admits it or not)

Dobby = A house-elf (which quite literally represents slaves, and he died protecting the white savior of the book)

Lavender = A traditionally feminine woman (who JKR made sure was repeatedly insulted for that throughout the books)

Alastor Moody = A disabled character (who likely had a mental illness as well)

Severus = The character who grew up in a household with a low socioeconomic status & was abused as a child

Don't get me wrong; I fully understand that marginalized people do tend to suffer more during times of crisis (like war), but it was highly unnecessary in this setting.

JKR claims to have killed off Remus & Tonks so that Teddy would be an orphan and the story would come full circle, but that's BS. She only added Tonk's pregnancy into Book 7 for that reason, and she could have easily made Fleur pregnant instead.

The readers had a strong connection to Bill & Fleur (after seeing their engagement and wedding), and they would have represented the tragedy & randomness of war - these were two young, talented, powerful people (who are still not immune to death) who were well-loved and had their whole lives ahead of them. This also would have killed off one of the Weasleys (which JKR was determined to do).

She also could have stayed with her original idea to kill off Arthur & Molly instead. They could have died during the battle (also representing the randomness of war & effectively killing two of the Weasleys), and if Molly died protecting Ginny from Bellatrix, then the books would have come full circle from Lily dying to protect Harry (since a mother's sacrifice was a huge focus in the series). It also would have given Harry & Ginny yet another thing to bond over.

But no, she chose Remus & Tonks instead - one of which was a character that had suffered (physically and emotionally) for most of his life, yet when he finally had the chance at happiness, he was killed. That's not a satisfying end to his character arc; it's cruel.

I understand some of her choices (like Fred), whether I like them or not, but I also hate the way she killed them off. Percy literally just reconnected with his family, and JKR made it so that he has to live the rest of his life riddled with survivor's guilt, blaming himself because he feels like Fred died because Percy distracted him.

Some people find this scene in the books to be "touching" because Percy made Fred laugh, so at least they had one last good moment before Fred died smiling, but I totally disagree. Percy will always be traumatized by this (way more than if Fred had died when he wasn't around Percy). On top of that, there's no way that the thought didn't at least cross George's mind (and probably others) that it was Percy's fault & should have been him instead (which Percy likely agrees with).

Percy was being punished for his past choices, and having a character grow and apologize for their mistakes just to make them suffer mentally for the rest of their life is also not a satisfying ending to their arc; yet again, it's just cruel.

The point is that some characters needed to die (that's a commentary on war), but it didn't need to be - and shouldn't have been - the ones that JKR chose.

Thanks for the ask! 😊

[valeriesolanasapologist]

This woman and JK Rowling chose right. 💙

I'm so proud of her!!!

Seeing a lesbian journalist break from her employers and speak the truth make me extremely happy.

[immeya]

JAMES POTTER IS A FUCKING PRINCE, and I fucking love him

[vivithefolle]

Hi,

Thank you for the answer to my previous question, I hope you are doing well.

I read JKR's quote on Ron needing to grow up in HBP, and while I didn't think much on that, reading metas on Ron makes me wonder, was that the way to show him growing up, by having everything piled up on him the way it went in HBP, because that leads to negativity I feel. rather than piling up stuff to show he has grown up, we can see how his behavior has changed, how he does not repeat mistakes he made earlier. I know there are other ways, but these are the ones I could list. I would like your thoughts on this.

I hope you're doing great! Sorry I didn't answer sooner, I've been having RESPONSIBILITIES, can you imagine D:

Honestly, I'd tell you to not believe JKR when she assesses her characters, because often she's full of shit. ESPECIALLY when it comes to Ron and Hermione. If she starts to compare the two of them close your ears, close your eyes, grit your teeth and let it go. She's a sexist old coot, don't even bother.

Really, all she wanted was for Ron to be the "instigator" of drama, because of course, because she's too much of a coward to have Hermione be the one to fuck everything up since gasp, can you imagine, people wouldn't like Hersel- I mean Hermione - anymore if Hermione proved to be a failible, mundane teenager like the rest of us... ahem.

So she piled on negativity and self-esteem-breaking shit onto Ron, just so he could be the first to break, and then she had Hermione be a horrid little madam except since Ron was mean first then dear darling precious flower Hermione is perfectly entitled to be an asshole back right? Nevermind that Ron was never so horrible when he was 14 and heartbroken, he just made a prat of himself in public once then he stopped, but Hermione's entitled to bully him for MONTHS and forgives him ONLY ONCE HE'S ALMOST DIED. But it's Ron that needs to grow up, uh-huh, sure.

we can see how his behavior has changed, how he does not repeat mistakes he made earlier

And the thing is, his behaviour DID change! But like a teen that is LEARNING, he doesn't get it right. Not the first time, not the second time, he fumbles and misses.

In GOF he went directly to confront Hermione, making a scene in public. In HBP he doesn't confront her at all, avoiding her and using the silent treatment. From one extreme to another as he's learning how to deal with that shit, because that's how kids learn emotional regulation and develop into adults. That's NORMAL. THAT'S HEALTHY EMOTIONAL DEVELOPMENT GOD DAMNIT STOP BRANDING A LITERAL KID AS AN INCEL WHEN HIS LITERAL BRAIN DEVELOPMENT ISN'T FINISHED.

... ahem. Sorry. Got... got a little upset here.

Except that next to a almost hyper-realistic teenage character you have the poor man's ideal of feminism, Hermione Granger the one Sue to rule them all, who's lauded for being always so calm and nice and mature and understanding, but also when she's being a bitch and straight-up committing assault it's oh no you don't understand, she's just a teenager!!! Plus RON started it!! Then when you start going "but wait then, you were saying it's great Hermione has flaws but now you're trying to excuse her flaws away, you know that's exactly what I mean when I say she's a Mary Sue-" they immediately go NO SHE'S NOT A MARY SUE SHE'S SO RELATABLE!!!! I too was so wise and smart and brilliant and only ever did things perfectly on the first try, I always got everything absolutely right, even my own emotional development was done perfectly without a hitch because I was just so mature for my age :D

... Yeah, right, ok, fine, all I'm hearing is "I'm probably stuck at mental age 15" and "I have a completely fucked-up, puritanical view of what teenagers are like". Also "I think feminism is about worshipping Hermione Granger for being an unrealistic character and holding her up as a role model to turn little girls into neurotic messes that try to keep up with her 'perfection' and become depressed burnt-out messes when they inevitably fail".

Sigh... all in all Rowling was really just... interested in piling shit on Ron so she could humiliate him in her twisted idea of "romance". To her Ron was "expecting Hermione to make herself less than she is" I guess??? (actual JKR quote)

But Ron NEVER DOES THAT!!! He never fucking does that!! When he beats her at something he's FUCKING ECSTATIC because HE KNOWS! He KNOWS just how """brilliant and smart and wonderful and saintly""" Hermione is and HE'S HAPPY HE WON FAIR AND SQUARE! Conversely, it's Hermione in that scene who gets upset and tries to DIMINISH RON'S ACCOMPLISHMENT TO MAKE HERSELF FEEL BETTER!!!

So... basically, Rowling is trying very hard to force the square peg into the round hole by claiming something, EXCEPT SHE WROTE THE EXACT OPPOSITE OF WHAT SHE CLAIMS SHE'S WRITTEN. It's HERMIONE who keeps casually belittling Ron, it's RON who says that "always the tone of surprise" AND HAS REASON TO SAY IT BECAUSE HE'S SPENT PRETTY MUCH SIX YEARS BEING TREATED LIKE HE'S AN INCAPABLE IDIOT AND THIS ENTIRE BRAINDEAD FUCKING FANDOM OF BRAINDEAD FAKEMINISTS FOLLOWS SUIT BECAUSE CRITICAL THINKING, HEY, NOT EVEN ONCE!!!!

... Fuck I really should learn to stop being so pissed over stupid shit. Blargh.

Aaaanyway! Sorry friend, I wasn't targeting you, I wasn't angry at you, I'm not angry at you, I was raging against the heavens so to speak. Have a great day. *hugs*

[valeriesolanasapologist]

Pretty gross watching long time HP accounts and sites turn against the woman who basically gave them a reason to exist.

I skimmed this. They claim she's hanging out with "anti-abortiinists", but the big complaint seems to be they are all "anti-trans". I may have to look deeper into this to see if they aren't just making shit up.

They are still staying relevant because of her. Wouldn't the best course of action, if they are so against her, be to ignore her completely? Quit giving her free promotion!

Hypocrites.

[quillify-tries-to-talk]

I have a theory:

People often ask why the readership for YA is more women-centric and why boys don't read.

We talk about the objectification of women in movies and how men get huffy about the "feminist propaganda" and ask all sorts of stupid questions about why women need heroes like Captain Marvel (love her btw). They don't see a problem with Harley Quinn being fetishized in Suicide Squad.

Well, it's the opposite in YA.

Series with male characters, Percy Jackson, Six of Crows, and Harry Potter (as much as I hate Rowl*ng, I have to give her points for this) have one thing in common: the authors don't wax poetic about how hot and tall and muscular the male leads of their books are.

Sure, they're good-looking but there's no weird mentions about their hotness level and how every other side character considers them good-looking and beautiful and perfect on every other page.

I think it's time to change that. How do you expect boys to read books that tell them they have to be over 6 feet tall, have a six-pack, be great at physical intimacy, be broody or become cameras for their love interests (Thomas Cresswell, I'm looking at you)?

But Divvy, you say, women experience it in movies! Middle-aged men fetishize our breasts and curves for their own benefits.

Yeah, I say, of course that happens. But the thing about feminism is also holding women accountable when they're going wrong somewhere. The thing about feminism is also about supporting young boys and girls and help them believe in themselves. It is the equality of all genders. If we can praise our girls for being strong and lovely and brave, then we can do the same for boys.

And if that's the opposite of your feminism, then you're not a feminist.

Tell me honestly, why will young boys read books that hold them to an unrealistic standard of beauty and fitness? Why will they read books that show them as hypersexual, hypermasculine? What about asexual boys? Trans boys? Short boys? Boys with worsening mental health? Fat boys? Boys of color, especially those who are dark-skinned? Imagine the hit their self-esteem will take.

Same way, why will women watch movies that objectify them? And I've seen that happen since I was very young (blame Bollywood movies -_-)

So this is for those female authors who think it's okay to write your own fantasies and market it to children: PLEASE STOP. I'm tired of reading about the "alpha male." It is not okay. And we, as their audience, should hold them accountable for it.

Would love to hear other's opinions on this!

[puppyduckster]

I don’t always like how JK Rowling portrayed Ron Weasley. There were times that I thought she was too hard on his character and that she couldn’t hold her other characters to the same standards(one such example is The Lavender Incident, where both Ron and Hermione were in the wrong, but only Ron is really called out.) That being said I do love how Ron was able to grow throughout the series. He definitely stumbled and had his moments but he turned out to be an amazing wizard with a great heart who would do anything for the ones he loves. I guess that’s why it used to hurt so much(and still does sometimes) when I see people bash Ron Weasley. His character flaws don’t define him, but learning to acknowledge them and working to be better is what does and that’s why he’s one of my favorite Harry Potter characters.

[valeriesolanasapologist]

Imagine seeing this and still trying to paint JK Rowling as "hateful" and "violent".

I can only assume it's projection.

💖

[blueboltkatana]

So i saw some Harry Potter stuff on my dash and started thinking about it because my brain does things sometimes. More specifically i was thinking about why I stopped liking Hermione as a character once i hit 16 but my love for Ron and Neville grew and i think i know why.

Since the beginning of the story, Hermione is depicted as a prodigy of sorts, she has incredible memory and si very advanced for her classes, while Ron and Neville are average in most classes or even below average in some, Neville more than Ron. She excels in almost everything she does and is loved by her teachers (exept Snape but he hates everyone so doesn't count). Meanwhile Ron and Neville are slower with their progress and less liked by the teachers.

As a 13/14 year old reading these books, I identified with Hermione the most out of any character because i was just like that in middle school. She was the person i wanted to be like when i grew up, while Ron and Neville i did love, but i didn't feel connected to them, i didn't aspire to be them, i wanted to be Hermione.

Then i went to High School and that's when my world turned upside down. The curriculum was difficult, the teachers were bullies and my classmates were insufferable at best. I developed severe anxiety and had depressive episodes weekly. The first year fucked me up badly and it destroyed my self esteem so much that it too 3 years to build it back up. The second year i changed schools because my parents saw how badly i was doing, even though i was maintaining good grades, it was killing me.

That summer i reread those books and suddenly, they didn't feel the same to me. Hermione now didn't feel like an inspiration or a relatable character at all, seeing her being perfect and never do anything wrong didn't make me think "Oh wow" it made me think "Jesus Christ Rowling". Whenever i read about her i felt sad and disappointed, she was the epitome of what i wanted to become but I didn't. I later realized it was because i set myself some impossible standards, I forced myself to be Hermione even though Hermione doesn't exist, never has existed. Rowling herself has said that even though Hermione was based on her as a child, she was a "better" and "less flawed" version. While reading i was trying to feel like Hermione again but i couldn't, i couldn't relate to her anymore, her words and decisions didn't sit that well with me now.

Instead i found myself falling even more in love with Ron who before had just been a character i liked in the back of my mind, and discovered just how much i loved Neville and how much i wanted to see him succeed. Hermione was the perfection i wanted to be, but Neville and Ron were the most realistic "good" i could achieve, especially Ron. My dad had just lost his job and we were not doing good financially, so i didn't relate to Hermione having the best night of her life with the famous boy that liked her and wearing a pretty new dress and fixing her imperfections with magic, instead i related to Ron, because i wore a dress my cousin handed me down and didn't go with anyone let alone a boy that liked me, and i didn't have that much fun and it wasn't the best night of my life. I went through a shitty burnout that made me extremely lazy and unwilling to do anything unless it was one night before the due date, i developed a deep dislike for teachers and started talking back to most of them, i devoted myself to my friends and was ready to throw hands for them. And rereading the books, i didn't feel like that much Hermione anymore, i didn't want to be like her. This time Ron and Neville's journeys and development looked so much more appealing to me than Hermione's. They grew as people and achieved great things without being perfect the entire time, they struggled to do the right thing, struggled to be brave and to accept themselves and love themselves. That is the kind of growth i wanted to achieve now.

Hermione is a good role model for little girls, everyone says, Hermione is what little girls should strive to be. But I don't agree. Little girls shouldn't strive for perfection because perfection isn't real and it isn't healthy. What they should try to be is "their best".

Children that are held to such high standards at a young age will always end up hurt, anxious, depressed and burnout at some point. And Hermione never went through that, was never shown to feel like she wasn't good enough, or even if she was, everyone around her was quick to reassure her, when she made mistakes those mistakes were treaded as Empowering for women, or brilliant for her age. When she hurt people's feelings, the narrative didn't punish her.

That doesn't happen in real life. If you hurt people in real life then you start loosing them, if you make mistakes you have to pay the price, if you feel like you're not good enough there won't always be people around saying "no that's not true!" Hell there might be people who see your insecurities and use them and make you feel so much worse.

So yeah, I don't wanna be Hermione anymore.

[headcanonsandmore]

I don't know if this was intended, but I always thought that it was so rude of Harry, Hermione, Ginny, etc. to stop hanging out with Ron when Lavender entered the room in HBP. It's like telling Ron that his friendship is not worth the inconvenience which is awful. Especially when you add that Lavender made Ron feel happy and supported (at least at first); it reads like Harry, Hermione, Ginny, etc. don't want to be friends with Ron when he is happy and getting support/self-confidence.

It certainly comes across that way, doesn’t it. Although -to be fair- Harry does try and spend time with Ron during Quidditch matches. 

Thanks for the message, anon. 

[thepinkseat-askthemoonbunny]

Suspension of disbelief, the ability to separate fiction from reality. The ability to not apply real world rules to this fictional world.

Antis don’t have it...and if they do they sure as fuck don’t know how to use it.