#making queer HP works

[rewritingcanon]

andromeda tonks and ted tonks and nymphadora tonks and druella black are the only ones who can even come close to an eeato au with evelyn and waymond and joy and gong gong

[olderthannetfic]

https://www.tumblr.com/olderthannetfic/746553097204203521/the-fandom-hates-women-response-to-lack-of-ff

The "fandom hates women" part of it comes from the fact that fandom as an entity just doesn't watch the kind of media that draws femslash, even if it ticks all of the boxes of things those very same people say they like. There are so many times I've watched a show that I've seen mega-popular Tumblr posts wishing existed, and then the fandom is so, so small comparatively and often in general. There have been superheroes, vampire/supernatural shows, fantasy shows, movies, books, the list goes on, that feel like they were generated out of Tumblr's desires for ideal fandom media, and everyone knows they're never going to attract anywhere near the same attention for fandom and fanworks because the common denominator just tends to be that if there isn't a full ensemble of attractive men to ship either with each other or with the women, fandom's not interested.

So it's not about prioritizing women in that sense, it's about people witnessing hypocrisy over and over again the second a show doesn't have a mostly-male ensemble. The people who are in these fandoms are frustrated that good faith attempts to get people interested are met with every excuse in the book that all eventually boils down to "I don't like watching stuff with women in it as much as I like watching stuff with men in it." And if that's how people feel about it... sometimes the conclusions are going to turn into the more uncharitable take of "fandom hates women."

--

Maybe, but whenever I see a "fandom hates women" reblog of my stuff, one or two reblogs further down the chain I get an overt TERF. I just had to go block several people today, in fact.

The first person to reblog with a comment like that is usually subtle, but their friends and friends of friends are not. The rhetoric that very quickly starts is the fandom equivalent of that "All the butches are becoming trans men! We're losing lesbians!" stuff.

Here's the thing: I've been in ten billion fandoms that were so awesome and fit fandom's supposed tastes to a T and yet no amount of promoting them could get anyone to try the canon. This goes for canons that are all men or all white men or all majority ethnicity men or whatever else.

The default state of media is to not engender a big fic fandom.

I agree that the rare outliers mostly follow certain patterns, but we extrapolate too far when we say that a lack of those patterns is why a fandom is small.

A fandom is small because that's the near-universal default.

--

Yes, a small slice of fandom consists of guilt-ridden queer fujoshi who say they want more f/f but don't make much of a move to make that happen. I tend to run into that a lot because of my own tastes and having friends who share those tastes.

Far more of fandom is people talking generally about how representation matters without saying they would personally join these fandoms if they existed.

Neither group is large enough to be the real reason some woman-heavy canon fails to take off to HP levels.

The real reason is not hypocrisy but the fact that most things don't take off like that. Most things without massive, massive audiences especially don't take off like that. And the very few things that do are flukes and don't actually predict that another similar thing will take off in the future.

--

Go to AO3's tag search. Search for all canonical fandom tags. Sort by uses and descending order.

Right now, I get 64,390 tags.

The first page, 50 tags, goes from HP with 497,845 works to the Thor movies with 59,266 works. By page 6, we're below 10 thousand works.

By the end of page 10, we're down to Labyrinth with 3,906.

Somewhere in the top 500 AO3 fandom tags (many of which are just franchise metatags for each other), we go all the way from megafandoms to medium size and down to relatively modest ones.

That's not a lot of room for a big f/f-heavy fandom given the trends in mainstream media and that mainstream media is where most really big fandoms come from.

--

I also notice that you're conflating a lack of desire to watch something that's primarily about women with a lack of desire to watch something that includes women.

There are tons of fans who want something more like The Mummy with a leading man and leading woman they love.

Granted, that's not me and that's not a lot of my fujoshi/slasher audience, but it's extraordinarily common. I know plenty of people who don't like canons that are only dudes, but since they also don't like canons that are only ladies and they don't ship f/f, this gets spun into "fandom hates women".

--

Let me be clear:

Conflating "lesbians" and "women" is a radfem position.

[wisteria-lodge]

And now for a HP fandom question - do you have any thoughts on queercoding in the series and if JKR ever actually intended it, and then backtracked, or if it was always completely unintentional? I'm thinking specifically about Lupin and Tonks (as individuals, not as a ship) Inspired by your post about the intention vs how fans perceived Draco Malfoy. Thanks!

So the first thing I want to do is make a distinction between femme-coding and queer-coding. They're tropes with very similar histories, and a lot of works treat them as the same thing. But Harry Potter doesn’t, and I think we can chalk this one up to JK Rowling’s habit of grabbing aesthetics and visuals without really thinking through the history behind them. 

(Like - the goblins. She says she didn’t mean to write an antisemitic thing, and I actually do believe her. But did she use a lot of tropes and images with a long history of being tied to antisemitism? yes.)

So when I say “femme” I mean giving a male character traits stereotypically associated with femininity. Heightened sensitivity/emotionality, an interest in hair, clothes and being attractive, a love of lace/pink/frills, a dislike of violence and physical confrontation, and a preference for the soft power of manipulation, character assassination and poison - versus the hard power of direct confrontation and physical prowess. Are these things super stereotypical? Yes. But they’re ALSO traits you see all the time on male villains, especially ones that you don’t want to seem that threatening. Femme-coded villains show up a lot in children’s media, or as the Big Bad’s #2. They’re not meant to be heroic or sympathetic (since all these feminine traits are not desirable, especially for guys.) But they also aren’t scary, and you can pretty much always play them for comedy. 

For example: see almost every male Disney villain. And JKR was writing children’s literature in the 90s, so of course she’s pulling from the same zeitgeist as the Disney Renaissance. 

JKR loves herself a femme villain. The absolute gold standard is of course Lockhart - who wears pink, wants to start his own line of hair care products, is self-centered, vain, obsessed with popularity… but he sucks in a fight. His entire MO involves manipulating people into thinking he has these traditional masculine qualities when he just doesn’t. But there’s also fussy, prissy Percy wearing his prefect badge on his pajamas. Bitchy, emotional mean-girl poisoners Draco and Snape (especially early book Snape - which is Snape at his most villainous.) Draco, Percy and Snape are also unusual for being male characters who we see crying for reasons other than grief (apparently the only truly acceptable reason for masculine crying). 

Lucius Malfoy is an interesting case because he starts off quite masc. He’s threatening to curse people, the governors are scared of him, etc. But, as the books go on… and he gets less powerful… he also gets more femme. When we meet him in Book 5 he’s no longer threatening people, but bribing them, spreading rumors, and giving interviews to the Prophet casting Arthur Weasley in a negative light. He's also getting really into peacocks. In Book 2 he was a major threat, but as he gets recast as Voldemort’s #2 he becomes a more femme, soft-power villain. When he leads the attack on the Department of Mysteries, he absolutely bungles it, which defines his character (and relationship with Voldemort) for the rest of the series. And it makes sense that Lucius is given this kind of treatment! It’s a way of communicating that there's a new villain in town, a real villain. 

So, are any of these femme-coded villains additionally queer-coded? I’m actually going to say no. Queer-coding is (like it says on the tin) finding ways to imply that your character is specifically gay. Like maybe giving them a same-sex relationship that is written romantically, but not explicitly called out by the text. Or pairing up all of the characters except them. Maybe have other characters joke about them being gay, and use that as a way to talk about the subject with some plausible deniability. Or they could just play suggestively with a cigar, or a walking stick. There are different strategies.  

But Lockhart doesn't get any of that. Honestly, I think that if JKR actually thought of him as gay, she would have been a lot more wary about a scene where he keeps Harry alone with him in his office for way longer than he’s supposed to. And she might have skipped this joke: 

“Harry was hauled to the front of the class during their very next Defense Against the Dark Arts lesson, this time acting a werewolf (...) “Nice loud howl, Harry — exactly — and then, if you’ll believe it, I pounced — like this — slammed him to the floor — thus — with one hand, I managed to hold him down — with my other, I put my wand to his throat (...) he let out a piteous moan — go on, Harry — higher than that — good —” 

Like. At least she would have picked a different word than “moan,” right? Which unfortunately has slightly sexual connotations. Especially if she wanted to keep Lockhart a buffoon, to properly set up the twist at the end. 

Slughorn also gets femme-coded in a similar way: he loves his candy, his parties, his smoking jackets, his lilac silk pajamas, his web of connections he can use to get stuff (Lucius style.) We are introduced to him squatting in specifically a “fussy old lady’s” house. He’s also unusually emotional, getting weepy at Aragog‘s funeral. But I don’t think we’re meant to read him as actually gay, or else his relationship with Tom Riddle might’ve read a little too close to Tom seducing/trying to seduce him. Which is a beat JKR does subtly play out with Hepzibah Smith, but idk. by that point at least Tom is a legal adult.

(As a side note - the Harry Potter series got so lucky that all of its adult characters are played by absolutely top-shelf actors who are aware of the connotations and history behind various symbols, and do consider these things in their performances. Kenneth Brannagh and Jim Broadbent are good enough to make sure there’s not even a hint of iffy subtext when they play Lockhart and Slughorn. Also, Emma Thompson took the potentially very problematic character of Trelawney and made her cute and sympathetic… and not Romani in the slightest.) 

Draco, Snape, and Percy all have a case of the not-gays. Percy has a girlfriend (we don’t really see her or anything, but we’re told she’s there.) Snape of course gets his whole thing with Lily, and Draco… after one too many beats where it’s clear that Pansy is into him, but he’s not into Pansy…  gets a scene where he’s talking to his buddies with his head in her lap. (JKR uses “no one‘s good enough for me” beats with Blaise, Draco and Sirius, and the idea there seems to be more that they have undeservedly high opinions of themselves, and less that they don’t like girls.)

But, I do agree that a lot of JKR's characters do come across as a little more queer than intended. It boils down, I think, to the general lack of any kind of romance in the Harry Potter books and JKR being generally bad at/uncomfortable with writing male attraction directed at women, BUT being perfectly happy writing attraction directed at pretty guys. And because of that… yeah, it can sometimes feel like maybe Harry has a thing for Cedric. Especially when Dudley goes on to tease him about Cedric being his boyfriend, which I believe is the only actual mention of gay people in the entire series.  

So is there any intentional queer-coding in the book? It’s really subtle, but yes. I think Dumbledore is queer-coded. He is unusually emotional/cries unusually often for a Rowling guy. He is also given a scene which emphasizes his “flamboyantly” cut plum-velvet suit, and his relationship with Grindelwald is implied to be romantic for one book and two movies before being actually confirmed in Fantastic Beasts 3. (With the line of dialogue “I was in love with you.” Big step up from “We were closer than brothers.” which is an odd thing to say about someone you are interested in romantically.) 

But you brought up Tonks and Lupin, two characters very commonly interpreted as queer. So let’s get into that. JKR has said that she considers Lupin’s lycanthropy to be a metaphor for stigmatized diseases like AIDS. And… as incredible as it is to say… I actually do not think that she made the jump from there to thinking that maybe the character suffering from AIDS should be gay.

Because the narrative places so much weight on Lupin being bitten young and then on maybe not being allowed to attend school, I’m pretty sure that he’s not intended to be queer so much as he’s meant to be Ryan White, the literal poster child for AIDS activism who got infected via blood transfusion when he was two. Tragic, absolutely. But not gay. Honestly, I hope JKR was thinking of ‘lycanthropy’ as a metaphor for stigmatized illness in the abstract and not as a comment on gay people specifically. Because otherwise, Greyback’s thing about biting children becomes a mash-up of two of the biggest homophobic boogeymen from the 80s: gay men infecting people with AIDS on purpose because… idk, they hate the world or something. And the influence of gay men somehow “turning” children gay. Both absolutely real, if ridiculous, moral panics.

On top of that, Remus and Sirius do get a pretty clear case of the not-gays early on (“He embraced Black like a brother.”) Buuuut Alfonso Cuarón did think through those implications for Movie 3, absolutely saw Lupin as gay, and directed David Thewlis to play him accordingly. No reports confirming or denying whether Alfonso Cuarón ships Wolfstar, but I think that if I’m an actor trying to make sense of Lupin’s motivations… and I know he didn’t show Dumbledore the Marauders’ Map and didn’t tell anyone Sirius was an animagus… and then I’m told my character is gay… well. Anyway, I think there are absolutely hints of Wolfstar in that performance. 

And there's Tonks. Tonks is introduced during a very spooky segment in Book 5: Harry has been going through it, been left alone at the Dursleys while having what sounds like a depressive episode. It’s dark, he hears intruders. It's a really good piece of writing. But JKR knows that it’s the good guys who are coming and thinks, okay. Let’s make that as clear as possible from the word go. And so the first thing Harry sees is Tonks' pink hair. And what kind of person has pink hair? A young adult. A punky young adult. And what power would a teenager think was cool? Well, the ability to change the color of their hair at will. That, by itself, would have worked perfectly fine for this character.

But then (for reasons best known to herself) JKR goes further. Even though Tonk’s hair changing color is easily 90% of the transformations we see and there is no plot reason her appearance needs to change more than that, we see her drastically change her age and body type. When you think about this power for more than five seconds, it becomes kind of OP. For worldbuilding reasons alone, my instinct would’ve been to tone it down a bit. 

But no, we have this counterculture character who seems interested in her career and not in a relationship, who can easily change anything about her body, and (if her ability works anything like Polyjuice) that means she should definitely be able to change her gender. Cool.

Then, in everyone’s least favorite romance, Tonks and Lupin are paired up. I have heard the argument that this was meant to walk back queer-coding, or to punish people who thought they were queer... but I don’t think that’s the case. I don’t think JKR expected these two to be fan favorites, and then was kind of surprised when everyone wanted to hear about their continuing adventures. 

(There are a handful of characters who JKR clearly really enjoys - and really enjoys writing - that fandom honestly could not care less about. Mundungus Fletcher and Ludo Bagman spring to mind. But the reverse is also true. She had one story for Lupin and people wanted to see more. Tonks is probably supposed to be her comment on immature young adults: she is loud, in your face, causes mild destruction and is “a little annoying at times.” But the fans fell in love with her.) 

So JKR has these two fan favorite characters and nothing for them to do. A romance is something for them to do. JKR also has a kind of weird pattern where good people need to either have kids or take care of kids. It’s not good to be a woman who isn’t involved with taking care of children in some fashion: see Rita Skeeter, Dolores Umbridge, Bellatrix Lestrange. This is also (I think) why Harry names his kids specifically after Severus, Sirius, and Albus. Since they’re good men, JKR had to find a way to give them kids after the fact. 

So yeah. I think we were meant to read Tonks and Lupin having a kid as kind of a reward, or at least as proof of their intrinsic goodness. There also just isn’t another guy in the right age range to ship Tonks with. The only other option is Sirius. 

(Harry in the books and Lupin on Pottermore both suspect that Tonks/Sirius is a thing. Completely forgetting, I guess, that they're cousins.)

[runin-reads]

James/Lily vs James/Sirius: a case of accidental queer coding

Jily (James/Lily) is a pairing central to the HP universe in the sense that had they not been married, Harry Potter, the main character, would cease to exist and neither would his story as we know it. Yet we are left with only a few brief glimpses of their relationship in canon whilst other pairings are textually far more fleshed out– take Prongsfoot (James/Sirius), for example, who are frequently portrayed as The Duo, not just by those closest to them (Lupin) but by many others too such as McGonagall, Flitwick and so on. Harry himself could see how close they were during SWM in OOTP and this is someone who had a very limited time with Sirius and close to none with James. 

Queercoding is described as “the subtextual coding of a character in media as queer. Though such a character's sexual identity may not be explicitly confirmed within their respective work, a character might be coded as queer through the use of traits and stereotypes recognisable to the audience.” One character comes to mind when I think of “queercoding” and that’s Sirius Black. He’s estranged from his family, goes against the norms associated with his upbringing, there’s no mention of any ex-girlfriends and most notably he has intense love and devotion for his male best friend; James Potter.  At first glance, James had led an incredibly hetero-normative life by virtue of his wife and son, but through his relationship to Sirius there’s leeway to reach a queer reading of him as well. 

As recognised by countless characters and even Sirius himself, Prongsfoot come in a two-for-one deal:

“Do you remember who his best friend was?”  “Naturally,” said Madam Rosmerta, with a small laugh. “Never saw one without the other, did you? The number of times I had them in here — ooh, they used to make me laugh. Quite the double act, Sirius Black and James Potter!”  “Black and Potter. Ringleaders of their little gang. Both very bright, of course — exceptionally bright, in fact…”  “You’d have thought Black and Potter were brothers!” chimed in Professor Flitwick. “Inseparable!” 

The use of the word “brothers” in the above quote is one reason why fans don’t interpret Prongsfoot as queer-coded and/or romantic. However, it’s important to note that Sirius never referred to James as a brother, and there’s no canonical proof to suggest that Flitwick was close to James and Sirius– he was their teacher, not their friend or confidant. He isn’t calling them “brothers” either but rather he’s saying that word to express how strong their bond was. Hence why I believe an exclusively fraternal reading of their relationship doesn’t hold much weight. 

They are, however, established as each other’s closest friend and most trusted confidant. 

“Harry had the distinct impression that Sirius was the only one for whom James would have stopped showing off.” “Potter trusted Black beyond all his other friends. Nothing changed when they left school. Black was the best man when James married Lily. Then they named him godfather to Harry.  “I persuaded Lily and James to change to Peter at the last moment, persuaded them to use him as Secret-Keeper instead of me.”  “Lily and James only made you Secret-Keeper because I suggested it,” Black hissed

On multiple occasions James and Sirius were described as a unit– The Unit– within their friend group. Lupin said they were “the cleverest students in the school.” They were the “ringleaders” of the Marauders; always on the same page and in agreement with each other.

“Then, with identical fluid movements, they reached into their back pockets.” 

Even during their very first encounter, they quickly and effortlessly become a team. 

“Got a problem with that?”  “No,” said Snape, though his slight sneer said otherwise. “If you’d rather be brawny than brainy–” “Where’re you hoping to go, seeing as you’re neither?” interjected Sirius.  James roared with laughter.

This excerpt from DH also neatly sums up the Marauders group dynamic:

“To Sirius’s right stood Pettigrew, more than a head shorter, plump and watery-eyed, flushed with pleasure at his inclusion in this coolest of gangs, with the much-admired rebels that James and Sirius had been. On James’s left was Lupin, even then a little shabby-looking, but he had the same air of delighted surprise at finding himself liked and included” 

Lily herself acknowledged Sirius’ importance in James’ life in her letter to Sirius, where she all but says that only he could lift James’ mood whilst the Potters’ were hiding from Voldemort’s forces. 

“James is getting a bit frustrated shut up here, he tries not to show it but I can tell — also, Dumbledore’s still got his Invisibility Cloak, so no chance of little excursions. If you could visit, it would cheer him up so much.” 

On the other hand, Jily is portrayed in a less compelling way for lack of better words. I spoke about this in my other meta but to summarise it briefly: Lily is James’ wife, the mother of his son and… that’s pretty much it. In the books they’re barely spoken about as a couple, unlike Prongsfoot who are always mentioned together as if they were a package deal– which they were, as recognised by practically everyone. That’s not to say Jily has zero textual backing, though it is far and few between.

“How come she married him?” Harry asked miserably. “She hated him!”  “Nah, she didn’t,” said Sirius.  “She started going out with him in seventh year,” said Lupin.  “Once James had deflated his head a bit,” said Sirius.  “And stopped hexing people just for the fun of it,” said Lupin. 

Conclusion

What we do know about James and Lily’s relationship is limited to the following: Lily disliked James because he and Snape were enemies, James developed feelings for her first, they began dating in seventh year once James had matured, they got married when they were nineteen to twenty years old, had a child together. The end. 

On the contrary, James and Sirius are constantly implied to be each other’s closest, most loyal friend; each other’s most trusted confidant. They are equals in every conceivable way. Both were popular, from wealthy backgrounds  and intelligent. Throughout the entire series Sirius’ only priority was Harry, James’ son. He went through unfathomable lengths to protect Harry: he was the first to escape Azkaban, he snuck into Hogwarts with all the dementors around and lived off rats during the GOF so he could be close to Harry, the last piece of James he had left. 

There’s also evidence to suggest Sirius was a narrative parallel to Snape. There are two adults in Harry’s life who sought to protect him due to their respective relationships with one of his parents. Snape was a double agent for Dumbeldore out of love for Lily; Sirius escaped Azkaban to protect Harry out of love for him, an extension of his love for James. 

All these factors are  why I believe that by not fleshing out Lily as a character and Jily as a couple, JKR accidentally queer-coded Prongsfoot. 

[mamuzzy]

My unpublished HP fanfictions don't even follow canon but it would be still considered transphobic and racist act to publish it to any place, eventhough most of my OCs are queer, diverse from many countries, and often not even humans. I don't even use canon characters or ships.

I can try and leave out the conservative british empire elements, even changing the worldbuilding entirely, it would still be considered transphobic and racist.

See how crazy this is?

Not because Harry Potter story is shit, it's because the author is doing horrible things to real people.

JK Rowling really ruined it for all of us. For those who are actually affected by her. For those who only just wanted a safe place to hide from reality.

Good people can make good art.

Good people can make shitty art.

Shitty people can make good art.

Shitty people can make shitty art.

People have got to get more comfortable with the fact that people with despicable moral values can create good art

"But Harry Potter was always shit-"

No. No it wasn't. It may have had its flaws, but people liked it for a reason. It was popular for a reason.

So many times people find out that the creator of something they liked was awful and then they go and claim that it was never good in the first place.

I think it's pretty dangerous to get into the mindset of horrible people can't create good things, because then you can't spot those people, or then you can use the fact that they obviously created something wonderful to deny that they've done anything wrong.

It's reductive. And it's dangerous.

[ree-dee-art]

Honestly, I must admit that I'm not too fond of fan artists changing/headcanoning Harry and James to be as desi/dark skinned. I personally think the Dursleys are far more despicable due to hating on someone not because of skin color/racial prejudice(because then they would've no doubt hated Kingsley), but because someone is not their definition of 'normal'/ looks & acts not to their standards. It's already stretching it with race changing Hermione and making her a big target of wizard prejudice on muggles. And it also kills the prejudice Lily faced, because she's still fair skinned.

Initially, I was just going to respond to this by encouraging anon to go touch some grass.

However, I feel somewhat compelled to respond, because there is just so much to unpack in this single nonsensical message.

Firstly, I honestly don't get a whole lot of asks or messages in general, so receiving this one out of the blue was a bit wild for me. The nature of fandom itself allows for and embraces a plethora of different interpretations and headcanons for any given character. In many ways, this is the beauty of fandom--to take a beloved character and ask "what if?" I have no problem with someone having a different interpretation of a character from my own. What confuses me is this person's method for expressing their opinion. Why are you anonymously sending this to a stranger? Why not make a text post on your own blog about it? Like...what is your goal here, anon? I'm an artist who draws what I enjoy, and sometimes I share these drawings in the hopes that someone else might enjoy them too. Not your vibe? Not my problem. Go find some white Harry artwork to appreciate, there's plenty out there. Were you hoping I would change my own interpretation and headcanon of Harry or Hermione to fit your own? Lol, tough luck. No one is stopping you from drawing your own pictures.

All of that aside, your reasoning for your preference of having characters like James, Harry, and Hermione not be POC is incredibly confusing to me. You said you believe the Dursleys are "far more despicable" for hating Harry not because of skin color but because he didn't match their "definition of normal." I have a few follow-up questions regarding this (wildly inane imo) take:

1. Does this mean you believe the Dursley hypothetically also hating Harry because of the color of his skin is in some way less despicable than them hating him because he can do magic?

2. What exactly do you think racism is, if not "hating someone because they don't match your definition of 'normal?'"

3. How does Hermione being black and muggleborn erase the discrimination Lily faced for also being muggleborn? Do you know that intersectionaily exists?

Some of the most interesting creations I've encountered in the HP fandom (fics and art) explore the complexities in the intersections between racial discrimination, white supremacy, and pureblood fanaticism. And there truly is so much to explore in these themes (for example: ways in which Harry could have been separated not only from his loving family, but also a part of his culture. It also allows for interesting and more complex ways for Harry and Hermione to bond and relate to each other in their friendship, etc).

For me, more diversity within these characters (whether it be race, queerness, or anything else) allows for much richer storytelling and much more interesting characters. If that's not your jam, then perhaps my work isn't for you.

However, I will say--this message is very much giving "only white characters and muggle discrimination allowed!!!" and I encourage you to ask yourself why that is the only context for these characters you feel comfortable with.

But seriously, go touch some grass.

[unhinged-romione]

i'm prolly going to get a lot of shit for this but here goes anyway: to everyone who is side-eyeing the hp fandom or trying to convince us to jump ship, i'm begging you to leave us alone and let us enjoy what's left of this fandom in peace.

the fandom is not the creator and neither is the art she created. this is no more apparent than in how the OVERWHELMING majority of the hp fandom denounces jkr and activities that line her pockets. and we're like this precisely because of the morals she reinforced within us through the series (the greatest irony of it all).

i am a proud trans person and the hp fandom is the ONLY space in my life where i'm able to fully embrace my trans creative self. it's full of the funniest, nicest, cleverest, most creative people i've ever encountered in my 32 years. through our fan works, we are queering and transing the fuck out of the series and engaging in other creative acts that foster the best of what the series has to offer: tolerance, love, resistance, and inclusivity. our continued engagement with the hp narrative and how we're making it our own is, in fact, the best form of resistance.

so when you ask us to give up the hp fandom, please understand that you're asking us to give up something that goes way beyond jkr. you're asking us to give up a profound source of our creativity. you're asking us to give up something that's etched deeply within our psyche. you're asking us to give up our people.

[mollyringle]

I am perhaps extreme on this, but I don’t think there’s a good excuse to stay in HP fandom, unless one does agree with Rowling's infamous tweets of recent years. Separating art from artist is debatably all right when the artist is dead and no longer collecting royalties, but when the artist is still on Twitter bragging about her royalties, and there’s so much queer-friendly fantasy that could be talked up instead…yep, nope, trans/genderqueer/NB allies should jump ship.

I admit I look askance now at HP cosplayers and anyone still putting their Hogwarts house in their social media bio. I know, I know, a fandom that meant so much to a person for a phase of their life is going to claim a special place in their memories. But you wouldn’t (I hope) continue celebrating the birthday of a toxic ex-friend because you liked them two decades ago, so why stay with the fandom, when by so doing you’re keeping Rowling culturally relevant? We can support the innocent actors from the HP movies by supporting the work they’ve done since the series—I’m sure they’d rather have more focus on those newer projects anyway.

I practice what I preach: I could be continuing to lure in potential readers with my HP parodies, but instead I have taken them all down, all the places I can still reach, because I don’t want to give her any airtime, even obliquely like that.

I think if y'all knew how very, very little the vast majority of us writers make, and how hard we try to reach readers, and how much we'd appreciate a smidgen of success, and how hard some of us are trying to help and protect our fellow queer folks...you would better understand why this is a big deal, to someone who is also a writer of urban fantasy. I’ll stop there. Apparently I could go on and on about this.

[utilitycaster]

i've seen some people say kipperlilly is neurodivergent but it's more them being like BUT THE RATGRINDERS ARE KIDS!!! and it's like yeah??? so are most of the characters in this show? it's set in high school? penelope everpetal is in hell right now? so idk why THESE kids are being treated differently

RIGHT.

I'm trying to answer a question about both the D20 discourse and the CR discourse but like. There is a post going around in the CR fandom about how it doesn't make sense to apply real-world morality to ttrpgs, which firstly is not entirely wrong but it's much more complicated than that and secondly and more importantly I'd take it way more seriously if it weren't coming from the people who threw a fit when I said that treating Imogen's powers as a metaphor for real-world queerness is reductive and stupid and who keep treating Orym's status as a guard as a member of like, the US Military. The real answer is "D&D settings have their own moral framework, and you need to make arguments based on those, rather than the real world, but there is often some overlap."

I think, as your post points out, this is one of those cases where you do need to work within the moral framework of the show. Penelope is in hell. It is a show about teenage adventurers. Two of the Bad Kids died in the second episode, famously. While I suspect they'd never cross the line of like, a serious romantic or sexual relationship between and adult and one of the high schoolers, in basically any other context the students of the Aguefort Academy are treated as children or adults based on, essentially, which is funnier. The way to get your magic GED is to battle monsters to the death. The way to graduate is to go on a full D&D adventure. It's normal for a high school senior to have access to like, Power Word Kill. The premise of this world is "D&D but in a John Hughes movie setting" and the premise of a lot of D&D is "killing your enemies is part of the story." Like, I've said this before (as has Brennan) but a big appeal of D&D is that you don't need to be patient and send a polite email and let the person who dangerously cut you off on the highway merge in because otherwise you'll get in an accident and smile through the microagressions (let alone put up with larger injustices); you can just straight up kill your way through problems and wake up the next morning fresh and refreshed with full HP and 8 hours of sleep behind you. You don't have to swallow your anger; you can cast fireball on a bitch. As I've also said before, if your entire table likes finding peaceful solutions in D&D, fine, play that way, but I came here to cast fireball and I find you preachy, boring, and stupid.

The rules of this world are "teens are full-blown adventurers and are treated as such." The Rat Grinders are on the same footing as the Bad Kids; there is no imbalance of power here (indeed, they even have the favor of some teachers themselves)! Yeah, if the Bad Kids were actually a bunch of 30-somethings this would play much differently but if they're their classmates? go off.

[whydidoth]

As someone who frankly watches too much hbomberguy, I was fairly startled by the tone he adopted in his latest video in regard to his own sexuality. He has been openly bisexual, coming out (as far as I’m aware) on his channel five years ago in a video on adaptations of HP Lovecraft, but his bisexuality overall hasn’t been particularly present. Even in instances like discussing the queerbaiting of Sherlock or the ability in Fallout to officially play as a bisexual character, he tends to approach the topics in such a way that if you didn’t already know his sexuality, you’d probably just assume he was a good ally. Genuinely, I would not be surprised if casual viewers of his channel had had no idea. I saw someone else suggest that he centered his own bisexuality so much at the start in order to dissuade accusations of him targeting Somerton for being gay. While I think this is certainly plausible, on a pure narrative level, I can’t help but see this most recent video as a book ends to his one on Lovecraft.

In that video, he talks about the value of adaptation and how adaptation at its best doesn’t recreate the work but is a response in concert with it. He speaks very personally about how the film Cthulu embodied the deep, crawling horror of being an outsider in a way that he resented as a kid. As a queer adult, he came back to find not only catharsis but also that it understood the essence of Lovecraft and of his own experience in a way he had been unable to when he was younger.

In his video on plagiarism, he emphasizes how the harm extends past the simple act of stealing someone else’s work, and how plagiarism goes on to suppress genuine dialogue among new voices with new ideas. In some regard, this is a direct response to his original thesis, and the response is one of despair. We are without adaptation. We are without queer voices and narratives.

This shouldn’t be where things end, and I don’t think he would have bothered uploading this video if he had seen no hope for things going differently in the future. I know it’s fun to revel in the scandal of this call-out, but ultimately, we’re witnessing a tragedy. In addition to supporting and giving small creators a shot, I think we should also take this as a chance to be less hesitant about promoting and sharing our own stories.

I have a youtube channel that’s been sitting in the corner collecting dust for a year now, but I’m going to try picking it up again. I’ll be putting a link to both hbomberguy’s video on Lovecraft and my own channel in the notes, and I would encourage everyone to similarly shamelessly self-promote in the comments—literally everything from soundcloud to twitch to personal blogs, go nuts. Let’s all make sure the future is over-saturated with authentic, marginalized voices, yeah?

[juni-ravenhall]

im sure u guys talked about this when the medieval thing was released and i wasnt active bc of the horrors, but doesnt it feel like the medieval group thing is inspired directly from HP house stuff which is questionable considering the author-being-a-transphobic-and-racist-evildoer thing? like, theres blue and silver, red and gold, yellow and black and just skipping the green one.

feels to me like they couldve gone with other colour combos. especially ones RELATED TO SSO, like jorvik flag colours, purple-pink for pandoria or purple green for south hoof, snow for dino valley, autumn for golden hills, etc, colour combos we saw recently for the ribbon thingy. factions that make sense for the existing game. things that tie into lore.

instead of referencing what is now a very controversial transphobia-related and racist media franchise, in their horse game that is ~progressive and loves women and queer people and poc and we're so diverse~ (says rich white man making bank on manipulating kids to buy overpriced things in unserious game)

i know that esme silverforce, who works at sse and is a youtuber, is a HP fan and afaik she played the HP game and does stuff like name her sso horse HP names.... sure, theres that whole "death of the author" thing and i think these things can be very complex!!! there are trans and poc fans of HP that choose to enjoy it despite flaws (and assumably view it from the "death of the author" standpoint). im a huge lover of nuance and understanding, but im also a huge lover of trans people and poc, and a huge hater of transphobes and racists. idk what else to say about the whole thing but i wanted to post about it bc i feel iffy about this. it seems like a bad choice both bc sse shouldnt support HP in this manner as a company/game, and also just bc stupid fucking game design that yet again has nothing really to do with the existing sso game and lore.

[johannestevans]

set up the post gauging interest in a history club for queers in yorkshire and someone was immediately like "why don't you want to make the social aspect online?" and like. i really respect and get the desire for online social things but i want to run a club and public talks, not a forum

like i'm trained for public speaking, i'm confident running talks, chairing meetings, moderating panels and discussions and interviews

but moderating an online forum or, god forbid, a group chat, is a fundamentally different task that saps all of my HP immediately and i just cannot do it anymore - i used to be able to do it more as a teen and young adult and now i just can't

and it is a thing of conflicting access needs, if someone has significant physical issues (whether mobility wise immuno compromisation) or if it's social anxiety etc, there are so many reasons to prefer or want the option for an online option, but the obverse here is that as the disabled facilitator who's specifically setting this up as an in-person social group, i need this stuff to be in person

bc i said like. i'm happy to make talks available online, i'm happy to run a mailing list where ppl get notifications or links or transcripts to their email inbox, but i've seen so many clubs and things that end up just being a facebook group where people post memes but don't show up in person and like.

that is not the thing i'm here to put work into

[annabtg]

Anna, you’re so right(i love you). It’s so annoying that all these woke yaoi-shipping sjws have taken over the fandom. You cannot put characters like James and Sev through modern lenses(“Snape was a child abuser” teachers were allowed to hit students with rulers at 90s british schools but being a little mean to a troublemaker makes you satan🙄) and understand them fully. You also cannot make James Potter into a bisexual adhd-having MOC and keep true to his character(everything about him relays on him being very privileged in society)

Love, an old man.

I don't know how you can read this post and conclude that my problem is "woke, yaoi-shipping sjws"? My problem is, like I said, the complete lack of reading comprehension skills, of creative and analytical thought and of the ability to empathize with the characters.

Indeed, modern social media seems to favour performative activism, but that's not what fanfic suffers from. I've engaged with fandom enough to understand that the prevalence of non-nuanced takes comes from younger fans who have grown up in a world massively different from the one I grew up in as a millennial with boomer parents.

Nevertheless, I don't think you're doing it right either, my love. Teachers might have been allowed to hit students with rulers in the 70s (they weren't allowed in 90s Greece, though, and I have been informed neither were they in the UK) - and an example of a strict but good teacher in the books is Minerva McGonagall, who would dole out harsh punishments and use her sharp tongue on students, but still gives you the feeling that she cared about them and loved them. That kind of "tough love" was how boomers took care of their kids. Not Snape, who had beef with a student because he didn't like his father. That's fucked up. But the thing is that Snape is supposed to be unlikeable and mean and come off as the villain, to make his arc all the more surprising and impactful. He's supposed to be a fucked up dick who works for the side of good, because the world isn't split into good people and Death Eaters.

As for James, I don't think his portrayal as a bisexual ADHD-having MOC is inherently incompatible with his character, even if it's not the authorial intent (indeed, James is supposed to be the picture of privilege). For instance, one aspect of HP I find fascinating is how being a POC doesn't descend into racism in the books - I think there's one single instance of it, where Pansy tells Angelina she's got worms on her head, but that's obviously Pansy being a dick, and other than that there is no casual racism thrown about to people like Dean or Lee or Cho or the Patils. Whether their portrayal is nuanced or stereotypical is a different discussion, but I think it's obvious that we're supposed to take out that if you're a racist wizard, it's not colour that matters, it's blood. James Potter could reasonably be a POC and it wouldn't matter at all in the world he lived in.

That he would struggle with ADHD or sexuality is also not implausible, and in fact I think it makes for very compelling portrayals of him to be going through that in an era-adequate way. Have people around him be annoyed because he just won't sit still, show him confused by his attraction to Sirius and downplaying it with semi-homophobic remarks. I'm personally not so much a fan of a Hogwarts that reads like you're at Pride, but it was the era of hippies, after all?? I think that Hogwarts would be on the conservative side of things, but at the end of the day it *was* the time when queerness started to gain visibility and I understand how people feel at liberty to use that. Everyone seeks to connect to these characters through fic to some degree; for me, who grew up as a gifted (and probably undiagnosed autistic?) kid in a conservative society, the canon portrayal of people like James and Lily and Sirius at Hogwarts resonates enough to keep me intrigued.

I don't lament people trying to project their own struggles with queerness or mental illness or idk just the fun conversations they have with their friends on the Marauders and Hogwarts; what bugs me is when it's being done in a way that cancels canon aphoristically, and you're suddenly idk toxic for shipping Jily because "James was an abuser and Lily had Stockholm Syndrome" - that's not what happened. Showing off like a peacock was the men's standard flirting technique, and playing hard to get was the women's standard flirting technique, and even with that Jily contains a LOT of nuance - and frankly, even through a modern lens I find it very difficult to miss if you have the first idea of reading between the lines. Which is why I keep saying: lack of reading comprehension skills and critical thinking beyond understanding straightforward text messages and cheap quips is the bane of these readers' existence (or, you know, our existence, for having to put up with it).

[olderthannetfic]

https://www.tumblr.com/olderthannetfic/663370772509802496/do-you-know-what-the-origin-of-the-sold-to-one

So I was looking at this old post of yours (in your fandom meta tag) and has anyone else noticed that Hogwarts AU fanfic and meta about if this or that character from another fandom would be Hufflepuff or Ravenclaw has completely disappeared? I assume that this is related to JKR’s transphobia making her (understandably) persona non grata to a lot of online queer people of the kind who dominate fanfic fandom at least on AO3 (I’m less familiar with Wattpad or other corners of fandom that are overwhelmingly cishet and writing het, and the Bridgerton drama has taught me a lot about just how out of pace a lot of them are with even elementary queer stuff, yeesh). but I was wondering if others have noticed that. It did seem to really start to crater around 2019-20 when she stopped being coy and blaming it on “middle aged moments,” and started openly making transphobic tweets and writing essays about it rather than just “liking” others’. Like when I was into Yuri on Ice circa 2016-18, it was still all over that fandom, even though people were already souring on the actual official franchise stuff such as those terrible Fantastic Beasts movies.

So I’m mostly active in anime, JRPG and Western genre TV fandoms so I was curious if this was also happening elsewhere. I’m also wondering if the fact that actual HP fandom seems to be increasingly divorced from canon (like fanon pairings of characters who never interacted in canon being the most popular lately) is related to this too.

Cuz having a Hogwarts AU used to be a sign that a fandom had Arrived. I remember in 2016 you saw people doing house sortings for the people on the frickin 538 political podcast. Now I never see any of that even with huge fandoms.

It’s interesting to me given that it feels like her transphobia hasn’t dented much of her popularity with non online nerd culture. Like the third Fantastic Beasts movie failed but those had never been good and had been declining in box office numbers already. But the Hogwarts Legacy game sold really well. You still see HP in stores all over the place with other nerd culture staples like Star Wars and Marvel. Still constantly see brands doing collabs. I often find non online friends and family, including many who are genuine allies to the trans people in their lives, who have no idea about her transphobia. Or they’ve only heard a little and assume it’s some weird insular online culture thing that is just fans nitpicking, maybe having heard about some other Twitter “canceling” over nothing and figuring it’s like that. They’re always shocked and horrified when I tell them what she’s actually saying and doing.

--

Interesting question.

For me, as an Old, it just feels like Hogwarts AUs are part of my childhood, and why wouldn't they be less common now? But realistically, if they actually are declining, it does mean something.

There's no way for us to know if the "Would X be a Hufflepuff?" posts are really a thing of the past. That could be a question of whom one follows or of fans leaving one's platform. But we can at least poke at some AO3 tags and see if they show a pattern.

The relevant tags are Alternate Universe - Hogwarts and its metatag Alternate Universe - Harry Potter Setting.

There are 21,426 works in the metatag. Obviously, not everything uses the tag, but it's a starting point. (Some cursory playing with filters on big tags makes me think that maybe around 3/4 of HP AUs are actually tagged with a relevant AU tag.)

If we look at the AU tag itself, the numbers have come down in the last few years. (This year is obviously only half over, so we'd expect those numbers to be smaller.)

But we have to take into account how big the archive itself was. It's been growing significantly since it opened to staff accounts in late 2008 and then more widely in late 2009, so the overall rise doesn't mean much, but the recent drop might.

It does seem like there's a downward trend lately, but it doesn't look like it's falling off a cliff.

[sitp-recs]

I wanted to ask a question... idk if you're straight, bi.... but I consider myself a lesbian and since I read HP books in the pandemic I became obsessed with them, then wolfstar then drarry. I love pansmione, ginsy and linny as well but they didnt hit the same (besides some specific fics) like drarry to me bc I love draco's background story so much. I love how they complete each other (two sides of the same coin / being used as pawns / relatable traumas etc). anyway I was thinking what do you think about lesbians reading mlm/gay men fiction? specially if some of them are explicit. I love them and fic got me through the pandemic as well but I feel guilty :( I read other types of books too (a lot of sapphic ones) but yeah I always come back to drarry. help.

Hi anon! I’m sorry to hear that you’ve been feeling this way about preferring mlm over femslash. You are not the first person I see mentioning this and I think your experience is 100% valid and probably more common than you imagine. Following that logic, I should only read stories featuring bisexual women but you see, I’m not always interested in fics reflecting my own reality and issues. Most of the time I’m not even in the mood to read wlw or straight sex, no matter (or maybe exactly because of) how familiar it feels. I read it occasionally, but I normally use fic as an outlet to escape and read the stories that interest and intrigue me the most, and sometimes they couldn’t be farther away from my own experiences.

Be it because of the writing itself, or because I care more about Harry and Draco than I’ve ever cared about Ginny and Luna, Drarry just attracts me more than Linny. Hell, Ron/Ginny attracts me more than Linny. There’s no rationale behind what I ship, no objective way of knowing what will hit the right note for me, and so I gave up on tying to rationalize it a long time ago. Additionally, as a queer person I noticed that I often feel attracted to queerness in general, so I think it makes a lot of sense to connect to a gay character or mlm story even if you’re a woman (and vice-versa).

We all get different things out of fandom/fic and your reasons for enjoying this and not that work are entirely your own. I believe that our fandom experience should be all about self-indulgence and prioritizing joy and healing over anything else so from my perspective, I don’t think you have anything to feel guilty/ashamed of. That’s my two cents on it, just keep reading what you love and what brings you joy! ❤️

[rjalker]

heres a question, im curious as to your opinion on engaging with problematic media and how people should handle it. I mean in some cases it really cant be untangled. For example JK Rowling and Harry Potter because it gives her a platform, but even dead author like H.P Lovecraft a lot of his ideals deal with a rejection of race mixing and those he views as other most notable in Shadows Over Innsmouth. Yet people have for almost a century now engaged with Lovecraft's work. I'm curious as to your opinion on these things owo

A lot of it depends on if the bigoted creator is still alive and profiting (whether financially or socially) off their work.

Doing free advertising for Harry Potter, even in the form of ~progressive~ fanfiction, is still doing free advertising for JK Rowling.

Same for Ladd Ehlinger.

But people like HP Lovecraft, or Edgar Rice Burrougs for that matter are dead, and gain nothing from people doing anything with their creations.

Someone can write as many Trans!POC!Harry fanfiction as they want, it won't stop JK Rowling from making money from her books when people keep buying them.

People can make Ladd Ehlinger's designs for the narrator and the Sphere gay as much as they want, it literally only encourages more people to give Ladd Ehlinger more positive attention on youtube, where he spreads his Conservative ideas about how he thinks Black people are evil monsters and trans people -- or even just people who respect trans kids -- are all pedophiles.

But you can actually take concept from HP Lovecraft or Edgar Rice Burroughs and make them actually progressive, and you're not doing them any favors. They're dead. They have nothing to gain. And you can make their stories actually progressive.

You can't do that with Harry Potter fanfiction or fanart for Ladd Ehlinger's 2007 Flatland film. you can't make them progressive even through fanfiction or shitpost fanart because you're literally just sending more people to give them positive attention and money.

HP Lovecraft gains no power by people turning Cthulu into a little plushy. ERB gains nothing by people rewriting Tarzan to not be racist.

JK Rowling and Ladd Ehlinger have everything to gain by people continuing to worship their creations and encouraging more people to give them positive attention.

Dead people can't directly influence whether or not minorities have basic rights. But real living bigots who are famous and getting attention specifically because of their fictional stories sure as hell can.

It's the difference between buying Chikfila and making your own chicken at home. One of these leads to you directly handing money to people who want Queer people dead. The other does not.