Now those of us not thrilled by Harry Potter will be called homophobic, too

"Harry Potter" author J.K. Rowling waited for a moment when
the last volume in the series had been released, and the Potter
franchise was drawing closer to losing momentum. Then she
stirred the pot with a remark that she imagined the beloved
old wizard-professor, Dumbledore, to be a homosexual. It was
crafty timing. Earlier, and she might have turned off some of
the Christians who had been buying her books "because they
depict good against evil." As it was, she already had plenty of
Christian money in her bank account. Now it was time (1) to
get the privileged gay elite rallying around, perpetuating Harry
Potter's fame, and (2) to spray on a little Eau de Controversy,
so that she would remain a topic of conversation and fans would
remember to be looking forward to other books from her.

A columnist for one of our Colorado newspapers was quick to
publish an editorial, amounting essentially to the predictable
insistence that anyone having any objection to homosexuality
was a knuckle-dragging, retarded goon. This was concurrent
with her paper doing an opinion poll. Poll respondents were
asked whether or not they agreed that Ms. Rowling's remark
was a potential cause of trouble for gays as well as being a too-
early initiation to sexual subjects for child fans of the fantasy
series. Note that the concern for children was tightly bound up
with the always-hyped boogeyman of "homophobia;" the poll
made no allowance for any possibility that the well-being of
children and the preferences of homosexuals could ever be
mutually exclusive.

I wrote a letter to the columnist, knowing that she would not
answer it; but I can make further use of it here.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =


Dear Ms. Bornstein,

Having read your column of 27 October, I ask you to consider
the following.

If I, as a heterosexual man, meet a heterosexual woman, any
of several things could happen: (1) we are both indifferent to
each other sexually, (2) we are both attracted to each other,
(3) I am attracted to her but she is indifferent, or (4) she is
attracted to me but I am indifferent.

If two homosexual men meet, all of the above alternatives are
possible, but an _additional_ possibility exists which cannot
happen among heterosexual persons: the two men become
rivals for the attentions of a _third_ homosexual man. Any
two gays might, in the course of an acquaintance, be each
other's lovers AND each other's rivals for someone else. This
means that there are more different, conflicting ways one gay
person can feel toward another than there are or can be among
straight people.

Your column showed that you want to believe that anyone who
has any objection to homosexuality _must_ be irrational and
hysterical. But the meaningful difference I have demonstrated
between heterosexual relations and homosexual relations is not
hysteria, it is a matter of seeing what obviously and inevitably
follows from same-sex attraction. A person could see a problem
in that greater potential for instability, without thereby being
irrational--or "biased."

Speaking of bias, it's interesting the way your newspaper has
worded its reader poll about J.K. Rowling calling Dumbledore
gay. The way they are worded, the two choices amount to
(1) "Homosexuality is normal, so let's tell the world," and
(2) "Homosexuality is normal, but we should let children
wait a little longer to be let in on it." No option is even given
for anyone to say that homosexuality is not normal in the
first place. You folks are clearly familiar with the principle
that whoever gets to define the terms can claim to have
won the debate.

But reality will keep leaking through your kind of subtle
censorship. That includes the reality that same-sex attraction
is NOT fixed and unchangeable. I need look no farther than
a female neighbor I had, who was a committed lesbian--but
then changed over, fell in love with a man, and married him.

Meanwhile, I am left to wonder if you are also going to be
arguing that brother-sister incest is normal, when that
"alternative" starts making more noise for itself, which it
will if current trends continue.

Sincerely,
Joseph Ravitts
Aurora, CO