Microblog Memes

She called the Asian girl "ching chong", she called one of the few black people in it "shackle bolt", and she might as well have called the Irish kid "Irish O'Carbomb" given his name an propensity for unintentionally setting things on fire.

Don't even get me started on the goblins.

She straight up admitted lycanthropy is HIV, and all werewolves are interested j is spreading their disease by attacking anyone nearby, one werewolf specifically targets children, if I remember correctly.

The only gay characters I am aware of, one is a villain, and the other other is "one of the good ones" who never acted on it after a point and just stayed a celibate single.

The only non-magical users in the magic world "squibs", basically disabled people, are portrayed as shitty humans. Every summer Harry got left with ms fig who was "a mad old lady", and the school caretaker Filch, who is a sadist that welcomes umbridge with open arms, a parasite who latches on to whoever benefits him most.

I'm sure there's others I've never caught or thought about.

Voldemort is evil because he wants to be immortal (not because he promotes the ideas of an genocidal eugenicist)

That's not quite true but the degree that's tolerated is what makes it odd.

In (I think) the seventh book, the trio is horrified, upon infiltrating the Ministry of Magic, at a statue that the Death Eaters have installed which has wizards sitting on muggles as a throne with the phrase "Magic is Might" (for whatever reason, my brain remembered this as, like, a centaur and an elf and, maybe, a goblin underneath but I think this still qualifies for genocidal eugenicism, nonetheless).

But (as you and others have pointed out) these ideas have kind of tepidly been present throughout wizard society well through the books. Even if we disregard – say – Malfoy's use of Mudblood and such (as his family was always analogous to supremacist families, anyway): Arthur Weasley's pretty much not respected by his colleagues for his interest in muggles (which, if we were to actually take themes seriously, could have been an opportunity for Rowling to draw further connections with his monetary class) while those who do respect him kind of just regard it as pointless amusement, the fact that nearly every magical creature exists meaningfully segregated from wizarding society without any exploration of why (even in cases where the text provides it as being a choice by the magical creatures), and other small bits.

Like, perfectly reasonable if you're trying to represent a realistic society (people have all kinds of prejudices) but Rowling and her protagonists seemingly have no interest in it (or, perhaps more importantly, rooting it out more thoroughly past the overt supremacy of Voldemort).

Explicit, in-your-face bigotry: the books come down hard on but it seems wholly interested in maintaining the status quo, so long as it isn't disruptive.

Which, like, (considering the author) isn't surprising but I do find it interesting in the ways in manifests itself.

Meanwhile, neck-deep in AI slop and surrounded by bots, the uncanny valley of people that aren't people with unknowable intentions may turn out to be the most resonant.

HP ain't got shit on The Hobbit.