That and every competent male being forced out of the storyline or/ and just outright killed off. The entire series was a “bumbling dad, smart graceful amazing mom commercial”
Let's make a list of "Competent males in the series"
Harry - Was stated in the books to be good with his spellwork, and a match for Voldemort. Survives the series
Dumbledore - Most powerful sorcerer in the world, who only died because he was cursed by Voldemort who placed a powerful compulsion charm on a ring that he might have known held a Deathly Hallow, something he among a small number of people Dumbledore was searching for.
Filius Flitwick - one of the best professors in the school, survives
Hagrid - competent with magical creatures, a great guy, survives
Let's see who dies though
Snape - total prick, good at potions and a spy, but still dies to Voldemort
Mad-Eye Moody, aged ex-auror, in the battle of the seven potters is killed by Voldemort
Sirius Black - Harry's godfather, taken out by Bellatrix
Remus Lupin - married to Tonks, he is taken out by Dolohov in a double battle with Bellatrix Lestrange killing Tonks
So of the competent males, the ones who actually expressed some level of proficiency in the series, of the 4 killed two were taken out by the main villain, another taken out by a psycho witch who was stated to be incredibly dangerous, while Remus lost to another wizard who was also a member of Voldemorts inner circle and thus considered dangerous.
Notice I didn't mention Ron or Neville, because they weren't written out of the story and had large parts to play in events.
Look you can be pissy all you want about the leftist writing in the HP franchise but in no way was the entire series "bumbling dad, smart graceful amazing mom commercial"
Of the families we do see on screen or mentioned in the books, the Potters, James fought off Voldemort to buy time for his wife and child to escape, Lily dies to protect Harry. The Weasleys are shown in the books to be a loving family and at worst Arthur is muggle obsessed but still good at his job.
About the only families that are shown to be bad are the Malfoys. Explicitly family, husband, wife and children.
Harry is the main protag. Dumbledore was retconned to be gay, hagrid is repeatedly treated as a Buffoon even by the children and no one knows who the fuck Flitwick is. Try harder
Harry is the main protag, so what. He was never shown to be incompetent.
Dumbledore being retconned into a gay means that he prioritized his gay lover over stopping him which in the book series directly leads to the start of WW2, meaning Rowling said the gays were the true cause of WW2.
Hagrid is only treated as a buffoon by Malfoy, a main antagonist of the series, for Harry and the other characters, they respect him as a kind man who loves his job as keeper of keys and grounds before becoming an excellent care teacher, who routinely helped the school and Harry throughout the series up through the battle of Hogwarts.
Flitwick is the charms teacher, he has a role in most of the books and in the movies is the one who puts up the barrier that keeps out the entire army of death eaters until Voldemort has to be the one to take it down.
But if we still keep up with your incessant whining about how unfair the male characters are treated. Let's look at the female ones.
Hermione is treated as a know it all bookworm that annoys everyone around her, in the movies the director's blatant favoritism towards Emma Watson, no doubt a sex pest, has actual caused more people to dislike Hermione's character for the amount of scenes stolen from other characters just to be given to her.
McGonagall, is said to be stern, but in the films she might as well be an idiot, how many times does Harry have to come to her with his belief that something is wrong before she actually listens to him? Especially after being right nearly all the time. She's shown to be completely ineffectual at stopping even someone like Draco from calling other people mudbloods and threatening them.
Molly Weasley, is show in the books and films to be an overbearing woman who in the fifth installment all but treats Sirius as an invalid in his own home and decided to enforce the "Don't talk to Harry rule" just because Dumbledore said so. About the only competent thing she did was blow up Bellatrix other than she contributed very little.
Ginny, in the films wasn't even a character for the few times she was relevant, in the second film after the introduction she dropped out of the film until the end, and in the later films Harry and Ginny had so little on screen time that most people who watched only the movies were genuinely surprised they got together while it infuriated the book readers because she stopped mattering.
Pretty much the only other female character to actually do anything in the films was Bellatrix and she was the main female villain.
Cho Chang was turned into a backstabber when in the films she was the one to turn on the Defense club Harry was running, not her friend as it was in the books. Fleur and Tonks pretty much vanished from the series, to where they were mentions in the films until you see Tonks dead and get told that Fleur married Bill.
And the only other female of note in the series is Dolores Umbridge, which everybody hates, so many people hate her more than Voldemort. Just some random bitch karen teacher is considered worse than their wizard hitler.
If you are going to whine about a series being "such and such theme" at least know what the fuck you are talking about.
There are plenty of leftist themes that hold back the story, but just as many unintentional right themes as well, such as the government will control the media, the schools will dumb down your education to make you not a threat, the (((goblins))) are just waiting for the fighting to die out to pick a side and will screw over good people for profit.
Yes retroactively Harry Potter was pozzed but originally it is a book where every kid in school has the second amendment and the media and government cannot be trusted to tie their own shoes and are full of elitist who give zero shits about the common wizard much less the muggles they treat as lessers to be sheperded.
Is this referring to the bumbling idiot of a headmaster and the weasley teacher? i noticed it watching on youtube there is a strong "girls rule boys drool" narrative being pushed in the game with the african girl and the im-not-a-poacher girl being the smartest and pure hearted where else the snake house guy keeps fucking up and at the end of his questline he has to grovel for the rest of life for fucking up. The whole thing is trash writing in my opinion.
That’s just the books in general, every male character was weak willed or just seen as inept. The game being true to the books is just every male being evil or an imbecile or both.
I do not entirely agree but I did always question why none of the kids engaged in physical training. You could abuse the shit out of healing spells to get swole.
Nah, it was Harry getting briefly involved with one of the Paki sisters. Fortunately, he smartened up later.
So far in the game, the only mention of "purebloods" had to do with a mention of someone with the surname Gaunt, which would be one of Tom Riddle's direct ancestors, anyway. At the time, it should have been considered nothing more than a mere personal choice as to whom one married; I seem to recall the books laying the whole pureblood thing directly on Voldemort's shoulders (as being a shit-raiser.) At worst, it would have been looked at in a more tribalist sense before Darwin, in the same sense that royal families made the mistake of wanting to keep things to the nearest family possible, or the multi-generational cousin-marriage we see in modern tribalist societies (which would make sense given that they're all literally inter-related, with maybe very little fresh blood, such as the Grangers.)
i always thought the main woke part of harry potter was the whole demonizing of people who want to keep their race pure. You know, the pure bloods
That and every competent male being forced out of the storyline or/ and just outright killed off. The entire series was a “bumbling dad, smart graceful amazing mom commercial”
Let's make a list of "Competent males in the series" Harry - Was stated in the books to be good with his spellwork, and a match for Voldemort. Survives the series Dumbledore - Most powerful sorcerer in the world, who only died because he was cursed by Voldemort who placed a powerful compulsion charm on a ring that he might have known held a Deathly Hallow, something he among a small number of people Dumbledore was searching for. Filius Flitwick - one of the best professors in the school, survives Hagrid - competent with magical creatures, a great guy, survives
Let's see who dies though Snape - total prick, good at potions and a spy, but still dies to Voldemort Mad-Eye Moody, aged ex-auror, in the battle of the seven potters is killed by Voldemort Sirius Black - Harry's godfather, taken out by Bellatrix Remus Lupin - married to Tonks, he is taken out by Dolohov in a double battle with Bellatrix Lestrange killing Tonks
So of the competent males, the ones who actually expressed some level of proficiency in the series, of the 4 killed two were taken out by the main villain, another taken out by a psycho witch who was stated to be incredibly dangerous, while Remus lost to another wizard who was also a member of Voldemorts inner circle and thus considered dangerous.
Notice I didn't mention Ron or Neville, because they weren't written out of the story and had large parts to play in events.
Look you can be pissy all you want about the leftist writing in the HP franchise but in no way was the entire series "bumbling dad, smart graceful amazing mom commercial"
Of the families we do see on screen or mentioned in the books, the Potters, James fought off Voldemort to buy time for his wife and child to escape, Lily dies to protect Harry. The Weasleys are shown in the books to be a loving family and at worst Arthur is muggle obsessed but still good at his job.
About the only families that are shown to be bad are the Malfoys. Explicitly family, husband, wife and children.
Harry is the main protag. Dumbledore was retconned to be gay, hagrid is repeatedly treated as a Buffoon even by the children and no one knows who the fuck Flitwick is. Try harder
Harry is the main protag, so what. He was never shown to be incompetent. Dumbledore being retconned into a gay means that he prioritized his gay lover over stopping him which in the book series directly leads to the start of WW2, meaning Rowling said the gays were the true cause of WW2. Hagrid is only treated as a buffoon by Malfoy, a main antagonist of the series, for Harry and the other characters, they respect him as a kind man who loves his job as keeper of keys and grounds before becoming an excellent care teacher, who routinely helped the school and Harry throughout the series up through the battle of Hogwarts. Flitwick is the charms teacher, he has a role in most of the books and in the movies is the one who puts up the barrier that keeps out the entire army of death eaters until Voldemort has to be the one to take it down.
But if we still keep up with your incessant whining about how unfair the male characters are treated. Let's look at the female ones.
Hermione is treated as a know it all bookworm that annoys everyone around her, in the movies the director's blatant favoritism towards Emma Watson, no doubt a sex pest, has actual caused more people to dislike Hermione's character for the amount of scenes stolen from other characters just to be given to her.
McGonagall, is said to be stern, but in the films she might as well be an idiot, how many times does Harry have to come to her with his belief that something is wrong before she actually listens to him? Especially after being right nearly all the time. She's shown to be completely ineffectual at stopping even someone like Draco from calling other people mudbloods and threatening them.
Molly Weasley, is show in the books and films to be an overbearing woman who in the fifth installment all but treats Sirius as an invalid in his own home and decided to enforce the "Don't talk to Harry rule" just because Dumbledore said so. About the only competent thing she did was blow up Bellatrix other than she contributed very little.
Ginny, in the films wasn't even a character for the few times she was relevant, in the second film after the introduction she dropped out of the film until the end, and in the later films Harry and Ginny had so little on screen time that most people who watched only the movies were genuinely surprised they got together while it infuriated the book readers because she stopped mattering.
Pretty much the only other female character to actually do anything in the films was Bellatrix and she was the main female villain.
Cho Chang was turned into a backstabber when in the films she was the one to turn on the Defense club Harry was running, not her friend as it was in the books. Fleur and Tonks pretty much vanished from the series, to where they were mentions in the films until you see Tonks dead and get told that Fleur married Bill.
And the only other female of note in the series is Dolores Umbridge, which everybody hates, so many people hate her more than Voldemort. Just some random bitch karen teacher is considered worse than their wizard hitler.
If you are going to whine about a series being "such and such theme" at least know what the fuck you are talking about.
There are plenty of leftist themes that hold back the story, but just as many unintentional right themes as well, such as the government will control the media, the schools will dumb down your education to make you not a threat, the (((goblins))) are just waiting for the fighting to die out to pick a side and will screw over good people for profit.
Yes retroactively Harry Potter was pozzed but originally it is a book where every kid in school has the second amendment and the media and government cannot be trusted to tie their own shoes and are full of elitist who give zero shits about the common wizard much less the muggles they treat as lessers to be sheperded.
Is this referring to the bumbling idiot of a headmaster and the weasley teacher? i noticed it watching on youtube there is a strong "girls rule boys drool" narrative being pushed in the game with the african girl and the im-not-a-poacher girl being the smartest and pure hearted where else the snake house guy keeps fucking up and at the end of his questline he has to grovel for the rest of life for fucking up. The whole thing is trash writing in my opinion.
That’s just the books in general, every male character was weak willed or just seen as inept. The game being true to the books is just every male being evil or an imbecile or both.
I do not entirely agree but I did always question why none of the kids engaged in physical training. You could abuse the shit out of healing spells to get swole.
Nah, it was Harry getting briefly involved with one of the Paki sisters. Fortunately, he smartened up later.
So far in the game, the only mention of "purebloods" had to do with a mention of someone with the surname Gaunt, which would be one of Tom Riddle's direct ancestors, anyway. At the time, it should have been considered nothing more than a mere personal choice as to whom one married; I seem to recall the books laying the whole pureblood thing directly on Voldemort's shoulders (as being a shit-raiser.) At worst, it would have been looked at in a more tribalist sense before Darwin, in the same sense that royal families made the mistake of wanting to keep things to the nearest family possible, or the multi-generational cousin-marriage we see in modern tribalist societies (which would make sense given that they're all literally inter-related, with maybe very little fresh blood, such as the Grangers.)