Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
** I guess he is supposed to be StupidEvil, too.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 4 (click to see context) from:
* Ron is supposed to be a coward. In fact, he’s too cowardly to be in Gryffindor. He’s also a “shit wizard” who can’t hex two Muggles properly. So why does he choose to attempt to [[RapeIsASpecialKindOfEvil force himself]] on a witch who is both more powerful than he and who has proven to be willing to attack him when he’s ticked her off enough (remember the canaries)?
to:
* Ron is supposed to be a coward. In fact, he’s too cowardly to be in Gryffindor. He’s also a “shit wizard” who can’t hex two Muggles properly. So why does he choose to attempt to [[RapeIsASpecialKindOfEvil force himself]] on a witch who is both more powerful than he and who has proven to be willing to attack him when he’s ticked her off enough (remember the canaries)?canaries)?
----
----
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 3 (click to see context) from:
* The CrapsackWorld introduced (and left behind forever) in the first chapter. Aside from how unlikely it is that the people who suffered and lost loved ones under Voldemort’s rule would just sit back and allow Umbridge to take power, the two pro-pureblood laws she introduces (or rather, the ones we hear about) are absurd. First, she states that it is legal for a pure-blood to rape a Muggle-born or half-blood, and then specifies, “The girls should be delighted to receive the attentions of such noble wizards”—so does this law account for [[DoubleStandardRapeFemaleOnMale a pure-blood witch raping a Muggle-born wizard]], or [[DoubleStandardRapeMaleOnMale homosexual rape]]? Second, Umbridge has made it illegal for a half-blood or Muggleborn who gets pregnant by a pure-blood to terminate her pregnancy—but isn’t encouraging the production of half-bloods precisely the opposite of what she’s supposed to be doing?
to:
* The CrapsackWorld introduced (and left behind forever) in the first chapter. Aside from how unlikely it is that the people who suffered and lost loved ones under Voldemort’s rule would just sit back and allow Umbridge to take power, the two pro-pureblood laws she introduces (or rather, the ones we hear about) are absurd. First, she states that it is legal for a pure-blood to rape a Muggle-born or half-blood, and then specifies, “The girls should be delighted to receive the attentions of such noble wizards”—so does this law account for [[DoubleStandardRapeFemaleOnMale a pure-blood witch raping a Muggle-born wizard]], or [[DoubleStandardRapeMaleOnMale homosexual rape]]? Second, Umbridge has made it illegal for a half-blood or Muggleborn Muggle-born who gets pregnant by a pure-blood to terminate her pregnancy—but isn’t encouraging the production of half-bloods precisely the opposite of what she’s supposed to be doing?
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 1,3 (click to see context) from:
* Lets start off with this whole notion of Gringotts goblins somehow being about to destroy Horcruxes(You know, that very ancient, very evil, and very ''forbidden'' form of magic) by feeding it to pigs, somehow transferring the Horcrux soul to the pig, and then slaughtering the creature to destroy the Horcruxes. There's just a whole bunch of WTF involved in this whole process. Firstly, according to Harry and Hermione, Dumbledore refused to inform them of this easy method(that the author made up, mind you) because he was suddenly a [[FantasticRacism Fantastic Racist]] who didn't consider methods by other races. This implies that Dumbledore knew of it from the start, which means Voldemort probably damn well knew of it in the original timeline as well. You'd think that Voldemort, upon discovering that his precious treasures could be so easily destroyed, would have sought out some other means of immortality lest someone, like Harry, discover this and use it against him. Failing that, you'd then think that Voldemort would go and, at the very least, slaughter ''every'' goblin within Gringotts and then destroy the institution himself as a means of keeping this particular method of Horcrux destruction from being discovered. At most, Voldemort would have probably committed out-and-out ''genocide''(which would fit with his character) as a means of self-preservation. Secondly, even when Horcruxes were made out of animals(see: Nagini), it was ''still required to have something capable of destroying Horcruxes''(like a Basilisk fang or the Sword of Gryffindor) in order to destroy the Horcrux! So how in the hell would roasting the pig alive do ''anything'' to destroy the Horcrux!?
* The CrapsackWorld introduced (and left behind forever) in the first chapter. Aside from how unlikely it is that the people who suffered and lost loved ones under Voldemort's rule would just sit back and allow Umbridge to take power, the two pro-pureblood laws she introduces (or rather, the ones we hear about) are absurd. First, she states that it is legal for a pureblood to rape a Muggleborn or halfblood, and then specifies "The girls should be delighted to receive the attentions of such noble wizards" - so does this law account for [[DoubleStandardRapeFemaleOnMale a pureblood witch raping a Muggleborn wizard]], or [[DoubleStandardRapeMaleOnMale homosexual rape]]? Second, Umbridge has made it illegal for a halfblood or Muggleborn who gets pregnant by a pureblood to terminate her pregnancy - but isn't encouraging the production of halfbloods precisely the opposite of what she's supposed to be doing?
* Ron is supposed to be a coward. In fact, he's too cowardly to be in Gryffindor. He's also a 'shit wizard' who can't hex two muggles properly. So why does he choose to attempt to [[RapeIsASpecialKindOfEvil force himself]] on a witch who is both more powerful than him and who has proven to be willing to attack him when he's ticked her off enough (remember the canaries)?
* The CrapsackWorld introduced (and left behind forever) in the first chapter. Aside from how unlikely it is that the people who suffered and lost loved ones under Voldemort's rule would just sit back and allow Umbridge to take power, the two pro-pureblood laws she introduces (or rather, the ones we hear about) are absurd. First, she states that it is legal for a pureblood to rape a Muggleborn or halfblood, and then specifies "The girls should be delighted to receive the attentions of such noble wizards" - so does this law account for [[DoubleStandardRapeFemaleOnMale a pureblood witch raping a Muggleborn wizard]], or [[DoubleStandardRapeMaleOnMale homosexual rape]]? Second, Umbridge has made it illegal for a halfblood or Muggleborn who gets pregnant by a pureblood to terminate her pregnancy - but isn't encouraging the production of halfbloods precisely the opposite of what she's supposed to be doing?
* Ron is supposed to be a coward. In fact, he's too cowardly to be in Gryffindor. He's also a 'shit wizard' who can't hex two muggles properly. So why does he choose to attempt to [[RapeIsASpecialKindOfEvil force himself]] on a witch who is both more powerful than him and who has proven to be willing to attack him when he's ticked her off enough (remember the canaries)?
to:
* Lets Let’s start off with this whole notion of Gringotts goblins somehow being about able to destroy Horcruxes(You Horcruxes (you know, that very ancient, very evil, and very ''forbidden'' form of magic) by feeding it them to pigs, somehow transferring the Horcrux soul fragment to the pig, and then slaughtering the creature to destroy the Horcruxes. There's There’s just a whole bunch of WTF involved in this whole process. Firstly, according to Harry and Hermione, Dumbledore refused to inform them of this easy method(that method (that the author made up, mind you) because he was suddenly a [[FantasticRacism Fantastic Racist]] who didn't didn’t consider methods by other races. This implies that Dumbledore knew of it from the start, which means Voldemort probably damn well knew of it in the original timeline as well. You'd One would think that Voldemort, upon discovering that his precious treasures could be so easily destroyed, would have sought out some other means of immortality lest someone, like Harry, discover this and use it against him. Failing that, you'd one then would think that Voldemort would go and, at the very least, slaughter ''every'' goblin within Gringotts and then destroy the institution himself as a means of keeping this particular method of Horcrux destruction from being discovered. At most, Voldemort would have probably committed out-and-out ''genocide''(which ''genocide'' (which would fit with his character) as a means of self-preservation. Secondly, even when Horcruxes were made out of animals(see: animals (see: Nagini), it was ''still required to have something capable of destroying Horcruxes''(like a Basilisk fang or the Sword of Gryffindor) in order to destroy the Horcrux! So how in the hell would roasting the pig alive do ''anything'' to destroy the Horcrux!?
** The explanation for every bit of bad writing and plot hole is that author just wanted Harry and Hermione to breeze through the whole story without expending any effort.
* The CrapsackWorld introduced (and left behind forever) in the first chapter. Aside from how unlikely it is that the people who suffered and lost loved ones underVoldemort's Voldemort’s rule would just sit back and allow Umbridge to take power, the two pro-pureblood laws she introduces (or rather, the ones we hear about) are absurd. First, she states that it is legal for a pureblood pure-blood to rape a Muggleborn Muggle-born or halfblood, half-blood, and then specifies "The specifies, “The girls should be delighted to receive the attentions of such noble wizards" - so wizards”—so does this law account for [[DoubleStandardRapeFemaleOnMale a pureblood pure-blood witch raping a Muggleborn Muggle-born wizard]], or [[DoubleStandardRapeMaleOnMale homosexual rape]]? Second, Umbridge has made it illegal for a halfblood half-blood or Muggleborn who gets pregnant by a pureblood pure-blood to terminate her pregnancy - but isn't pregnancy—but isn’t encouraging the production of halfbloods half-bloods precisely the opposite of what she's she’s supposed to be doing?
* Ron is supposed to be a coward. In fact,he's he’s too cowardly to be in Gryffindor. He's He’s also a 'shit wizard' “shit wizard” who can't can’t hex two muggles Muggles properly. So why does he choose to attempt to [[RapeIsASpecialKindOfEvil force himself]] on a witch who is both more powerful than him he and who has proven to be willing to attack him when he's he’s ticked her off enough (remember the canaries)?
** The explanation for every bit of bad writing and plot hole is that author just wanted Harry and Hermione to breeze through the whole story without expending any effort.
* The CrapsackWorld introduced (and left behind forever) in the first chapter. Aside from how unlikely it is that the people who suffered and lost loved ones under
* Ron is supposed to be a coward. In fact,
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 3 (click to see context) from:
* Ron is supposed to be a coward. In fact, he's too cowardly to be in Gryffindor. He's also a 'shit wizard' who can't hex two muggles properly. So why does he choose to attempt to [[RapeIsASpecialKindOfEvil force himself]] on a witch who is both more powerful than him and who has proven to be willing to attack him when he's ticked her off enough (remember the canaries?). That's not a cowardly act. It's brave. Don't get me wrong, it's still very, very evil, but it's brave, since he could have gone for women who would be less able to fight back, but chose to take on someone he knew could easily fight back.
to:
* Ron is supposed to be a coward. In fact, he's too cowardly to be in Gryffindor. He's also a 'shit wizard' who can't hex two muggles properly. So why does he choose to attempt to [[RapeIsASpecialKindOfEvil force himself]] on a witch who is both more powerful than him and who has proven to be willing to attack him when he's ticked her off enough (remember the canaries?). That's not a cowardly act. It's brave. Don't get me wrong, it's still very, very evil, but it's brave, since he could have gone for women who would be less able to fight back, but chose to take on someone he knew could easily fight back.canaries)?
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 1,2 (click to see context) from:
* Lets start off with this whole notion of Gringotts goblins somehow being about to destroy Horcruxes(You know, that very ancient, very evil, and very ''forbidden'' form of magic) by feeding it to pigs, somehow transferring the Horcrux soul to the pig, and then slaughtering the creature to destroy the Horcruxes. There's just a whole bunch of WTF involved in this whole process. Firstly, according to Harry and Hermione, Dumbledore refused to inform them of this easy method(that the author made up, mind you) because he was suddenly a FantasticRacist who didn't consider methods by other races. This implies that Dumbledore knew of it from the start, which means Voldemort probably damn well knew of it in the original timeline as well. You'd think that Voldemort, upon discovering that his precious treasures could be so easily destroyed, would have sought out some other means of immortality lest someone, like Harry, discover this and use it against him. Failing that, you'd then think that Voldemort would go and, at the very least, slaughter ''every'' goblin within Gringotts and then destroy the institution himself as a means of keeping this particular method of Horcrux destruction from being discovered. At most, Voldemort would have probably committed out-and-out ''genocide''(which would fit with his character) as a means of self-preservation. Secondly, even when Horcruxes were made out of animals(see: Nagini), it was ''still required to have something capable of destroying Horcruxes''(like a Basilisk fang or the Sword of Gryffindor) in order to destroy the Horcrux! So how in the hell would roasting the pig alive do ''anything'' to destroy the Horcrux!?
* The CrapsackWorld introduced (and left behind forever) in the first chapter. Aside from how unlikely it is that the people who suffered and lost loved ones under Voldemort's rule would just sit back and allow Umbridge to take power, the two pro-pureblood laws she introduces (or rather, the ones we hear about) are absurd. First, she states that it is legal for a pureblood to rape a Muggleborn or halfblood, and then specifies "The girls should be delighted to receive the attentions of such noble wizards" - so does this law account for [[DoubleStandardRapeFemaleOnMale a pureblood witch raping a Muggleborn wizard]], or [[DoubleStandardRapeMaleOnMale homosexual rape]]? Second, Umbridge has made it illegal for a halfblood or Muggleborn who gets pregnant by a pureblood to terminate her pregnancy - but isn't encouraging the production of halfbloods precisely the opposite of what she's supposed to be doing?
* The CrapsackWorld introduced (and left behind forever) in the first chapter. Aside from how unlikely it is that the people who suffered and lost loved ones under Voldemort's rule would just sit back and allow Umbridge to take power, the two pro-pureblood laws she introduces (or rather, the ones we hear about) are absurd. First, she states that it is legal for a pureblood to rape a Muggleborn or halfblood, and then specifies "The girls should be delighted to receive the attentions of such noble wizards" - so does this law account for [[DoubleStandardRapeFemaleOnMale a pureblood witch raping a Muggleborn wizard]], or [[DoubleStandardRapeMaleOnMale homosexual rape]]? Second, Umbridge has made it illegal for a halfblood or Muggleborn who gets pregnant by a pureblood to terminate her pregnancy - but isn't encouraging the production of halfbloods precisely the opposite of what she's supposed to be doing?
to:
* Lets start off with this whole notion of Gringotts goblins somehow being about to destroy Horcruxes(You know, that very ancient, very evil, and very ''forbidden'' form of magic) by feeding it to pigs, somehow transferring the Horcrux soul to the pig, and then slaughtering the creature to destroy the Horcruxes. There's just a whole bunch of WTF involved in this whole process. Firstly, according to Harry and Hermione, Dumbledore refused to inform them of this easy method(that the author made up, mind you) because he was suddenly a FantasticRacist [[FantasticRacism Fantastic Racist]] who didn't consider methods by other races. This implies that Dumbledore knew of it from the start, which means Voldemort probably damn well knew of it in the original timeline as well. You'd think that Voldemort, upon discovering that his precious treasures could be so easily destroyed, would have sought out some other means of immortality lest someone, like Harry, discover this and use it against him. Failing that, you'd then think that Voldemort would go and, at the very least, slaughter ''every'' goblin within Gringotts and then destroy the institution himself as a means of keeping this particular method of Horcrux destruction from being discovered. At most, Voldemort would have probably committed out-and-out ''genocide''(which would fit with his character) as a means of self-preservation. Secondly, even when Horcruxes were made out of animals(see: Nagini), it was ''still required to have something capable of destroying Horcruxes''(like a Basilisk fang or the Sword of Gryffindor) in order to destroy the Horcrux! So how in the hell would roasting the pig alive do ''anything'' to destroy the Horcrux!?
* The CrapsackWorld introduced (and left behind forever) in the first chapter. Aside from how unlikely it is that the people who suffered and lost loved ones under Voldemort's rule would just sit back and allow Umbridge to take power, the two pro-pureblood laws she introduces (or rather, the ones we hear about) are absurd. First, she states that it is legal for a pureblood to rape a Muggleborn or halfblood, and then specifies "The girls should be delighted to receive the attentions of such noble wizards" - so does this law account for [[DoubleStandardRapeFemaleOnMale a pureblood witch raping a Muggleborn wizard]], or [[DoubleStandardRapeMaleOnMale homosexual rape]]? Second, Umbridge has made it illegal for a halfblood or Muggleborn who gets pregnant by a pureblood to terminate her pregnancy - but isn't encouraging the production of halfbloods precisely the opposite of what she's supposed to bedoing?doing?
* Ron is supposed to be a coward. In fact, he's too cowardly to be in Gryffindor. He's also a 'shit wizard' who can't hex two muggles properly. So why does he choose to attempt to [[RapeIsASpecialKindOfEvil force himself]] on a witch who is both more powerful than him and who has proven to be willing to attack him when he's ticked her off enough (remember the canaries?). That's not a cowardly act. It's brave. Don't get me wrong, it's still very, very evil, but it's brave, since he could have gone for women who would be less able to fight back, but chose to take on someone he knew could easily fight back.
* The CrapsackWorld introduced (and left behind forever) in the first chapter. Aside from how unlikely it is that the people who suffered and lost loved ones under Voldemort's rule would just sit back and allow Umbridge to take power, the two pro-pureblood laws she introduces (or rather, the ones we hear about) are absurd. First, she states that it is legal for a pureblood to rape a Muggleborn or halfblood, and then specifies "The girls should be delighted to receive the attentions of such noble wizards" - so does this law account for [[DoubleStandardRapeFemaleOnMale a pureblood witch raping a Muggleborn wizard]], or [[DoubleStandardRapeMaleOnMale homosexual rape]]? Second, Umbridge has made it illegal for a halfblood or Muggleborn who gets pregnant by a pureblood to terminate her pregnancy - but isn't encouraging the production of halfbloods precisely the opposite of what she's supposed to be
* Ron is supposed to be a coward. In fact, he's too cowardly to be in Gryffindor. He's also a 'shit wizard' who can't hex two muggles properly. So why does he choose to attempt to [[RapeIsASpecialKindOfEvil force himself]] on a witch who is both more powerful than him and who has proven to be willing to attack him when he's ticked her off enough (remember the canaries?). That's not a cowardly act. It's brave. Don't get me wrong, it's still very, very evil, but it's brave, since he could have gone for women who would be less able to fight back, but chose to take on someone he knew could easily fight back.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 1 (click to see context) from:
* Lets start off with this whole notion of Gringotts goblins somehow being about to destroy Horcruxes(You know, that very ancient, very evil, and very ''forbidden'' form of magic) by feeding it to pigs, somehow transferring the Horcrux soul to the pig, and then slaughtering the creature to destroy the Horcruxes. There's just a whole bunch of WTF involved in this whole process. Firstly, according to Harry and Hermione, Dumbledore refused to inform them of this easy method(that the author made up, mind you) because he was suddenly a FantasticRacist who didn't consider methods by other races. This implies that Dumbledore knew of it from the start, which means Voldemort probably damn well knew of it in the original timeline as well. You'd think that Voldemort, upon discovering that his precious treasures could be so easily destroyed, would have sought out some other means of immortality lest someone, like Harry, discover this and use it against him. Failing that, you'd then think that Voldemort would go and, at the very least, slaughter ''every'' goblin within Gringotts and then destroy the institution himself as a means of keeping this particular method of Horcrux destruction from being discovered. At most, Voldemort would have probably committed out-and-out ''genocide''(which would fit with his character) as a means of self-preservation. Secondly, even when Horcruxes were made out of animals(see: Nagini), it was ''still required to have something capable of destroying Horcruxes''(like a Basilisk or the Sword of Gryffindor) in order to destroy the Horcrux! So how in the hell would roasting the pig alive do ''anything'' to destroy the Horcrux!?
to:
* Lets start off with this whole notion of Gringotts goblins somehow being about to destroy Horcruxes(You know, that very ancient, very evil, and very ''forbidden'' form of magic) by feeding it to pigs, somehow transferring the Horcrux soul to the pig, and then slaughtering the creature to destroy the Horcruxes. There's just a whole bunch of WTF involved in this whole process. Firstly, according to Harry and Hermione, Dumbledore refused to inform them of this easy method(that the author made up, mind you) because he was suddenly a FantasticRacist who didn't consider methods by other races. This implies that Dumbledore knew of it from the start, which means Voldemort probably damn well knew of it in the original timeline as well. You'd think that Voldemort, upon discovering that his precious treasures could be so easily destroyed, would have sought out some other means of immortality lest someone, like Harry, discover this and use it against him. Failing that, you'd then think that Voldemort would go and, at the very least, slaughter ''every'' goblin within Gringotts and then destroy the institution himself as a means of keeping this particular method of Horcrux destruction from being discovered. At most, Voldemort would have probably committed out-and-out ''genocide''(which would fit with his character) as a means of self-preservation. Secondly, even when Horcruxes were made out of animals(see: Nagini), it was ''still required to have something capable of destroying Horcruxes''(like a Basilisk fang or the Sword of Gryffindor) in order to destroy the Horcrux! So how in the hell would roasting the pig alive do ''anything'' to destroy the Horcrux!?
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Changed line(s) 1 (click to see context) from:
* Lets start off with this whole notion of Gringotts goblins somehow being about to destroy Horcruxes(You know, that very ancient, very evil, and very ''forbidden'' form of magic) by feeding it to pigs, somehow transferring the Horcrux soul to the pig, and then slaughtering the creature to destroy the Horcruxes. There's just a whole bunch of WTF involved in this whole process. Firstly, according to Harry and Hermione, Dumbledore refused to inform them of this easy method(that the author made up, mind you) because he was suddenly a FantasticRacist who didn't consider methods by other races. This implies that Dumbledore knew of it from the start, which means Voldemort probably damn well knew of it in the original timeline as well. You'd think that Voldemort, upon discovering that his precious treasures could be so easily destroyed, would have sought out some other means of immortality lest someone, like Harry, discover this and use it against him. Failing that, you'd then think that Voldemort would go and, at the very least, slaughter ''every'' goblin within Gringotts and then destroy the institution himself as a means of keeping this particular method of Horcrux destruction from being discovered. At most, Voldemort would have probably committed out-and-out ''genocide''(which would fit with his character) as a means of self-preservation. Secondly, even when Horcruxes were made out of animals(see: Nagini), it was ''still required to have something capable of destroying Horcruxes''(like a Basilisk or the Sword of Gryffindor) in order to destroy the Horcrux! So how in the hell would roasting the pig alive do ''anything'' to destroy the Horcrux!?
to:
* Lets start off with this whole notion of Gringotts goblins somehow being about to destroy Horcruxes(You know, that very ancient, very evil, and very ''forbidden'' form of magic) by feeding it to pigs, somehow transferring the Horcrux soul to the pig, and then slaughtering the creature to destroy the Horcruxes. There's just a whole bunch of WTF involved in this whole process. Firstly, according to Harry and Hermione, Dumbledore refused to inform them of this easy method(that the author made up, mind you) because he was suddenly a FantasticRacist who didn't consider methods by other races. This implies that Dumbledore knew of it from the start, which means Voldemort probably damn well knew of it in the original timeline as well. You'd think that Voldemort, upon discovering that his precious treasures could be so easily destroyed, would have sought out some other means of immortality lest someone, like Harry, discover this and use it against him. Failing that, you'd then think that Voldemort would go and, at the very least, slaughter ''every'' goblin within Gringotts and then destroy the institution himself as a means of keeping this particular method of Horcrux destruction from being discovered. At most, Voldemort would have probably committed out-and-out ''genocide''(which would fit with his character) as a means of self-preservation. Secondly, even when Horcruxes were made out of animals(see: Nagini), it was ''still required to have something capable of destroying Horcruxes''(like a Basilisk or the Sword of Gryffindor) in order to destroy the Horcrux! So how in the hell would roasting the pig alive do ''anything'' to destroy the Horcrux!?Horcrux!?
* The CrapsackWorld introduced (and left behind forever) in the first chapter. Aside from how unlikely it is that the people who suffered and lost loved ones under Voldemort's rule would just sit back and allow Umbridge to take power, the two pro-pureblood laws she introduces (or rather, the ones we hear about) are absurd. First, she states that it is legal for a pureblood to rape a Muggleborn or halfblood, and then specifies "The girls should be delighted to receive the attentions of such noble wizards" - so does this law account for [[DoubleStandardRapeFemaleOnMale a pureblood witch raping a Muggleborn wizard]], or [[DoubleStandardRapeMaleOnMale homosexual rape]]? Second, Umbridge has made it illegal for a halfblood or Muggleborn who gets pregnant by a pureblood to terminate her pregnancy - but isn't encouraging the production of halfbloods precisely the opposite of what she's supposed to be doing?
* The CrapsackWorld introduced (and left behind forever) in the first chapter. Aside from how unlikely it is that the people who suffered and lost loved ones under Voldemort's rule would just sit back and allow Umbridge to take power, the two pro-pureblood laws she introduces (or rather, the ones we hear about) are absurd. First, she states that it is legal for a pureblood to rape a Muggleborn or halfblood, and then specifies "The girls should be delighted to receive the attentions of such noble wizards" - so does this law account for [[DoubleStandardRapeFemaleOnMale a pureblood witch raping a Muggleborn wizard]], or [[DoubleStandardRapeMaleOnMale homosexual rape]]? Second, Umbridge has made it illegal for a halfblood or Muggleborn who gets pregnant by a pureblood to terminate her pregnancy - but isn't encouraging the production of halfbloods precisely the opposite of what she's supposed to be doing?
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None
Added DiffLines:
* Lets start off with this whole notion of Gringotts goblins somehow being about to destroy Horcruxes(You know, that very ancient, very evil, and very ''forbidden'' form of magic) by feeding it to pigs, somehow transferring the Horcrux soul to the pig, and then slaughtering the creature to destroy the Horcruxes. There's just a whole bunch of WTF involved in this whole process. Firstly, according to Harry and Hermione, Dumbledore refused to inform them of this easy method(that the author made up, mind you) because he was suddenly a FantasticRacist who didn't consider methods by other races. This implies that Dumbledore knew of it from the start, which means Voldemort probably damn well knew of it in the original timeline as well. You'd think that Voldemort, upon discovering that his precious treasures could be so easily destroyed, would have sought out some other means of immortality lest someone, like Harry, discover this and use it against him. Failing that, you'd then think that Voldemort would go and, at the very least, slaughter ''every'' goblin within Gringotts and then destroy the institution himself as a means of keeping this particular method of Horcrux destruction from being discovered. At most, Voldemort would have probably committed out-and-out ''genocide''(which would fit with his character) as a means of self-preservation. Secondly, even when Horcruxes were made out of animals(see: Nagini), it was ''still required to have something capable of destroying Horcruxes''(like a Basilisk or the Sword of Gryffindor) in order to destroy the Horcrux! So how in the hell would roasting the pig alive do ''anything'' to destroy the Horcrux!?
