![[info]](https://www.insanejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small}
terri's not DEFENDING him - nowhere in this essay do I see terri saying it is ALL RIGHT for Draco to have used that word. Do you not understand the word "opprobious," as in (to quote the essay itself) "opprobious epithet"?
Here's a dictionary definition for you:
op·pro·bri·ous
–adjective
1.
conveying or expressing opprobrium, as language or a speaker: opprobrious invectives.
2.
outrageously disgraceful or shameful: opprobrious conduct.
What terri DID do was use the exact circumstances surrounding a particular incident of using a blood-based slur to investigate those situations in which the characters who hold prejudices based on blood find it acceptable to express that prejudice out loud, to the other person's face, with the term "Mudblood." And from there other situations in which one might expect them to use the term among themselves or to others and don't, and possible reasons why they don't.
That is, getting a sense of how the characters' prejudice gets manifested and why. How characters with bigoted attitudes actually interact with supposedly inferior people, and what this indicates about the nuances of what they actually think about blood, beyond simply "pure blood is better."
In attempting to understand these things and so get a better picture of certain characters and the WW as a whole, NOWHERE does terri say IT IS NOT WRONG TO BE BIGOTED. The essay is not a defense or a moral judgment on the phenomenon, merely an attempt to understand WHAT it is and HOW it is manifested.
Here's a dictionary definition for you:
op·pro·bri·ous
–adjective
1.
conveying or expressing opprobrium, as language or a speaker: opprobrious invectives.
2.
outrageously disgraceful or shameful: opprobrious conduct.
What terri DID do was use the exact circumstances surrounding a particular incident of using a blood-based slur to investigate those situations in which the characters who hold prejudices based on blood find it acceptable to express that prejudice out loud, to the other person's face, with the term "Mudblood." And from there other situations in which one might expect them to use the term among themselves or to others and don't, and possible reasons why they don't.
That is, getting a sense of how the characters' prejudice gets manifested and why. How characters with bigoted attitudes actually interact with supposedly inferior people, and what this indicates about the nuances of what they actually think about blood, beyond simply "pure blood is better."
In attempting to understand these things and so get a better picture of certain characters and the WW as a whole, NOWHERE does terri say IT IS NOT WRONG TO BE BIGOTED. The essay is not a defense or a moral judgment on the phenomenon, merely an attempt to understand WHAT it is and HOW it is manifested.