Not racism, ablism
(Anonymous)
I think what those of us who refuse to see the issue as simple racism have been reaching towards is this: viewing the series through the racism lens masks JK's real message, which is that ablism is *good*, and that neuro-typicals (represented by wizardry in the series, because they, not Muggles, are the viewpoint characters) have the right to override the rights, welfare or dignity of the lesser-abled for their own convenience.
True intellectual disability is invisible in the Potterverse. There are some on the slow end of neuro-typical, all of whom are held up to ridicule and/or hatred, eg Crabbe, Goyle., Dudley. (I don't really count Neville, because as soon as he actually starts *trying* - in OotP - he turns out to be quite competent.) There are some who were born neuro-typical and suffered brain damage, eg Neville's parents: they are locked away in institutions. But no one who falls into the developmentally-delayed slot.
Or do they?
The closest analogues to developmental disability in the Potterverse are Muggles and Squibs. And not even the supposed good guys care about *their* rights. Quite the contrary. Even the Muggle-borns like Hermione and Muggle-lovers like Arthur Weasley see no problem with Obliviating them for wizard convenience. No one ever even questions it.
There was a time when Muggle institutions thought nothing of doing experiments on the inmates without their consent (or even their families' consent). That's the sort of ablism that JK is advocating when she presents Confunding a Muggle as acceptable, or worse, humorous.
Intellectually disabled people are not less human than neuro-typicals. Basic human rights include having one's welfare, dignity and (to the extent one is capable of making any) choices treated with respect. That is the standard the Australian government requires of every disability organisation I've ever had contact with; it is the UN standard of universal human rights.
*No one* in the Order or the wizarding world respects the dignity, welfare or choices of individual Muggles or Squibs with whom they come in contact. No one. The dehumanisation of non-magical beings - disabled in magical society, but not in their own societies - is embedded in the Potterverse as a fundamental principle. Not questioned, not criticised, but upheld by *everyone* on *every* side. Harry's voice is the author's: Ron Confunds a Muggle in the epilogue and "All was well."
It disgusts me.
True intellectual disability is invisible in the Potterverse. There are some on the slow end of neuro-typical, all of whom are held up to ridicule and/or hatred, eg Crabbe, Goyle., Dudley. (I don't really count Neville, because as soon as he actually starts *trying* - in OotP - he turns out to be quite competent.) There are some who were born neuro-typical and suffered brain damage, eg Neville's parents: they are locked away in institutions. But no one who falls into the developmentally-delayed slot.
Or do they?
The closest analogues to developmental disability in the Potterverse are Muggles and Squibs. And not even the supposed good guys care about *their* rights. Quite the contrary. Even the Muggle-borns like Hermione and Muggle-lovers like Arthur Weasley see no problem with Obliviating them for wizard convenience. No one ever even questions it.
There was a time when Muggle institutions thought nothing of doing experiments on the inmates without their consent (or even their families' consent). That's the sort of ablism that JK is advocating when she presents Confunding a Muggle as acceptable, or worse, humorous.
Intellectually disabled people are not less human than neuro-typicals. Basic human rights include having one's welfare, dignity and (to the extent one is capable of making any) choices treated with respect. That is the standard the Australian government requires of every disability organisation I've ever had contact with; it is the UN standard of universal human rights.
*No one* in the Order or the wizarding world respects the dignity, welfare or choices of individual Muggles or Squibs with whom they come in contact. No one. The dehumanisation of non-magical beings - disabled in magical society, but not in their own societies - is embedded in the Potterverse as a fundamental principle. Not questioned, not criticised, but upheld by *everyone* on *every* side. Harry's voice is the author's: Ron Confunds a Muggle in the epilogue and "All was well."
It disgusts me.