I think this is a misattribution. Is it really our species classification that leads us to that conclusion, or some other factor?

Thought experiments with alien races and AI seem to indicate the latter. There is nothing special, in particular, about being human. We're not some completely discrete entity, we're part of a continuum. There were many other species of the homo genus that were very similar to us, and to a lesser extent the other primates are.

Humanity isn't just a label, it's a set of characteristics. Those characteristics that make us "special" -- complex communication, planning, reasoning, use of tools, delayed gratification, complex social structures -- are not uniquely ours, they're attributes that can exist universally and just so happen to be expressed to a certain degree in humans.

House Elves appear to possess all those characteristics to the same extent as humans. They don't look like humans, and they no doubt have different genetics, but they are functionally human, in that they share all the characteristics that define what being human is.

Edit: In anticipation of the objection "but they don't have the same characteristics, because they also like being slaves":

Slavery is behaviour. The vast majority of behaviours are not genetically defined but rather learnt. Those behaviours that do not need to be taught are generally those essential for life: eating, sex, defecating, sleeping. Anything more complex is learnt from parents and society. Slavery is quite a complex behaviour, requiring a concept of private property.

This heavily indicates the behaviour of House Elves is not a direct result of their genetics but is a learnt behaviour like all other social structures. The burden of proof, I think, is very much on those who wish to attribute the complex social behaviour to genetics.

After all, if you put a human in the right situation, they will exhibit the same behaviour. The existence of "Uncle Toms" is well-documented.

 

House elves are not animals. They are not like donkeys who work tirelessly under human control, for example.

I'm not sure about canon so I would ask Taure this:
1. Are house elves a British only thing?
2. Am I remembering correctly that house elves can't have wands? Just the fact that they aren't allowed to have wands makes me draw a parallel to human slaves who weren't alllowed to read or write.

If we got back to Plato's Republic then house elves at this juncture, that is in canon, do not know what freedom is since they have never experienced it. Other than Dobby - there is no mention of a free elf. Attributing Dobby's fierce loyalty to Harry (who not only freed him but treated him kindly and as if he were a person instead of a slave or animal) as different from the loyalty showed to him by other characters is based on a false premise.

What did J.K. Rowling intend the house elves to symbolize? I am unsure and a "thought experiement about how there could exist a sentient species which wante to be enslaved to humans" does not really jive with her words or beliefs particularly about friendship, courage, family, and most importantly love.

Hermione's SPEW movement was a juvenile teenage movement and her methods were largely unsuccesful. However, that in itself is not the point of discussion rather the point of discussion is the status of house elves in wizarding society.

Hachi, something of which you refer to exists and many people do get them for the same exact reason: dogs. I've never much cared for them myself.

 

There's definitely a law against non-humans having wands.

 

I don't think this is the case. Not every form of education is brainwashing. It is possible to educate someone in such a way that they have the tools to make their own informed decision. You're not raising them to have the opposite view, you're raising them to make the choice.

If they want, they can choose to work for free. But that's fundamentally different to being robbed of the choice via a combination of a) not ever being given the choice and b) never being given an opportunity to know any other life.

It's a matter of consent. Quoting from earlier:

Basically, the House Elves are under a "social imperius". As such, their happiness is not genuine -- I don't think any of us would accept that placing someone under the Imperius and ordering them to be happy is the equal of a person achieving happiness on their own terms.

It's also a matter of the right to self-determination:

 

They can't cook, they can't clean. No thanks

 

The arguments I'm reading from all the pro 'House elves are meant to be slaves' people, I just have this this to say to you. Your arguments and rationalizations sound exactly like the white colonist's did when they were enslaving the rest of the world. Having darker skin made the others sub-human and hence beneath them and the only thing they were good for was being slaves to their white masters. You might argue that that's what house elves want to do, but to me it seems like a product of centuries if not millenia of exploitation.
I'm sure you can draw the parallels here.

 

Or otherwise, what Sesc seems to be saying is that he approves of the status quo of where house elves are in HP canon. A status quo of which the inner workings we really only see with the Malfoy family and then the Crouch family.

We don't really know what House Elves want since we only get a glimpse into the lives of a few of them. Dobby being the most prominent and he definetely wants freedom. Why does he want freedom? Why is he proud to be a free elf who gets paid? It only takes one elf to want it.

 

I don't think anyone is endorsing mistreatment (i.e. physical and verbal abuse) of House Elves.

Sesc is basically talking a utilitarian approach (if no difference in happiness, no moral difference). I'd prefer not to get into an abstract philosophical discussion about the virtues and vices of utilitarianism, so it might be agree to disagree time.

 

I hate you, Taure.

 

Sesc, I think the reason I see the real life more then the folktale stuff is due to this quote by J.K. Rowling from Wiki:

""I wanted Harry to leave our world and find exactly the same problems in the wizarding world. So you have the intent to impose a hierarchy, you have bigotry, and this notion of purity, which is this great fallacy, but it crops up all over the world. People like to think themselves superior and that if they can pride themselves in nothing else they can pride themselves on perceived purity. So yeah that follows a parallel [to Nazism]. It wasn't really exclusively that. I think you can see in the Ministry even before it's taken over, there are parallels to regimes we all know and love."[5] She also said, "You should question authority and you should not assume that the establishment or the press tells you all of the truth."[6]"

It's possible that she just thought of house elves as folk tale creatures but the existence of Dobby makes me feel like its not that simple.

And on self-determination, again its hard to talk about it in purely theoretical frameworks. Rather, to me I can give examples from history or other real life. If you don't know what the spectrum of your full possibility is you'll always stay in one shade and there's a very real history of people resisting or even trying to suppress facts or truths. Which, in the case of the house elves, that they know no other possibility or society is so taboo about it that it takes a lot of courage to actually leave that binding.

Are there some people who would rather be slaves today? Possibly, a lot of science fiction is concerned with people becoming slaves to VR or machines.

On a totally less serious angle, Dobby!Moses ftw but he was killed before he could receive the commandments

 

You know, I'd written a whole post about how wrong you are, but I'll just leave this instead:

 

Your entire argument is a GIF? Oh...it's like I've seen the light.

Actually, there are many historical parallels that can be made that J.K. Rowling actually clearly stated that she wanted there to be between the real world and her fantasy world. It's not a leap to apply parallels. As readers we bring particular personal responses to fiction, in addition the the layers that authors bring consciously or unconsciously.

 

That was mature of you. The only problem with your arguments is that most of them are rationalizations based on assumptions.

Lets forget the assumptions and look at the facts shall we?
House elves are slaves. You might say they are willing. But they are still slaves.
They get no say in what they want to do and from their very births are brainwashed into serving the family they are born into with complete compliance and loyalty. The fact that Dobby and even Kreacher for that matter are forced to serve masters they'd rather not shows how downtrodden they really are.
Cruelty to them isn't even registered as a crime.
I will agree to the fact that it is too late to change things for the older generation of house elves but things can still change for the next generation.

 

I don't get how you can be that annoyed at number 23. Larger than 7 inch penis, while not the norm, surely isn't unheard of. Admittedly the circumstances under which this fact becomes mentioned are usually cringe worthy already but in isolation it doesn't bother me at all.

 

Huh. The whole freeing of the houseelves argument feels very 'White Mans Burden' to me. Not that that's a bad thing, sometimes its necessary but we should be weary of pushing it too far.

Now looking at that list of cliches (thanks for curating them btw Taure) doesn't make make me want to discuss the pros and cons of freeing all house elves. Instead it makes me want to find ways to deconstruct/subvert those cliches to get something new and original.

Hmm. How about marriage contracts passed down through history as symbolic representations of the friendship between two families (like the Longbottoms and Potters). The marriage contract has a consent clause on both sides and isn't really enforceable at all.

Well the easy way to subvert this is to take the concept of responsibilties of the nobility seriously. The reason why landed titles are such anathema to most Harry Potter fanfiction is fundamentally because most fanfic writers are Americans who don't understand how the system of British nobility works (hell, most brits don't either). This, this, this, this and this post expand on what I mean. Basically: 'Sure Harry you've just gained the title of the Baron Black and the Baronet Potter, but there comes with it all these responsibilities that you now have to deal with, despite still being in school. What you're not able to deal with them? Huh, guess you should abdicate so someone more qualified can serve in your place.'

I admit I can't think of a way to subvert this one. Mostly because I honestly don't mind it.

Voldemort burnt it down with fiendfyre when he was killing Harry's grandparents. Also the ministry want their death duties.

Happens to be canon with Harry inheriting the Black London Townhouse.

Sure. Some people own an obscene amount of gold. Some people own gold mines. However in order to stop stupid amounts of inflation (and to limit the power of those fucking gold miners) there are numerous laws in place which limit the amount of gold that you can turn into galleons a year (the number is pretty low).

The letters are filled with meaningless platitudes about how much they love him. Also, they were given to him by Dumbledore. (Not actually an unbelievable step for parents who know they're being hunted during a war.)

See #2. Sure you can be emancipated but I hope you enjoy having to pay taxes. And the numerous legal protections given to children no longer applying to you.

See #2

See #2. Privileges come with responsibilities.

'Soul Magic is dark. Very dark Harry. Even the Dark Lord himself only skimmed the surface of it. You're messing with what makes people fundamentally human....'

They see Harry as a teenager who needs to get over himself. But they're too polite to say it out loud.

'God he's acting like an arse.' 'Don't worry about it mate, he's a teenager, he'll get over it.' Also, people taking him seriously and hailing him as a oracle, with all the associated fun that that brings.

*sigh* Fucking mudbloods need to get over themselves.

'Silly Muggleborn. Don't you know that firelegs can be blocked by any decent shield. (Still it stands to reason they could probably hit a wizard who's not highly trained/alert) If a wizard actually dies from it the Minstry comes down on the person responsible like a tonne of bricks. Hello Azkaban.

And Dumbledore comes back a day later with Harry's legal authority rebuked and tells him to sit down and shut up. Or its made obvious that he's made a deal with the devil (who in this case is Umbridge)

I refer you to fucking canon. Book 5.

"Love potions count as 'convincing him' right?"

Are you saying that my boy Harry isn't allowed to be nervous around girls?

Or you know it could be the fact that he's an international celebrity. The insecure thing is why he doesn't have more girls lining up. Also some girls make projects of insecure men who they see potential in.

"A veela will mate with whoever they choose Harry. Sucking out the lifeblood from that person slowly. Eventually they will wither and die."

And because she's a Veela she can't use wand magic. (But yeah, I agree with you. This is a stupid idea)

"Ouch Harry, you're hurting me! Its too big!"

"So what you're saying is that we do all our stabbing *inside* the common room then? Sure, I can work with that."

Yeah. I agree with you. This is pretty fucking stupid.

These random attacks actually turn out to have been Voldemort gathering materials for a legitimate immortality ritual. Or something of that sort.

"No, you see I don't want to kill all Muggleborns. I want to kill all Muggles. The Muggleborns just kept getting in the way"

Morally grey Dumbledore who's a pragmatist is easy to mistake as 'evil' especially when you're living in a black and white world.

He turns out to have been completely wrong.

"Harry. I don't care what you get up to with Ginny in the privacy of your own room, but when you're out in public I expect you to behave like a proper gentleman." Said Mister Weasley eying Harry sternly.

You realise that Political marriages are a thing that happen today right? Though perhaps not in the traditional sense.

"The only reason we have any problem with Gender Discrimination at all is the Mudbloods bringing their muggle prejudices with them when they enter our world."

Have a magical Britain who's power is waning. They had their time in the spotlight after Grindlewald's war, but now they're being eclipsed internationally.

"We don't teach our students to pass tests. Instead we aim to teach far more important things. Like being productive constructive members of society"

You'll have to excuse Sirius. He's still slightly crazy from Azkhaban

Which were follwed by massive detentions and never happened again.

This is a thing?

Said Gilderoy Lockart.

This is a thing???

He did it via a magical ritual that comes with side effects.

In fairness you don't need to understand the fundamental theories about how pain travels to know that if you're in a fight, throwing salt in a person's eye will hurt. I'd argue that Defence is pretty divorced from magical theory while other classes... aren't. (Though ability with divination theory in no way means you're going to be any good at it judging by canon)

They'll be polite and obliging. Just be aware that they're charging you per second.

See the last 4 pages of disscussion.

Also see the last 4 pages of disscussion.

"Yeah, Custom wands are more powerful. But they just don't have the stability of a premade wand. So yeah, be aware that it might explode in your hand."

People grow apart. It happens.

Define excessive....

In fairness the Dementor idea actually makes a fair amount of sense.

See Lumous in Book 5. Also as long as its treated as a visualisation exercise I don't have a problem with it really.

Fundamentally I don't actually give a damn about Quidditch. And he's no where near as fanatical about it as Ron is. He never even considers it as a career. I honestly wouldn't have a problem with Harry dumping Quidditch after having taken up Broom racing during his quidditch ban in book 5.


Holy fuck did I just write all that? Well that's two hours of my day gone.

 

Taure's arguments are a weird compromise between a neo-Marxist view of how society and mass indoctrination act on the individual, and liberal views and ideas. What Taure is defending is basically the 18th century idea of ius naturalis and unbreakable above all principles, trying to apply them to a non-human, magical and very different sentient being. House elfs are not animals, neither have an alien moral system and thought process. Just different. I use the same rule Tavi says to use regarding the Canim in Codex Alera, similar but very different.

While mass indoctrination and brainwashing are valid arguments, they do not justify everything, not very close to it wither. You're accusing the Wizarding World of being an even better 1984 Orwellian world, yet, House Elfs aren't kept on the dark about what is happening around. Both the original work and NK rely heavily on misinformation and blockading outside information, something that doesn't happen here. Your views also have something of a White Man burden's on knowing what is besrt, but the other side too, atop of racial profiling.

There is also how the Elfs seems to view everything, to them servitude, is to help someone, not slavery,mlet their masters focus on being great and such. Imagine if you could help your greatest hero on their work, mostly by helping him focus and not worried about mundane things, how would you feel? The man whose work/actions changed how you viewed the work, someone that did what is without a doubt one of humaniy's greatest achievements. Something like that is how I think that House Elfs think.

 

Oh damn we have a house elf in here. Do you mind answering more questions on how the mind of a house elf works?

Also: Re Taure's points - Why can't Harry be noble and a gentleman? Why not?