Was she going to slap you because you never in any way made him gay in the actual books, taking zero risks/doing absolutely nothing for gay characters in literature, and only announcing your “authorial intent” afterwards for a cheap shot at looking like an ~ally~
Gay people are just normal people. We are not told about any of the Hogwarts professors love lives, other than Snape, and it would be completely out of character for Dumbledore to walk around telling everyone about his sexuality.
Did you want her to make him dress in glittery platform boots, a crop top, and decorate his office in rainbow flags to make it more obvious for you? Would that be enough of a stereotype to appease you people? Or what? Please tell me. I’d like to know how you think a gay character is supposed to be portrayed.
And did you miss the Grindelwald chapters in the ‘actual books’? Or was that also not obvious enough for you? Did Dumbledore need to whisper “always” wistfully in order for you to connect that he had romantic feelings for Grindelwald? Maybe you are American and need them to gaze longingly into each others eyes with awkward close ups of their fingers almost grazing each other that Hollywood thinks means ‘true love’.
It didn’t fit into his relationship to Harry to ever say “I’m gay”, and so it was not stated explicitly (you might have noticed the book was told from Harry Potter’s perspective).
The point is though, that he is a homosexual, well respected, powerful, and very loved wizard- and his sexuality doesn’t matter because no one else thinks it matters. a.k.a. no one care that he loves men, and that is wonderful.
What she said^
Except that this “revelation after the fact” always smacked to me of wanting cookies for representation that DIDN’T HAPPEN.
Representation needs to be real and explicit. It doesn’t have to take over everything and it should never be the CENTRAL characteristic of a character, but if you’re representing a group of people, it can’t just be vaguely hinted at. It has to be stated, not implied so slightly that you have to squint to see it!
If JKR wanted cookies for providing representation, she had multiple chances to do it within the books. And it didn’t have to be with Dumbledore (because I agree that in books from Harry’s POV, it would come across as inappropriate to have the headmaster discussing his sexuality with him). It didn’t have to be with Dumbles. It could have been with any of the multitude of side-characters she wrote into the books. A side note about a lesbian couple going to Yule ball together, or Dean/Seamus could have been a thing. Or Ginny could have dated Dean and then broke up with him and dated a girl for a while. And these things aren’t necessarily something that would have had to take up SO MUCH time or space in the books. With a simple insertion of one or two lines throughout the ENTIRE SERIES, JKR could have had actual, tangible representation and it would have been awesome.
Stating after the fact that ‘Dumbles was totes gay, btw, where are my props’ was just pointless and kind of fucking insulting to the MOGII fans of the books.
And you know what, maybe she wasn’t looking for props when she revealed that, maybe it was an offhand sort of comment and she didn’t think about it while writing the books, but I’m sick of people saying “OMG SHE WAS AMAZING BC SHE ABSENTLY DECIDED DUMBLES WAS GAY” like it’s a crumb we should be grateful for. There are many things JKR did that were great, but this is not one of them and knowing she intended him to be gay - knowing we ALMOST had a chance for representation - it makes it even worse than if he’d be straight all along, imo.