Yesterday I posted a question on the sci-fi page regarding the consensuality of Hagrid's parents' coupling;

Not the nicest of topics I will grant you but I believe I approached it appropriately (with fantastic help from the people here on the meta board).

My question has been marked as a duplicate of;

My problem is that, whilst these two questions are certainly related, they are in no way duplicates of each other. One need only read the two questions to realize they are completely different (my question is admittedly a tad long).

I assume no malfeasance on the part of the one/s that marked my question as a duplicate, but I do believe it was an erroneous move.

  • 4
    The answer on the duplicate target says "It was consensual because Hagrid's father cried after the giantess left". I am not aware of any other canon information on he topic. – Gallifreyan Jul 15 '17 at 7:31
  • 1
    Comments about perceived racism in the question have been moved to chat; you can all continue the discussion there, but please remember to be nice. – Rand al'Thor Jul 15 '17 at 18:28
  • 3
    @Gallifreyan - Stockholm syndrome. That isn't a conclusive proof – DVK-on-Ahch-To Jul 15 '17 at 22:28
  • 4
    @DVK-on-Ahch-To 500 rep to anyone who can prove that Stockholm syndrome is a thing in Potterverse, and that Mr. Hagrid was indeed a victim. – Gallifreyan Jul 16 '17 at 9:15
  • 1
    Would house-elves count? Sorry, couldn't resist – Magikarp Master Jul 16 '17 at 9:30
  • 3
    @Gallifreyan - doesn't work like that. There's no canon info that it's NOT a thing. That means, your assertion that his father crying is proof of it being consensual is just a guess, not proof. Potterverse has similar psychology to normal world, so burden of proof is on extraordinary claim that somehow, Stockholm syndrome is a NOT a thing in Potterverse – DVK-on-Ahch-To Jul 16 '17 at 18:26

The top answer to the duplicate question specifically answers your question; Was Hagrid the product of a consensual pairing?

If you're worried about whether Hagrid's father did it voluntarily, be assured that he did: Hagrid says in Goblet chapter 23:

‘Me dad was broken-hearted when she wen'.

There seems to be zero ambiguity, nor any reason to assume that Hagrid was lying.

Your basis for declaring the question 'not a duplicate' seems to rely on ignoring the available evidence and assuming (based on your own headcanon) that Hagrid was mistaken and that his father was actually suffering from battered husband syndrome after having been repeatedly raped. If you could offer some evidencial reason to assume that that's the case, you'd have a good case to ask for the question to be reopened.

  • 4
    One wonders if you know anything about abusive relationships. It's very plausible for someone to be abused for years by their spouse and still be broken-hearted when they leave. Besides, would you want to live with an uncaring, ultra-violent woman ten times your size? – Rand al'Thor Jul 15 '17 at 10:49
  • 3
    @Randal'Thor - He was perfectly delighted with his gargantuan son, why shouldn't he be happy with his gargantuan spouse? – Valorum Jul 15 '17 at 10:53
  • 6
    His gargantuan son was a kind and caring individual. His even more gargantuan spouse was a violent brute who had no qualms about abandoning her husband and son never to see them again. – Rand al'Thor Jul 15 '17 at 11:03
  • 1
    @Randal'Thor I think there are people who are not good mothers, but could not be called violent brutes, especially given she's not killed her half-breed son after realising he's tiny by their standards. – Gallifreyan Jul 15 '17 at 12:05
  • 5
    "nor any reason to assume that Hagrid was lying" - you think all kids of abusive relationships know all the details of what went on between their parents? – Rand al'Thor Jul 15 '17 at 12:44
  • 3
    @Randal'Thor - Once again, that's headcanon and seems to be based on your own prejudices. Is there any actual reason to assume that Hagrid is wrong/lying? No. There isn't – Valorum Jul 15 '17 at 12:48
  • Fair enough. I apologize for any offence cuased, as that was not my intention. – Magikarp Master Jul 15 '17 at 14:52
  • 1
    @MagikarpMaster - No offense has been caused. Your question was the catalyst for an (ongoing and not yet resolved) discussion about what represents a duplicate. Both sides are passionate about their positions and can become a little over-eager. Don't take it personally and keep asking lots of questions! – Valorum Jul 17 '17 at 17:41

The older question asks about the physical practicalities of giant-human reproduction in general. Its top answer mentions in passing that it was consensual for Hagrid's parents, but doesn't provide any evidence for this other than a single quote. It would be unreasonable to expect the answerer to expand on this argument, since that's not actually what that question is about.

Your question asks specifically about whether Hagrid's parents' relationship was consensual. You provide evidence for why it might not have been, and rebut some potential arguments for why it might have been, including (and this is important) the very quote used as evidence by the answer to the older question. So your question doesn't really "already have an answer there".

From our current consensus on duplication based on answers:

Well, normally the presence of identical answers is a pretty good indication that the questions themselves are the same [...] if you're already pretty sure the questions are duplicates, testing the answers of one against the other can easily confirm your suspicions. But don't close completely irrelevant questions as duplicates of one another simply because there's an animated gif that happens to apply to both.

In this case, the questions themselves are totally separate. And while the relevant part of the existing answer isn't an "animated gif", it isn't exactly an essay either - it's a one-line remark only tangentially relevant to the older question. That doesn't in any way answer your question, which specifically rejects said remark as sufficient evidence, provides plausible reasoning to support the opposite case, and calls for more conclusive evidence. So I've reopened your question. I've also taken the liberty of adding the exact book quote and linking to the previous answer, just to clarify its non-dupe status.

  • So, despite multiple downvotes for the Meta question, you've unilaterally reopened it? – Valorum Jul 15 '17 at 10:54
  • 1
    Simply adding "I don't think this is a dupe" doesn't make it not a dupe. – Valorum Jul 15 '17 at 10:57
  • @Valorum It's a clear enough non-dupe that I felt a unilateral reopen was justified, especially given that its closure was also unilateral. – Rand al'Thor Jul 15 '17 at 10:57
  • Its closure was by a gold tag badge holder in that tag. You don't have a gold badge, you have a silver. – Valorum Jul 15 '17 at 10:57
  • 4
    Yes, and its reopening was by a moderator of this site. Both were unilateral. And I don't need 200 Harry Potter answers to know a non-duplicate when I see one. – Rand al'Thor Jul 15 '17 at 11:51
  • True, but only one was by a gold badge holder. We generally hold their opinions to be worth something, especially when a meta has been asked on the subject – Valorum Jul 15 '17 at 11:52
  • 1
    And we don't hold moderators' opinions to be worth anything? – Rand al'Thor Jul 15 '17 at 11:54
  • 2
    Since the question was already closed and subject to a down voted meta question, it seems wise to leave it closed until a consensus is reached. – Valorum Jul 15 '17 at 12:22
  • Listen, I do not want to rustle feathers. The question is not worth any level of grief, so I will gladly delete it. – Magikarp Master Jul 15 '17 at 14:54
  • 3
    @MagikarpMaster - you shouldn't let people bully you into deleting a perfectly valid question. If you undelete it i'll gladly re-open it, as it's NOT a duplicate – DVK-on-Ahch-To Jul 15 '17 at 22:30
  • 4
    @Valorum - but I do have a gold badge. And I would have hammer-opened it if you didn't bully OP into self-deletion. – DVK-on-Ahch-To Jul 15 '17 at 22:32
  • @DVK-on-Ahch-To - I didn't bully them into anything. I barely spoke to them. I think you might want to take this up with those that called them a racist... – Valorum Jul 15 '17 at 22:36
  • 4
    It certainly wasn't a duplicate. I do consider it an odd question in the same category as questions about Draco assaulting Hermione, though. It seems like reading sexual violence into places where it is not even hinted is not a great basis for a question - not that it should be closed because of that, though. – Adamant Jul 16 '17 at 5:53
  • 1
    I deleted the question because I felt it was not contributing to the collected well of knowledge that is stackexchange. Valorum had reasonable misgivings about the question despite my disagreement, and the discussion I had with the individual that called me a racist confirmed my belief that no positive discussion could come from my question. I have many other questions that I would rather dedicate my time to, and I did not join this website to start fights. TL, DR I am happy keeping the question deleted, and I hope we can all just forget this happened – Magikarp Master Jul 16 '17 at 7:04
  • 1
    @Adamant - Meta consensus only works on issues of policy. Not content (where expert opinion outweighs vox populii, as someone had noted in the comments above). Policy wise, there's a clear Meta consensus (across entire SE) that bad questions deserve downvotes, not VTCs. – DVK-on-Ahch-To Feb 15 '18 at 13:24

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .