Thanks so much for reading and commenting. I'm delighted the story has already gotten recs! Wheee.
Your critique is certainly valid, but if I may offer a respectful explanation: I did intend to historicise the path of women Aurors a little bit, and to contrast the '70s, when Emmeline and Alice would have trained, with Tonks's experiences in the '90s. As the story says,
It's the '90s – they can't legally stop a woman from enrolling in the academy anymore, but they can sure as hell do everything in their power to send women on the most dangerous assignments, and to make sure they never come back.
This was meant to indicate that legally, things are indeed different now, and the rumours about Alice's incompetence that followed the DE attack on her (in '81) would not happen anymore. At the same time, it's meant to show that Tonks is a bit paranoid, as well. It's not so much that I meant to indicate that the Wizarding world *is* sexist for law enforcement training, but rather that Tonks has had some experiences that has led her to *perceive* it that way.
There is at least one other female Auror, the witch with the eye-patch, and Amelia Bones was head of Magical Law Enforcement. Harry saw witches as well as wizards in the Auror division.
I would be most grateful if you could tell me where the eye-patch witch reference is. (I believe you; I'd just like to see it!) :) I did go through the books carefully before writing that segment, to make sure I wasn't contradicting canon. To the best of my knowledge, Tonks and Alice are the only women specifically mentioned as Aurors. Other women are in the Order, certainly, but canon does not tell us they are Aurors. I took that as leave to proceed with my own explanation, from that canon info (or lack thereof!)
As for Amelia Bones, and what Harry sees - you're right, I could have incorporated that more. It is still possible that Tonks was the only woman in her training class, though. There is no direct canon evidence to contradict that.
One more note - with the Tonks segment, and the segment later where Hermione discovers that it was illegal for girls to play Gobstones in the past - I was sort of going over-the-top for dramatic effect, and simply to draw attention, in this feminist Ficathon, to historical instances in which women simply were not permitted to do the same things as men. This is true in the Muggle world, and HP gives us no hard canon evidence that the Wizarding world is a paradise of gender equality. I thought it plausible that there could have been similar problems in Wizarding history.
Thanks again for your thoughts, and I do hope I'm not coming across as defensive! I did think a great deal about that bit, though, and while you are certainly free to find it implausible, I would argue that it does not contradict canon. :) Thanks for reading!
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2005-08-16 05:08 pm (UTC)Your critique is certainly valid, but if I may offer a respectful explanation: I did intend to historicise the path of women Aurors a little bit, and to contrast the '70s, when Emmeline and Alice would have trained, with Tonks's experiences in the '90s. As the story says,
It's the '90s – they can't legally stop a woman from enrolling in the academy anymore, but they can sure as hell do everything in their power to send women on the most dangerous assignments, and to make sure they never come back.
This was meant to indicate that legally, things are indeed different now, and the rumours about Alice's incompetence that followed the DE attack on her (in '81) would not happen anymore. At the same time, it's meant to show that Tonks is a bit paranoid, as well. It's not so much that I meant to indicate that the Wizarding world *is* sexist for law enforcement training, but rather that Tonks has had some experiences that has led her to *perceive* it that way.
There is at least one other female Auror, the witch with the eye-patch, and Amelia Bones was head of Magical Law Enforcement. Harry saw witches as well as wizards in the Auror division.
I would be most grateful if you could tell me where the eye-patch witch reference is. (I believe you; I'd just like to see it!) :) I did go through the books carefully before writing that segment, to make sure I wasn't contradicting canon. To the best of my knowledge, Tonks and Alice are the only women specifically mentioned as Aurors. Other women are in the Order, certainly, but canon does not tell us they are Aurors. I took that as leave to proceed with my own explanation, from that canon info (or lack thereof!)
As for Amelia Bones, and what Harry sees - you're right, I could have incorporated that more. It is still possible that Tonks was the only woman in her training class, though. There is no direct canon evidence to contradict that.
One more note - with the Tonks segment, and the segment later where Hermione discovers that it was illegal for girls to play Gobstones in the past - I was sort of going over-the-top for dramatic effect, and simply to draw attention, in this feminist Ficathon, to historical instances in which women simply were not permitted to do the same things as men. This is true in the Muggle world, and HP gives us no hard canon evidence that the Wizarding world is a paradise of gender equality. I thought it plausible that there could have been similar problems in Wizarding history.
Thanks again for your thoughts, and I do hope I'm not coming across as defensive! I did think a great deal about that bit, though, and while you are certainly free to find it implausible, I would argue that it does not contradict canon. :) Thanks for reading!