O’Reilly Bothered That Dumbledore Outing Teaches Tolerance


Bill O’Reilly spoke with Dennis Miller last night about the J.K. Rowling outing of Albus Dumbledore, the day after he labeled her a “provocateur” and criticized her for “indoctrinating” children, Think Progress reports:

O’REILLY: Here’s — you can talk about this on your radio show tomorrow. There are millions of Americans who feel that the media and the educational system is trying to indoctrinate their children to a certain way of life, and that includes parity for homosexuals with heterosexuals. And that’s what this Rowling thing is all about, because she sells so many books. So many kids read it, that she comes out and says, “Oh, Dumbledore is gay, and that’s great.” And this — it’s another in the indoctrination thing. That’s what the belief system is among some Americans.

MILLER: I’ll be honest with you. I don’t think you can indoctrinate a kid into being gay. You might indoctrinate him into trying it once and him going, “I guess I’m not gay.”

O’REILLY: No, but tolerance. It’s — you know, he’s not going to be gay, but it’s tolerance of it.

Media Matters has the full transcript. Video clip: Media Matters via Good as You.

Mark Harris, writing in Entertainment Weekly, talks about the importance of Rowling’s announcement, and directs sharp criticism at those who say it’s wrong to have unveiled the news in front of children: “In addition to the braying of hatemongers, there’s already been some umbrage taken at the appropriateness of Rowling’s decision to uncork this news in front of children, a brand of sanctimony for which I have no patience. At least one out of 25 of those children will eventually self-identify as homosexual. The other 24, having made their way through an epic series that includes multiple murders, demonic possession, and the psychic toll of having mentally ill parents, will, I imagine, be able to handle the bulletin that some people are gay, and will likely benefit from the richer understanding of the world that such knowledge provides.”


  1. Matt says

    I live in Atlanta and heard this comment on the radio: “Dumbledore is not gay or straight because he is a fictional character and did not engage in any kind of sex acts”. I’d be interested to see what commenters on this blog think about that.

    I honestly wish the character wasn’t outed. It is such a great series and unfortunately now, bigoted parents will never let their children read it. I mean we already had a fight about the series here because it was said to promote witchcraft.

  2. the queen says

    o’reilly is such an ignorant douchebag. the good news is that his species of neanderthal mindset is going the way of the dinosaur. And Good for dumbledore and bravo to j.k. rowling. we will prevail. Evohe Pan!

  3. Aindi says

    I feel sorry for O’ Reilly because he such an unmitigated, twisted, hostile, homophobic jerk that even though he and Rush Limbaugh are really meant go to bed together and “screw until the cows come home”, “it” will never happen because even those two men are so ugly in their looks and their beliefs that noone else would want to get near them let alone touch them, EEEEW! the thought of touching those evil, sick, ugly gay hating men makes me want to throw up!

  4. damien says

    “No, but tolerance. It’s — you know, he’s not going to be gay, but it’s tolerance of it.”

    And God forbid we teach our kids tolerance! That’d truly be the day…!

  5. DARB says

    I’m a little confused. I thought that O’Reilly was generally pro “tolerance” for gays. Must admit, I don’t really follow his show, and usually just ignore him; but I thought that I’d heard that he wasn’t homophobic. Guess I heard wrong.

  6. justincredible says

    Matt, it is pretty funny that Dumbledore is a fictional character and everyone is acting like he’s going to be on the cover of Out. Maybe he will be! But when you write, you write what’s real, even if it is fiction. Rowling or any writer has a good idea of the characters that go into the book. Each has a back story and details that don’t go to print.

    But I don’t think it’ll keep bigoted parents from having their kids read HP because those kinds of people wouldn’t let ’em read it anyway.

    Haven’t you heard HP teaches tolerance of Witches?

    I don’t think Bill O’Really actually believes half the shit he pipes out– I at least hope not. He’s gotta get ratings, and the fact that he’s scraping at this shows how pathetic he is.

  7. John McKee says

    Isn’t Dumbledore their ideal depiction of homosexuality? It seems to me like even the most extreme conservatives/christians have agreed that homosexuality is a real “affliction”, they just want homosexuals to be completely non-sexual and never have a real romantic partner or find true love for the rest of their lives. That’s Dumbledore.

    They get the depiction of a homosexual that they want and even that’s not OK with them.

  8. John says

    Good for Miller for drawing out O’Reilly’s true colors. So even tolerance isn’t okay by him? It doesn’t get any more clear than that.

    And let’s be honest about the disclosure…this just goes to show that there is so much to a person than who they are attracted to. It never played an issue in the book at all, as it shouldn’t have, but makes perfect sense, given the circumstances that have been explained in multiple books. I’m just blown away that with all of the “adult themes” in the book, something that influenced a character, but was never actually included, could cause an uproar. Welcome to American, JK!

  9. anon (gmail.com) says

    O’Reilly fancies himself a populist of a rather manly sort, who protects women and children from the way the world actually is. His attitudes are faintly Victorian, though his manners are Kindergardian. In his mind children must be protected from anything “dangerous”, including sexuality. It’s a very Catholic notion of avoiding temptation through ignorance. Trouble is, many parents think the same thing and would agree with him.

  10. Lupinicon says

    I’m not gay (at least I think so), but this guy’s a F-ing moron, but still I respect and understand his opinion.
    This fact of Dumbledore is not to provoke, but some (even fictional) people just happen to be gay, so let them be. This guy just laughs it off as a silly book series, but he should know it’s not.

  11. Rob says

    I admit that I watch The O’Reilly Factor fairly often for its entertainment value (which no other show of its kind can match). I disagree with Bill 99% of the time and find him offensive, stubborn, yet still entertaining, though sometimes he makes me so angry that I wonder to myself why I continue to watch. He is against gay marriage, but he’s for civil unions, but repeatedly screams that gays should just “shut up!” and not announce to others their sexuality (you know, kind of like how heterosexuals never talk about their spouses in public). He said once on his show that he doesn’t think gays will ever gain full acceptance, that we will never be able to marry, because it is against the Bible and the Bible has been around for centuries. Every poll shows among the youth of today that gays are not just be tolerated, but completely accepted into high school groups, homecoming royalty, athletics, etc. This generation (and others behind it) wil eventually take over the mainstream… and I just hope that Bill lives long enough to see how wrong he was.

  12. Wheezy says

    @ Matt “Dumbledore is not gay or straight because he is a fictional character and did not engage in any kind of sex acts.”

    Um, I guess those people have never been to a slash website. ‘Cause there’s plenty of action goin’ on over there.

Leave A Reply