What the fuck

what the fuck

> DEH

That's what happens when you're an evil person.

Being evil turns you into a bloody baby mummy thing?

it was a metaphor for abortion

Yes. It’s in the Bible

Only if you split your soul into a bunch of horcruxes.

It represents the part of Voldemorts soul that was in Harry that died when Voldemort avada kadavra'd him.

Idiot.

It's the piece of Voldy inside Harry. When he does the killing curse he kills his own horcrux by mistake - that's what a shard of a human soul looks like in the afterlife when it's been broken apart by dark magic. Voldy can't go to heaven or whatever because he literally killed his own soul

Is that (((the one who must not be named)))?

Leftists think this isn't a human!

Like and share if you disagree!

What else would you expect besides a hamfisted allegory from the creator of one of the dullest franchises in the history of movie franchises? Each episode following the boy wizard and his pals from Hogwarts Academy as they fight assorted villains has been indistinguishable from the others. Aside from the gloomy imagery, the series’ only consistency has been its lack of excitement and ineffective use of special effects, all to make magic unmagical, to make action seem inert.

Perhaps the die was cast when Rowling vetoed the idea of Spielberg directing the series; she made sure the series would never be mistaken for a work of art that meant anything to anybody?just ridiculously profitable cross-promotion for her books. The Harry Potter series might be anti-Christian (or not), but it’s certainly the anti-James Bond series in its refusal of wonder, beauty and excitement. No one wants to face that fact. Now, thankfully, they no longer have to.

a-at least the books were good though r-right
>"No!"

The writing is dreadful; the book was terrible. As I read, I noticed that every time a character went for a walk, the author wrote instead that the character "stretched his legs."

I began marking on the back of an envelope every time that phrase was repeated. I stopped only after I had marked the envelope several dozen times. I was incredulous. Rowling's mind is so governed by cliches and dead metaphors that she has no other style of writing. Later I read a lavish, loving review of Harry Potter by the same Stephen King. He wrote something to the effect of, "If these kids are reading Harry Potter at 11 or 12, then when they get older they will go on to read Stephen King." And he was quite right. He was not being ironic. When you read "Harry Potter" you are, in fact, trained to read Stephen King.

>look mom, I posted it again!

the fuck, i don't remember any of that.

are you telling me there's a canon heaven in the harry potter universe?

“See harry, this whole thing could have been prevented if abortion was legal after the 165th trimester.”

What did dubsledoor mean by this?

What expect the of hamfisted would do went allengordly in the dullest franchises on a history for movie franchises. Every episode the follows the boy wizard and he is a pals originated Hogwarts Academy to those fought assorted villains is achieved indistinguishably from others. Aside of gloomy the imagery, series’ only consistensiness is achieved its have empty of for excitement and ineffective used for special affect, everyone to create magic unmagical, to create active seem inert.

The perhaps die were cast what time Rowling the vetoed idea for Spielborg the directing series; herself make sure a series will always only be mistaken of that worked for art this mean anything to anybody? just ridiculously profitablely cross-promotion of woman of books. The Harry Ponter series might be anti-Christoph (or don't), prevent it’s the certainly anti-Jim Bond series on its refusal for wonder, beauty and excitement. Don't individual wants to face this fact. Currently, thankfully, those don't longer take to.

>a-at the least a books was good though r-right
"No!"
The writing are the dreadful; book were terribly. To myself read, I notice this each anytime that character go of that the walked, author write instead the this character "stretched he is a legs. "

Myself begin marketing the in backward for an envelope each anytime this phrase were repeat. Myself stop only after having the mark envelope several dozen times. Myself were incredulous. Rowling mind is then governed by cliches and die metaphors this herself is don't other style for writing. Later myself read that lavish, loving reviewed for Harry Ponter the by same Stephen Keng. Himself write one thing the to effect for, "if these kids am reading Harry Ponter upon 11 or 12, then what time those have older those would do went with in to read Stephen Keng." And himself were quiet right. His were don't being ironic. What time you are a read "Harry Ponter" you are am, on fact, trained to read Stephen Keng.

...

You misplaced one of the >'s

Would have been a genuinely great and unnerving scene if his fucking hands and feet hadn’t been so big. He looks like a fucking Triplets of Belville character

leftist baby murdering propaganda I say

fags

is that your average fan of hairy popper??

Kinda weak

>fuck
I'd fuck it

who makes these "studies"

University """academics"""

You have to remember it is only the man whose intellect is clouded by his sexual instinct that could give that stunted, narrow-shouldered, broad-hipped, and short-legged race the name of the fair sex; for the entire beauty of the sex is based on this instinct. One would be more justified in calling them the unaesthetic sex than the beautiful. Neither for music, nor for poetry, nor for fine art have they any real or true sense and susceptibility, and it is mere mockery on their part, in their desire to please, if they affect any such thing.

This makes them incapable of taking a purely objective interest in anything, and the reason for it is, I fancy, as follows. A man strives to get direct mastery over things either by understanding them or by compulsion. But a woman is always and everywhere driven to indirect mastery, namely through a man; all her direct mastery being limited to him alone. Therefore it lies in woman’s nature to look upon everything only as a means for winning man, and her interest in anything else is always a simulated one, a mere roundabout way to gain her ends, consisting of coquetry and pretence. Hence Rousseau said, Les femmes, en général, n’aiment aucun art, ne se connoissent à aucun et n’ont aucun génie (Lettre à d’Alembert, note xx.). Every one who can see through a sham must have found this to be the case. One need only watch the way they behave at a concert, the opera, or the play; the childish simplicity, for instance, with which they keep on chattering during the finest passages in the greatest masterpieces. If it is true that the Greeks forbade women to go to the play, they acted in a right way; for they would at any rate be able to hear something. In our day it would be more appropriate to substitute taceat mulier in theatro for taceat mulier in ecclesia; and this might perhaps be put up in big letters on the curtain.

It's not rocket science - Trump didn't really hit 50% in any age group until the 45 years and up folks, and I'm sure Potter is more popular with people below 45. As a result, their headline is true. It's also meaningless, but it seems interesting until you think about it.

Someday they'll follow you in the sun.

Thank you

d..deh..