“Harry Potter” author J.K. Rowling surprised many readers with her announcement, during an October appearance at Carnegie Hall in New York City, that one of her major characters, endearing Hogwarts headmaster Albus Dumbledore, is gay.



For years, millions of even non-reading children have been devouring every word of the widely popular Harry Potter series of novels. The announcement added fuel to fundamentalist fire that the novels will tempt the world’s children into a fever of evil magic not seen since the Wizard of Oz books resulted in a similar, invisible result.



Most preposterous of all are cries that the revelation that Dumbledore is a homosexual now “sexualizes children’s stories.”



Many adults would like to withhold all reference to s-e-x from children until the adults are old enough to realize the kids knew about it all along. To claim, however, knowing that Dumbledore is gay “sexualizes” fairy tales, which up until now have been snow white, is pure fantasy for two reasons.



First, let’s get the story straight: Papa Bear and Mama Bear bore Baby Bear, didn’t they? And the prince woke up more than Sleeping Beauty with that kiss. In case someone hasn’t yet figured it out, kids stop buying the hokum about “the stork brought me” after they are 18 months old or so.



In fact, kids have been getting the story straight all along. Even the kids who aren’t.



But those good little boys and girls have still listened to fairy tales of white knights and cowboys and damsels in distress, secretly knowing whose kiss they really wanted to wake them up from their sleep.



My suggested reading for adults who parade around the fantasy that children’s stories have been void of sexuality until now? The Emperor’s New Clothes.



The second absurdity in the claim that Dumbledore’s homosexuality sexualizes children’s stories lies only barely clothed in prejudice.



Learning someone is gay tells us nothing about the person’s sexuality -absolutely nothing. Learning someone is a homosexual tells us only the person is attracted to people of the same gender. That is it, that’s all. It tells us nothing about sex whatsoever. A celibate homosexual (or heterosexual) is still a homosexual (or heterosexual).



A homosexual who lives as a heterosexual is only make-believe. It is arrogant bigotry to presume to know a person’s sexual activity with nothing more than knowledge of the person’s orientation.

So the question must be asked to the questioner, “Yes, why do we have to sexualize children’s stories?” Minnie Mouse is attracted to Mickey Mouse, Olive Oyl to Popeye the Sailor and Beauty to the Beast. It’s wonderful that children who have been trained to behave unnaturally since birth, and taught to pretend to believe the fable that being yourself is wrong, now have some good and honorable role models.



We don’t raise happy children by cramming them into little boxes that don’t fit. When we do, they grow up into adults pretending to be happy but hiding in other boxes, shadows and perhaps bathroom stalls searching for Dumbledore…and themselves.



Perhaps those who obsess on the sexuality in children’s stories, or public figures or their neighbors or their children might consider an appointment with their internal Dr. Seuss to comprehend why it’s so important to them to prevent others from living happily ever after.

Lew Alessio is the director of the national Center for Disease Control’s program for men in Central Maine called “just guys,” and is a speaker with Maine SpeakOut. He lives in Greene.