𔓕⠀۫⠀ ‍‍𝗌𝗅y͟t͟h͟ǝɹᴉ𝗇 ⠀ׅ⠀s͟u͟p͟ɹǝʍ𝖺𝖼y͟⠀﹐⠀︡㍃ׅ︭︡⠀⠀⠀𝄄⠀⠀d̶e̶b̶a͟t͟ǝ ீ

ㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤ

⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀

ㅤㅤㅤㅤㅤ

⊹     ᮫       𓂂      ︵⏜    ۪     ˖      ꯭𖹭ׁꜝ     ֗    𝅄    ︵   ੭

𐙚    ִ    :cherry_blossom:   ─ ⠀ᰭ   𑜎꯭ִᧉ𝗅𝖼𖹭ׁ𝗆ᧉ   ◌⃘  ㅤ۟ ㅤ𖥻ㅤ𝅼     𑁤   𓈒

꒰   𝅄   𝑡͟𝑜  𝑚𝑦  𝓑𝑙𝑜𝑔  ֗    𓂂     ͟ :musical_keyboard: ㅤ۫   05:19  ۪  ୨୧  ꒱

︶︶      ۟       ─ִ─     ᮫        𓈒     ︶       .      ─ׁ─     ⚹

hey all, today ill be participating in this debate

defending my precious bb slytherin ☹ ima not

yap more and just straight up get to the point.

this is gonna be a long ass post, trust. so grab

your drinks or something idk.

⌒꯭⌒꯭   ⠀ׂ      ׅ    ⚹      ⌒꯭       ࣪    ⏜︵    𝅄    ♡.ᐟ    ˒

:hearts:     ۫    ₍ ࣪    𝖽𖹭ׁ𝗇'𝗍 𝗌𝖺𝗒   ࣪     𓈒   ㅤ⁔ㅤ𝅼    𝑂𝟭  ⠀͟୨

͜ㅤ𝅄   ࣪    ⊹ ⠀͟ㅤ۫     ︶    𝗙𝗢𝗥    !     𝅦     ࣪      ۪

yes, for slytherin gets an unfair reputation. for

far too long, slytherin house has been labeled

as the "evil house", its name unfairly linked to

dark wizards, ruthless ambition, and deception.

but is this reputation truly deserved? no <3333

the reality is slytherin’s reputation is unfairly

exaggerated—not because the house is free of

flaws but because it is judged more harshly than

any other. other houses have produced traitors,

cowards, and villains, yet only slytherin is conde

-mned for the actions of a few. allow me to exp

ose the bias against slytherin and the double

standards applied to the house :joy_cat: :pray: 🏻

⌒꯭⌒꯭   ⠀ׂ      ׅ    ⚹      ⌒꯭       ࣪    ⏜︵    𝅄   ♡.ᐟ    ˒

:hearts:     ۫    ₍ ࣪   𝗂᜔𝗍'𝗅𝗅 𝖻𝖾 𝗈𝗄𝖺𝗒 ࣪     𓈒   ㅤ⁔ㅤ𝅼    𝑂𝟮  ⠀͟୨

͜ㅤ𝅄   ࣪    ⊹ ⠀͟ㅤ۫     ︶    𝗱𝗼𝘂𝗯𝗹𝗲 𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗻𝗱𝗮𝗿𝗱𝘀 !     𝅦    

(a.k.a. how every other house gets a free

but slytherin gets dragged for everything.)

for centuries, slytherin house has been judged based on stereotypes and selective history. people claim that slytherin is the house of dark wizards, cheaters, and villains, but this is a BIASED and incomplete narrative. every, and i mean, every house has produced rule-breakers, traitors, and morally questionable individuals, yet slytherin alone carries the weight of that judgement. honestly this is not just unfair, it’s historically inaccurate. lemme break it down for you.

𝐆𝐑𝐘𝐅𝐅𝐈𝐍𝐃𝐎𝐑𝐒

gryffindors are celebrated as heroes, yet their reckless actions are excused, while slytherins are demonized for far less (skull skull) smh fam smh.

peter pettigrew:

THE ULTIMATE TRAITOR. let’s start with the single biggest betrayal in wizarding history. peter pettigrew, a gryffindor, sold out james and lily potter to voldemort, directly leading to their deaths. second, he framed sirius black for the crime, causing him to spend 12 years in azkaban for nothing. he betrayed his best friends and aligned himself with voldemort, becoming his servant for over a decade. next, he literally helped voldemort regain his body, restarting the war.

if a slytherin had done this, the whole house would be condemned. but because peter was a gryffindor, gryffindor's reputation remained untouched. why is gryffindor not called the “house of betrayal” when one of their own caused the deaths of harry’s parents?

. ❀ ₊⊹

james potter && the marauders:

the bullies disguised as heroes. james, sirius black, and the marauders are praised for their bravery, yet they ruthlessly bullied severus snape (my beautiful innocent princess) for years!! not because he did anything wrong, but simply just for existing. like, james hung snape upside down in front of the entire school, exposing his underwear. and sirius tricked snape into going to the shrieking shack where he could have been killed by a transformed werewolf. or in simple words, they constantly harassed snape and made his life miserable, simply because they thought it was fun.

NOW IMAGINE, if a group of slytherins had treated someone this way, they would be called cruel and sadistic. but when gryffindors do it, it’s brushed off as "pranks" ??

. ❀ ₊⊹

dumbledore:

i dont know who needs to hear this, but dumbledore is a power-hungry gryffindor who made questionable choices. he is seen as a wise and noble figure, but in reality, he had a dangerous obsession with power in his youth.

he and grindelwald plotted to rule over muggles because they thought wizards were superior. and how can we forget that his own arrogance led to the death of his sister, ariana? hell, he manipulated harry for years, raising him like a pawn in his grand plan to defeat voldemort.

now if a slytherin had done ANY of this, they would be considered power-hungry and untrustworthy. but because dumbledore was a gryffindor, his past mistakes are conveniently ignored.

𝐑𝐀𝐕𝐄𝐍𝐂𝐋𝐀𝐖

ravenclaws pride themselves on intelligence and logic, but their actions often show self-interest and disregard for others–

professor quirrell:

literally brought back voldemort thus, one of the most dangerous figures in recent history was a ravenclaw. he helped voldemort return to power, knowingly worked for him and even allowing him to attach himself to the back of his head. he ALSO tried to murder an eleven year old harry. if quirrell had been a slytherin, the entire house would be condemned. but no one calls ravenclaw the “house of dark wizards.”

. ❀ ₊⊹

marietta edgecombe:

marietta, the snitch who betrayed her friends. marietta, a ravenclaw, who betrayed dumbledore’s army by revealing their secret hideout to umbridge. and she did it only for self-preservation and her family’s ministry ties. she literally put everyone else in danger to save herself.

slytherins are always accused of selfishness and betrayal, but here we have a "ravenclaw" literally selling out her friends, and yet, her house’s reputation remains untouched.

. ❀ ₊⊹

gilderoy lockhart:

ah yes how can we forget lockhart, the fraud who stole other wizards' achievements? a ravenclaw, who built his entire career on lies? he erased the memories of talented wizards and stole their achievements as his own. and then tried to erase harry and ron’s memories to cover up his fraud. so yep, he was only interested in fame and not ACTUAL skill.

and if a slytherin had done this? they would be called deceptive and manipulative. but because lockhart was a ravenclaw, his fraudulent nature is treated as comedic.

𝐇𝐔𝐅𝐅𝐋𝐄𝐏𝐔𝐅𝐅

hufflepuffs are supposed to be the most loyal house, but loyalty means nothing if it disappears when things get tough. lets see.

zacharias smith:

zacharias smith, the coward who ran away. he was a part of dumbledore’s army, but when the time came to fight, he abandoned his friends. LIKE he ran away from the battle of hogwarts instead of standing with his classmates. also, he only ed the DA because it was popular, not because he actually cared.

so why does hufflepuff still get called the house of loyalty when one of their own ran away when it mattered most?

. ❀ ₊⊹

helga hufflepuff:

lets talk about her ission policy. helga hufflepuff famously said she would accept students that the other founders didn’t want. this is a noble idea, but it also means:

hufflepuff is a default house for students who don’t fit anywhere else && they don’t have a clear defining trait like the other houses.

if slytherin is criticized for its exclusivity, why isn’t hufflepuff questioned for its lack of standards?

gryffindors get rewarded for breaking rules:

people love to say slytherins are "rule breakers" and "bad," but ever thought about how hogwarts punishes them differently from other houses? harry, ron, and hermione broke school rules CONSTANTLY. and instead of punishment, they got house points and awards; "you broke into the chamber of secrets? saved the philosopher’s stone? fought a troll? here, have 900 points." fred and george also did illegal experiments for YEARS, yet barely any punishments. and i'll say this again, the marauders literally bullied snape for fun, teachers looked away. whereas, if a slytherin talks back ONCE, it’s an instant detention. they all assume slytherins are troublemakers before they even do anything. and if slytherins defend themselves = instant detention. slytherin plays by the rules and wins fair and square? dumbledore goes like "actually, let me pull 1,000 points out of nowhere so gryffindor wins." how is THAT fair??

𐔌 ﹒ ⋆ ꩜ ⋆ 𓂃 ₊ ⊹

the dark arts as tools, not alignments:

one thing ill never understand is how people think that an interest in the dark arts automatically aligns a person with evil intentions. the dark arts are simply a tool— a form of magic— just like any other. lord, i can go on about this for days. what matters is how it’s used, not whether it’s used at all. the failure to understand the dark arts as evil makes unjust judgment not just for slytherins but for anyone who employs or studies them.

at the heart of the matter is the premise that strong magic, when applied negatively, becomes perilous, but that does not equate to the magic itself being evil. the dark arts are tied to voldemort, his followers, and their nefarious actions, but just because someone applies these spells does not make them "dark" by default.

dark arts and intentions: the idea that practicing dark magic somehow makes a person inherently evil is not only unjust but also perilous. it trivializes the difficult connection between 'intention' and 'action'. there are countless, i mean countless examples where magic is employed for benevolent reasons, even if it just so happens to be categorized as being in the dark arts. for instance, the unforgivables are always depicted as means of evil, but under proper hands, they can serve to protect, defend, or hold in check nasty situations.

the most important part of magic, particularly the DA, is mastery. they tend to frighten people since they can prove difficult to handle and are seen with power and manipulation. BUT someone who is able to master the DA without succumbing to its destructive potential is not necessarily evil pls– they are merely proficient in a difficult and deadly field of magic. this proficiency is too often mistaken for an indication of evil, when in fact, it can merely be a product of an intense desire for mastery over the world of magic.

the key thing to keep in mind is that nobody is what they are because of the magic they practice, they are what they are based on how they practice it. "intentions", NOT spells, make someone good or evil. slytherins, or anybody who practices dark magic, should not be judged solely based on their use or knowledge of such magic. the question really is whether or not they use that power for good or evil, and whether or not they decide to use their talents to defend, or protect or injure.

this is a blog on slytherin so let's get to that– the slytherin house has been known for the dark arts for a long time, particularly because a lot of the death eaters, including voldemort himself, belonged to that house. BUT, this does not imply that all slytherins are bad or that they are destined to follow dark magic. many slytherins such as slughorn and snape, utilized their information on the DA for personal defense or to fulfill greater ends, whether that was working undercover, defending others, or simply surviving in a treacherous world.

just because slytherins are talented in the DA doesn't make them evil by nature. in fact, a lot of slytherins, even if they don't actively accept dark magic, tend to study its mechanisms so that they can know it and protect themselves. knowledge is power, and those who know both light and dark magic are usually the best ones to make strategic moves, both in combating evil and defending the wizarding world.

snape's deployment of those spells was usually for the greater good or out of a need. snape, though he, too, had his darkness and strife, didn't use his abilities for selfish motives or for sadistic pleasure, but used them to serve as a spy and guard harry. his skill with the DA did not turn him into an evil person– it was self-sacrifice, loyalty, and intellect that, in the end, made him a hero.

in the battle of hogwarts, harry employed the cruciatus curse on amycus carrow, one of the professors tormenting his peers. although harry knowingly used a dark arts spell during this instance, he is not characterized as evil in the eyes of the wizarding world or even by most readers. rather, harry is interpreted as defending his friends and fighting the good fight. yes, he was in the right mind– but the whole thing im getting at here is that if slytherins utilize the DA, because of good cause, they're deemed evil, yet if a gryffindor or hufflepuff does, they are heroes and were looking out for their friends.

i have yapped on and on– basically, the dark arts are a means, not an indication of a person's alignment. the real test of a witch or wizard is the way in which they use that power, not the tools available to them.

⌒꯭⌒꯭   ⠀ׂ      ׅ    ⚹     ⌒꯭        ࣪    ⏜︵    𝅄    ♡.ᐟ    ˒

:hearts:     ۫    ₍ ࣪   𝗂𝗍'𝗌 𝖺𝗅𝗅 𝖺 𝗅𝗂᜔𝖾   ࣪    𓈒   ㅤ⁔ㅤ𝅼    𝑂𝟯  ⠀͟୨

͜ㅤ𝅄   ࣪    ⊹ ⠀͟ㅤ۫     ︶    𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗽𝗮𝗴𝗮𝗻𝗱𝗮 !     𝅦     ࣪      ۪

yes, let's talk about the propaganda machine against slytherin (or how the wizarding world && hogwarts itself set slytherin up for failure.) we all know that slytherin has been villainized for centuries, but let’s ask the real questions:

1) who is controlling the narrative?

2) why is slytherin always portrayed as the “bad house”?

3) who benefits from making slytherin look like the villain?

4) why is every other house’s reputation protected, but slytherin is thrown under the bus?

the answer is simple but realest real: hogwarts itself fuels anti-slytherin propaganda. the school has deliberately twisted history, glorified gryffindor, and ignored slytherin’s achievements to maintain a bias that keeps slytherin as the “enemy.” this isnt even an accident, this is straight up systematic discrimination.

the house cup:

let’s start with the most obvious proof of hogwarts' bias: the house cup is supposed to be an objective system where students earn points based on skill, behavior, and achievements. but is it fair? absolutely NOT. we know that in harry’s first year, slytherin was set to win the house cup. the hourglasses clearly showed that slytherin had earned the most points fairly. it was a clean victory. the points were counted. the great hall itself was decorated in green and silver.

thenn...dumbledore pulled the biggest scam in hogwarts history. AT THE LAST SECOND—literally during the final feast—he suddenly awarded gryffindor a random 170 points, just enough to push slytherin into second place.

60 points to harry for “bravery.” (kay, fair enough.)

50 points to ron for playing wizard chess. (WHAT??)

50 points to hermione for solving a logic puzzle. (…which is literally JUST thinking.)

10 points to neville for “standing up to his friends.” (??? sobbing)

aaand just like that, slytherin’s victory was stolen. If the points had been given before the ceremony, it would’ve been slightly less suspicious—but no, dumbledore deliberately humiliated slytherin in front of the entire school.

now imagine if the roles were reversed. IMAGINE, if slytherin had been in second place, and snape suddenly gave draco 170 points out of nowhere to make them win. gryffindor would have RIOTED. this proves that the system is manipulated to make gryffindor look like the superior house while keeping slytherin down.

baised professors: the anti-slytherin education system

at hogwarts, professors are supposed to be neutral educators. but the moment a student is sorted into slytherin, they are treated differently.

professor mcgonagall:

mcgonagall is supposed to be strict and fair, but let’s look at her actual behavior. she let harry become seeker in his FIRST YEAR, even though first years weren’t allowed on the quidditch team. she is actually the gryffindor's biggest cheerleader. she constantly overlooked gryffindor’s rule-breaking, but if a slytherin broke a rule? immediate punishment. and she never even hid her favoritism, always making sure gryffindor got special treatment.

if snape had done even half of this for slytherin, everyone would call him corrupt. but because it’s mcgonagall, she’s praised for it.

hagrid:

hagrid is beloved, one of my favorites, but let’s be honest, he openly hated slytherins. he told harry “there’s not a single witch or wizard who went bad who wasn’t in slytherin.” (A LIE.) he encouraged anti-slytherin stereotypes instead of helping students see the house fairly. in fact, he even treated slytherin students as villains before they even had a chance to prove themselves. now you imagine being 11 years old, excited to start your hogwarts journey, and then hearing a school staff member say your house is evil. that is institutional bias.

dumbledore:

we can also call him the puppet master who used slytherin as a scapegoat. dumbledore claimed to be fair, but his actions proved otherwise. we know that he deliberately favored gryffindor, ignored slytherin’s achievements and never defended them against unfair treatment, used slytherins as an easy villain to make gryffindors look better. and thus, dumbledore’s actions created the hostile environment that fueled anti slytherin discrimination.

the history books: twisting the past

to make slytherin look bad

yes. hogwarts history has been rewritten to make gryffindor the heroes and slytherin the villains.

salazar slytherin. the founder who was demonized. the history books tell us that salazar slytherin left hogwarts because he was “evil” and hated muggle-borns. but, let’s look at the actual facts. salazar slytherin was one of the greatest wizards of his time, his main issue wasn’t muggle-borns, it was security. he believed that during a time of war and persecution, muggle-born students should be carefully chosen to ensure hogwarts stayed safe. but he was demonized for his ideas, while the other founders rewrote the story to make him look bad. everyone needs to get it in their heads that slytherin did not betray hogwarts, hogwarts betrayed him.

so, let's talk about how the other founders contributed slytherin’s reputation OR why exactly its NOT just salazar slytherin's fault. this is something i've always wanted to talk about, and not many, hell hardly few people think about this. LIKE–

everyone acts like salazar slytherin was the only founder with strong opinions. but ALL the founders contributed to house division. let me expose them real quick.

godric gryffindor CREATED the rivalry. salazar slytherin left because of a disagreement, but who stayed behind and let the beef continue? people are so blind to acknowledge the fact that gryffindor’s house embraced the idea of opposing slytherin—instead of trying to mend the gap, they encouraged house rivalry. and sorting hat? its literally enchanted with gryffindor’s bias.

and helga hufflepuff? she let the hate spread. hufflepuffs claim to be about "fairness," but they NEVER, ever, not once, stood up for slytherins. ever noticed how they were taught to accept everyone? except when it came to slytherin. like instead of challenging the negative stereotypes, they let it slide for centuries. yes, centuries.

how can we forget ravenclaws? they value intelligence over everything. but intelligence without ambition is useless. they ignored slytherin’s cunning and resourcefulness because apparently, it wasn’t "traditional intelligence." and many, MANY, ravenclaws saw slytherins as less worthy because they didn’t fit the "ideal" mold.

to sum it all up, slytherin left but others created the narrative. salazar slytherin didn’t stay to write history, his enemies did. the other founders shaped hogwarts’ culture after he left, meaning they allowed anti slytherin sentiment to grow; instead of fixing the division, they let it fester.

reading the books through a

gryffindor's eyes:

when you look at the reputation of slytherin, one of the most important things to consider is that the entire harry potter series is told from harry's POV (a gryffindor's POV) and thus everything we read is inherently biased towards the gryffindor worldview.

in the very first book, the sorcerer's/philosopher's stone we are shown that slytherin is the "bad house" through hagrid who tells harry "theres not a single witch or wizard who went bad who was not in slytherin" (which as we would later learn is NOT true). before harry even goes to hogwarts hes already been shown to hate and fear slytherin.

after harry arrives most of his enemies, draco, professor snape (at first) and eventually voldemort - come from slytherin, while most of his mentors and friends - dumbledore, mcgonagall, ron, come from gryffindors. this naturally distorts how events are unfolding in the books. we rarely see slytherins outside of their conflicts with harry, meaning we never get to know them other than what they think of harry.

now suppose the books were written from the point of view of draco malfoy. gryffindors would be arrogant and irresponsible and they would constantly break the rules and get away with it. dumbledore would be unfair and snape would be one of the few professors who actually looked out for slytherins. the entire story would seem to be completely different as this tells me that perspective has some important effect on the way we view history.

since we only get to see slytherins through harry's perspective we do not get to see their friendships, their struggles or their good moments. this lack of perspective is one of the biggest reasons why slytherin's reputation is unfair– because we only get to see one side of the story.

︶︶︶︶     . ୨       ︶︶︶︶

slytherins were denied the chance to

prove themselves in the battle of hogwarts:

during the battle of hogwarts, one of the greatest injustices was mcgonagall's choice to send most of the slytherins away, while allowing students from gryffindor, hufflepuff, and ravenclaw to fight. this intended that slytherin students had been by no means given the danger to prove their bravery or loyalty to hogwarts, further cementing their unfair reputation. instead of being treated as people, slytherins had been grouped together and presumed to be on voldemort’s side– a deeply unfair assumption. the reality is that not every slytherin ed voldemort, similar to not each gryffindor, ravenclaw, or hufflepuff was inclined to fight. though some brave slytherins like slughorn did return to fight, almost all of them were sent away before the battle even started and thus, slytherin house was denied the right to make that preference for themselves.

in the meantime, those who had been given the risk to stay had the possibility to be seen as heroes, while slytherins have been branded as cowards just because they had been sent away. even slytherins who fought afterward, like slughorn and the malfoys, had to prove themselves individually, in preference to being identified as part of a residence that had as a whole lot ability for heroism as every other.

to sum all of it up, if slytherins were allowed to fight alongside other houses, a lot of them may want to have shown their courage and helped shield the hogwarts that had spent years judging them unfairly. alternatively, history re them because the most effective house that "fled," while in fact, they have been in no way even given the selection to stand their ground.

⌒꯭⌒꯭   ⠀ׂ      ׅ    ⚹      ⌒꯭       ࣪    ⏜︵    𝅄   ♡.ᐟ    ˒

:hearts:     ۫    ₍ ࣪   𝗂᜔𝗍'𝗅𝗅 𝖻𝖾 𝗈𝗄𝖺𝗒 ࣪     𓈒   ㅤ⁔ㅤ𝅼    𝑂4  ⠀͟୨

͜ㅤ𝅄   ࣪    ⊹ ⠀͟ㅤ۫     ︶    𝗴𝗼𝗼𝗱 𝘀𝗹𝘆𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗿𝗶𝗻𝘀 !     𝅦    

i have never seen anyone mention the good slytherins that history ignores. but why? why does history erase the good slytherins? because history is written by the winners. gryffindors won the war, so they told the story. not just that, the ministry of magic also stepped in, glorified certain people and erased others. whenever a slytherin does something good, they either erase it or downplay it. and as i mentioned before, its very clear that the house system encourages division; hogwarts pits students against each other from the age 11. basically, hogwarts wants them to be rivals instead of friends. and teachers favoring certain houses makes the rivalry worse.

── ֺ ᪄ ♡ ၃ ִ ──

ministry officials && aurors:

ok before i mention the good slytherins history ignores, let me cook one of the strongest arguments against the idea that slytherins are inherently evil !! its the fact that the ministry of magic has hired so many of them and obviously not just as dark wizards or corrupt politicians, but in positions of power and influence that keep the wizarding world running. in fact, nearly half of the ministry of magic’s top officials and aurors have been slytherins, proving that this house produces some of the most skilled witches and wizards in law enforcement and governance, which proves that slytherins don’t just crave power for the sake of it, they use their intelligence and ambition to maintain order and protect the wizarding world.

"slytherins are known for their ambition, resourcefulness, and leadership," which are exactly the qualities needed in government positions. they have climbed the ranks of the ministry, proving that they are trusted with the responsibility of shaping wizarding laws, managing magical affairs, and even protecting the wizarding world etc.

some notable slytherins in the ministry of magic are cornelius fudge, rufus scrimgeour, pius thicknesse, draco in the future, horace slughorn (not exactly a direct ministry worker but his influence shaped many of the top ranking officials in the wizarding world) and dolores umbridge– one of the worst examples, but she still proves that slytherins were trusted with high authority. a house full of “evil” students wouldn’t be given this much influence.

if slytherins were truly untrustworthy or inherently evil, why would so many of them be given control over wizarding laws, education, and security? like why have so many of them served as aurors and ministry officials– the very people responsible for enforcing wizarding laws and protecting society? even in the fight against voldemort, some slytherins worked within the system rather than openly rebelling, using their positions to gather information or protect their families while still resisting in their own way (e.g., severus snape, who secretly worked against voldemort). if slytherin was truly a house of villains, the ministry wouldn’t have placed so much trust in them.

regulus black ♡

okay time for the other good slytherins. regulus was a death eater who betrayed voldemort. like regulus was literally one of the first people to realize that voldemort was a problem. yes he ed the death eaters as a teenager, but not by choice. his family expected it. but when he realized voldemort was out here committing magical war crimes, he sacrificed himself to try and destroy a horcrux. this man DIED to stop voldemort yet history barely mentions him. why does no one talk about this? if a gryffindor had done this, they’d be the face of every chocolate frog card. (not even exaggerating.)

severus snape <3

oh severus, i can write a whole book right now. severus, a SLYTHERIN, swore to protect harry despite hating his resemblance to his father james and actually spent years protecting him. people LOVE to hate snape, but let’s talk about the facts. he risked everything, his entire life being a double agent to protect hogwarts. and he was so good at it that voldemort trusted him completely, and so did the order of phoenix. he even agreed to kill dumbledore to save draco from being forced to do it. this man died saving the wizarding world, yet all people ever and say is "b-but...he was mean to students 🥺🥺" (okay and?? he ate every single time) so we’re just gonna ignore how he spied for YEARS to stop voldemort? dumbledore called him "the bravest man he ever knew" and history should him as exactly that.

andromeda tonks !!

andromeda, the slytherin who walked away from the pureblood ideals. who was born into the infamous black family, who were basically wizarding royalty. she literally saw their bigotry and was like, "nah, im outta here." she married a muggle born, got disowned, and still raised one of the bravest aurors ever (tonks). despite losing her husband, daughter, and son in law, did she ever turn to revenge or hatred? no. so, how come she is not in history books as a symbol of bravery?

horace slughorn ♡

slughorn, one of favourites, is one of the most underrated yet impactful slytherins in hogwarts history. who didn’t care about blood status and mentored talented students regardless of their background, even favoring muggle borns like lily. people forget that his slug club provided opportunities and connections that helped shape some of the GREATEST witches and wizards. yet all people is "but he gave tom riddle knowledge about horcruxes :rage: !!" yes and UNKNOWNINGLY, but he later redeemed himself by helping dumbledore uncover the truth, playing a 'direct' role in voldemort’s downfall. and despite his love for peace and comfort, despite his old age, he returned to hogwarts to fight in the battle of hogwarts, even dueling voldemort himself alongside mcgonagall and kingsley. he proved that slytherins could be kind, brave, and essential to the wizarding world, yet history often overlooks him and people act like he was just "a selfish old man" –?

︶︶︶︶     . ୨       ︶︶︶︶

history:

merlin:

now lets move on to history. starting with merlin. yes, THAT merlin. the one from legend. the most famous wizard in history, who was a slytherin. he who advocated for muggle rights at a time when wizards wanted to rule over them. he also founded the "order of merlin", which still honors good witches and wizards today. and people just ignore the fact that the greatest wizard of all time was a slytherin? make it make sense.

leta lestrange:

lets get straight to the point. leta was a powerful, wealthy pureblood, but instead of becoming a villain, she protected newt scamander from expulsion, tried to make up for a past mistake that haunted her && SACRIFICED HER LIFE to save theseus and newt from grindelwald. she proved that love and loyalty matters!! if a gryffindor had done this, people would call it “the ultimate act of bravery.” but because she’s a slytherin, she gets erased.

narcissa malfoy:

narcissa wasn’t a death eater; she didn’t even have the dark mark. she just wanted to protect her family, like she chose her family over voldemort's war. and the most important, she looked voldemort right in the eyes and straight up lied to his face to protect draco and saved harry's life. do you know the bravery it takes to lie straight into the face of someone like voldemort? if she hadn’t checked to see if harry was alive, voldemort would’ve won the war.

scorpius malfoy:

scorpius grew up under constant judgement for his last name. but of course, he was kind, smart and loyal, proving that not all malfoys followed voldemort. he too, was a slytherin, who literally rewrote the malfoy legacy. and in the end, he literally helped fix the timeline to stop an alternate voldemort controlled future. so much for "all slytherins are evil." dont you think?

everyone grew up thinking slytherin was the “evil” house, because that’s what the books, the films, and the wizarding world taught us. thankfully i, myself, have always loved the slytherin. and the more you read, the more you will see that slytherin isn’t evil. it was always misunderstood, silenced, and rewritten by a narrative that favored the loudest voices, not the full truth.

this debate isn’t just about defending a hogwarts house. it's about asking who gets to be ed as brave, and who gets written off before they even get a chance.

i stand with the house that’s been fighting to be seen for what it truly is: clever, resourceful, fiercely loyal to its own– and worthy of redemption. and therefore, slytherin gets an unfair reputation.

   . ⁺   。 ⁺ .    ︵⏜   ᮫ 𝅄  𝓣.𝘩𝘦 𝓔𝘯𝘥   𝄒  :tulip: ᮫

      .       ⠀ׂ𝝑୧  ׅ 𞋎𝑒𝑡 ๋𝑠 𝖼𝗈︩︪𝗎𝗇𝗍   ¹ ² ³ ⁴ ⁵    𝅄  𝆬 ִ⠀

        ⁺     시간이 째깍대고 바뀌어 숫자 . ࣪ ˖

well, thats it for my debate :smirk_cat: sorry if i wa

sted too much of your time, but i had to m

ake it clear that slytherin gets an unfair re

putation !! i enjoyed working on this sm bu

t it was really tiring– STILL THOUGH, i ho

pe that atleast a few people start loving sl

ytherin house after reading this whole blog.

᮫    ⏝   ׅ ㅤ 𝅄   ͜     ࣪      ⁺      ִ  𝆬       ꯭⊹   ᮫   ⏝︶ㅤ۫ 𝅄

#SlytherinReputation