Indeed he is. Rowlings fan base in the south just got a little bit larger (I do wonder if they are feeling "vindicated" in their opposition). I imagine that the discussion will get heated, so we might as well just start here and keep the newbies out. It's fine and dandy, and I suppose fictional characters can feel whatever they want to feel as far as they can feel, but I did find this unnecessary. I really didn't and don't care if Dumbledore was hetero-, homo-, bi-, a-, or sub-sexual (I'm sure I'm missing some categories). But, introducing his sexuality after the story, as something that was not discussed in the books just seems like she's looking for (does she really need it?) publicity. Part of what I loved so much about Dumbledore was his asceticism. He was so devoted to magic and teaching the kids, that he didn't have time to think about being attracted to McGonagall or Snape. I understand that she needed to correct the script, but adding a love interest to Dumbledore was gratuitous on it's own - aren't the books long enough without more material being added? Oh, and one more thing - falling in love with your rival? That's just too cliche. I mean seriously. Because teacher/student relationships would be going too far, Voldemort or Harry couldn't happen. So she went with the most cliche of cliche. So much for creative storytelling. Edit: Because I know that some are looking for me to rip into "the liberal agenda", I want to address up front, in summary, that my beef with this is the self-serving-after-the-fact-and-still-couldn't-be-original-and-fell-on-the-sword-of-cliche nature of her announcement, not who Dumbledore wanted to get in the sack with.