Have you all seen this post by Shyfoxling?

[sweettalkeress.livejournal.com]

I'm Dreamwidth friends with her so I noticed she was exploring Pottermore.

What she found was this.

I left a comment at the bottom of the page with my initial thoughts, but now I'm torn between that and WHYYY DID ROWLING THINK THIS NEEDED TO BE EXPANDED UPON?!

Still more credence for the theory that Rowling has the mental maturity of a twelve-year-old?

Comments

[aikaterini.livejournal.com]

/This idea that all three of the 'good' founders ganged up on the 'evil' (and foreign-sounding!) Slytherin leaves the same nasty aftertaste as, and textually reinforces, the concept that all children sorted into Slytherin at age 11 are inherently and irredeemably wicked./

Which once again leads to the question of how and why Slytherin still exists, if all of its students are supposedly evil. If that’s the case, if their House is so tainted by the bigotry of its Founder that all of its students must be inherently evil, then why even *have* Slytherin House anymore? Why not just stop those kids from learning magic if they’re supposedly so evil? Or Sort them into other Houses so that the other kids can "reform" them?

[oryx_leucoryx]

The others are keeping their enemies close. They want to watch them, but not be involved with them.

Except when things are different, of course. Pansy and Parvati were on first name basis in 1st year, and in GOF the Hufflepuffs collaborated with the Slytherins in the 'Potter stinks' campaign.