Ender's Game Author Asks For Tolerance After Boycott Threat

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 NEXT
 

theApoc:
Um, you people do know that the power/responsibility being pushed back on the states is not akin to "gay marriage becoming law throughout the land", right?

Folks, I hate to break it to you, intolerance, especially when it comes under voicing an opinion, is not a crime. Being passionate about beliefs, also, not a crime. The vilification of anyone with different ideals is a far bigger problem for EVERYONE than whether or not a gay couple can get married. I used to be for gay marriage. Now I only support legal protections and equality for ANYONE who wants to share their estate. The hypocrisy of "gay rights" advocates is appalling to me and I refuse to condone that type of social bullying.

We ALL, gay, straight, and otherwise, CHOOSE the people we love. We are not pre-destined to be one way or another. That CHOICE is ours to make and we should ALL be free to make it. Cohabitation law as well as legal binding of estate should have always been the focal point of this argument. I should be able to CHOOSE who I partner with from a legal standpoint. Love, religion, marriage, that is not something that can or should be legislated by anyone. You can't make a law that makes people tolerant and we shouldn't be trying.

Card should have left his beliefs out of his work, separated the two. And if he can't, he should be willing to accept the consequences. Pandering to the masses is more offensive than anything he has said about his beliefs.

And for the record, being a bigot is not exclusive to the people against gay marriage, both sides of this coin are far too intolerant for my tastes...

People weren't opposed to gay marriage until gay people started trying to get married. There was a rush in the 70's across the US to enact and reword anti-gay marriage laws specifically because the wording of the laws on the books at the time was not specific enough to exclude gay people from getting married.

We didn't start this fight, but we aim to finish it. If you think "gay rights advocates" are bullies then you are woefully ignorant of the severity of bullying we've had to endure just to get to this point. When anti-gay marriage advocates start getting beaten and/or killed and we send THEIR children to re-education camps (similar to current pray-the-gay-away camps), then you can start complaining about how intolerant we've become. I am sure we both hope it never comes to that point.

Hell even as a homosexual I don't really care about gay marriage. If heterosexuals hate us so much why should I want to emulate them, but I do resent being told specifically that I cant, that I hold some lessor status in society, because some words in a magic book say that what I do in the privacy of my bedroom with a consenting adult is wrong.

"Now it will be interesting to see whether the victorious proponents of gay marriage will show tolerance toward those who disagreed with them when the issue was still in dispute," Card concludes.

Sorry Orson, but I think there's a big difference between simply "disagreeing" on an issue and being a total and complete bigoted asshole to those you disagree with. And your past comments were definitely in the latter category.

KOMega:
I really liked Ender's Game, and a few of the sequel books (although I think the quality was on a slow decline for that series.)

Still, I didn't see any anti-gay stuff in his books. So whatever.

Although... I didn't really see what he actually said or did. Can someone show me what he did?

His Wikipedia page has a pretty good summary of it. Here are a couple of highlights:

"How long before married people answer the dictators thus: Regardless of law, marriage has only one definition, and any government that attempts to change it is my mortal enemy. I will act to destroy that government and bring it down, so it can be replaced with a government that will respect and support marriage, and help me raise my children in a society where they will expect to marry in their turn."

"The dark secret of homosexual society-the one that dares not speak its name-is how many homosexuals first entered into that world through a disturbing seduction or rape or molestation or abuse, and how many of them yearn to get out of the homosexual community and live normally."

And those were from 2008 and 2004, respectively. So yeah, basically in the past he has said gay marriage will mean the destruction of America and marriage as a whole, and claimed that gay people are either molesters or victims of molestation. The sort of stuff you expect to hear from fundamental churches in the South. And now he's trying to play the "Don't hold my past comments against me!" card without apologizing or so much as hinting that maybe what he said was a bit hateful and severely misinformed.

Well while I don't share Mr. Cards harsh views on gay marriage and gayness in general, I fully support his right to hold and discuss said views. However, I also fully support the right for any individuals annoyed by his views to tell Mr. Card to go fuck himself and refuse to support his creations as a form of protest. Asking for people to judge his art as its own entity and ignore the man behind it seems very much like he wants to have his cake and eat it too.

Welcome Mr. Card to the really real world where actions have consequences.

A bigot, when push comes to shove, turns out to be a hypocrite?

I am truly shocked, shocked I tell you, absolutely shocked.

Also, those fools seem to conveniently forget that "traditional marriage" they are so keen to protect has long since been destroyed. A man can no longer sell his daughter into slavery, and that was the cornerstone to the "sanctity of marriage."

Pickapok:
Snipped the rest because LONG!

But I do really want to see Ender's Game. I'm just stating some of the possible ramifications. And none of us have ANY idea how much Card is getting from this. It's a safe bet that he's already been paid the royalties and that's that. Your points are so hilariously one sided and balanced that they come off as mad.

Royalties don't work like that.

He already received an initial licensing fee. Royalties are the amount he gets per sold ticket. In other words he gets a percentage of the money the movie makes. The better the movie does the more he eventually gets out of it. All of that money he gets will potentially be used for campaigns and funding of an organization against gay rights or the church he goes to, which itself is anti-gay and anti-allot of other things.

My points are no stranger than your justification for seeing a completely unrelated movie somehow resulting in a possible financial interest and backing of a Del Toro movie that has nothing to do with Enders Game. Which is then okay because we will get one good movie and all we had to do was give money to one guy whose ideology is despicable. I am not into the whole sell my integrity for a possible reward later on.

I read though most of these comments, and i demand the last 20 minutes of my life back!

Also, i fully intend to see the movie, no matter if people boycott it or not.

Pickapok:

1337mokro:

Beethoven is dead and not actively engaged in political movements to do anything. This guy is and wants to institutionalize unequal treatment for 10% of the population. He is part of a group of people that have for a long time mentally and physically abused those around them that think differently, look differently or act differently.

If you want to be the naive uninformed consumer then be one. Don't demand other people share in the ignorance of the products they support and thus the people behind the products. Why put ingredients on packages? If it's tastes good and you like it there is no problem with it right? Who cares if your chicken burgers are 70% sawdust.

If the person behind the product is a piece of shit, he is working towards make his bullshit beliefs effective law and on top of that really isn't that good of a writer then you should not ignore the effects of supporting this man financially.

I think you're mislabeling who the naive, ignorant consumer is here. People who let the political agenda of an author color their opinion of a recognized classic work of literature to the point of boycotting adaptations despite the two having no relation to each other are the ones who need to open their eyes.

bravetoaster:

What's wrong with people's feelings toward a person influencing their perceptions of his/her writing, art, or other work?

It's perfectly normal to encounter someone who you find so objectionable as a person that you can't enjoy their work--no matter the objective quality of the work--and it's also fine if you can look at someone's work and say "Well, this is actually really good, despite X being a complete piece of crap. I like it." My go-to example is Auguste Rodin, who, from what I've read, was a complete asshole and treated women terribly... but was also an amazingly skilled sculptor. Sometimes, some people can separate the work from the person, other times they can't; for better or worse, you cannot change the way people feel, and it seems a waste to get too bent out of shape over it.

Also, regardless of whether or not Card has been paid his full share for the film, if it's hugely successful (which is most likely will be, despite the author), Hollywood's likely to make a whole series of films (which would almost certainly result in more money going into Card's pockets [unless he has a terrible agent and is an idiot, financially]). So there's that. Whereas, even if Tolkien had put similar efforts into oppressing LGBT folks, he's also long dead and couldn't put any money made off the films to harmful causes.

It's both illogical and naive. It screams of people looking for a cause to rally around no matter how ultimately trivial. THIS movie and book does not promote an anti-gay agenda. THIS movie and book is not directly responsible for people getting assaulted by lowlife scum for deviating from what's considered normal. THIS movie and book has done nothing wrong and is highly regarded as a benchmark for other science fiction works to aspire to. Great storytelling should not be discouraged because people have a beef with the author. Especially not in a day and age where films like Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen can bring in over 800 MILLION in the box office.

Genocidicles:

It kind of does support bigotry, as he donates to an anti gay marriage 'charity' or something. So buying his products provides him with a means to act on his bigotry.

I'm not too fussed myself though, as I doesn't affect me. I'm not gay and I don't know anyone who is, so if I decide to go and buy something of his then he can donate all the proceeds to a straight camp for all I care.

It does not support it directly. If some of Card's money goes to anti gay lobbyists, that his his decision not that of the consumer. And according to this article at least he's laying down the homophobic battle flag and removing himself from the battle.

I'm going to ignore your second paragraph because it just makes you look like a total jerk. :\

So let me get this straight you will support Card's freedom of speech but not the freedom of "people looking for a cause to rally around no matter how ultimately trivial".

What if I thought the anti-gay marriage movement was "na´ve, ignorant, and trivial" to begin with, shouldn't I be allowed to dismiss them just as easily as you dismiss that which you perceive as "na´ve, ignorant, and trivial"?

This is how "freedom" works. People are eventually going to use that freedom to do something you don't agree with. You are then going to have to decide if you really support freedom or if you only support it as long as it is convenient and/or pleasing to your tastes.

Allow me to demonstrate. I support the freedom of speech Card uses AND the freedom of speech used by the people that are speaking out against him. May the best voice "win".

We sure do seem to get a lot of stuff about gay marriage on here. Some of it doesn't even have the thinly veiled, "oh look this is related to sci fi so belongs on Escapist" aspect.

I think we legalised it in the UK recently, there certainly were angry people waffling on about God and Adam and Eve a lot which is usually a sign it's on the cards.

Wasn't massively high on my voting agenda, doesn't affect me directly and I can't influence the situation but if you gave me a box to tick saying "people should be allowed to marry who they like" I'd tick it.

In fact, I believe I did because Dave made it an election pledge last time round, I seem to remember, although I was more focused on the lower taxes, less EU bullying aspects.

Hm, I wonder if he'd be preaching this same tolerance if the gay marriage bill hadn't gone through.

If you're openly against people whose actions/way of life have precisely zero effect on you --and no, a warping of your perspective on the sanctity of marriage does not count as affecting you-- then you have no one but yourself to blame when people tell you to fuck off back to the dark ages where you belong.

I'm very pro-gay rights but I don't think these kinds of boycotts are the right way to go about promoting the issue so I probably wouldn't have boycotted the film (though I wouldn't have argued with anyone who did, its a personal decision).

After reading Orson Scott Card's weaselly response I definitely will be boycotting it. You have no idea what tolerance is and fuck you for trying to use it as a tool to protect your potential profits.

I think that on a personal level I object to the smug self-righteousness more than the actual homophobia.

Woodsey:
Ah, the old "You're a bigot if you condemn bigots" switch-aroo.

Dude's got some balls.

no he doesn't. if he had a pair he wouldn't be trying to play nice now just to sell tickets to a movie that's probably gonna another generic action movie. cause, ya know, Hollywood.

anyway, wasn't gonna see this before, less desire to see it when I found out his views and this just makes me laugh at the coward. so yeah, i'll be waiting to here how is movie flops, bonus points if it sucks to.

and if that makes me a 'bigot for condemning bigots' so be it, least I'm on the side trying to fix the problem rather then perpetuate it.

Jarimir:
People weren't opposed to gay marriage until gay people started trying to get married. There was a rush in the 70's across the US to enact and reword anti-gay marriage laws specifically because the wording of the laws on the books at the time was not specific enough to exclude gay people from getting married.

We didn't start this fight, but we aim to finish it. If you think "gay rights advocates" are bullies then you are woefully ignorant of the severity of bullying we've had to endure just to get to this point. When anti-gay marriage advocates start getting beaten and/or killed and we send THEIR children to re-education camps (similar to current pray-the-gay-away camps), then you can start complaining about how intolerant we've become. I am sure we both hope it never comes to that point.

Hell even as a homosexual I don't really care about gay marriage. If heterosexuals hate us so much why should I want to emulate them, but I do resent being told specifically that I cant, that I hold some lessor status in society, because some words in a magic book say that what I do in the privacy of my bedroom with a consenting adult is wrong.

You should choose your words wisely when debating on the internet. As a true minority(and yes I mean that as it sounds), I am painfully aware of what discrimination is and the effect it has on a group of people and your assumption of prejudice/ignorance belies your own intolerance.

SOCIETY determines what it accepts. The far left/right extremists may have the loudest voices but they do NOT represent society as a whole, and your generalization of both sides of this debate is extremely misguided. You know what I resent? Being told how to think. I have no problem following rules I don't agree with, but don't tell me I have to think the way you do in order for us to have a discussion. That IS bullying and it is no better coming from you than it is from some religious nut bag.

Intolerance and hypocrisy are not exclusive to left or right, straight or gay. But YOU don't get to decide how a community should govern itself. Don't like a town where they are intolerant, don't move there. Don't like a company that doesn't agree with your lifestyle, don't buy their stuff. But don't presume to be so high and mighty that you get to dictate what people should or shouldn't believe.

Everyone has a right to think or say what they like. And IMO, as long as they are willing to accept the consequences, it is not for your or I to tell them otherwise.

Vote, rally, change the laws for protection and LEGAL equality. But don't assume your beliefs are any more valid that theirs, they are not, they should belong to you and you alone, just like everyone else.

Lunar Templar:

Woodsey:
Ah, the old "You're a bigot if you condemn bigots" switch-aroo.

Dude's got some balls.

no he doesn't. if he had a pair he wouldn't be trying to play nice now just to sell tickets to a movie that's probably gonna another generic action movie. cause, ya know, Hollywood.

anyway, wasn't gonna see this before, less desire to see it when I found out his views and this just makes me laugh at the coward. so yeah, i'll be waiting to here how is movie flops, bonus points if it sucks to.

and if that makes me a 'bigot for condemning bigots' so be it, least I'm on the side trying to fix the problem rather then perpetuate it.

I have a feeling a WHOOOOSH just happened.

Woodsey:

Lunar Templar:

Woodsey:
Ah, the old "You're a bigot if you condemn bigots" switch-aroo.

Dude's got some balls.

no he doesn't. if he had a pair he wouldn't be trying to play nice now just to sell tickets to a movie that's probably gonna another generic action movie. cause, ya know, Hollywood.

anyway, wasn't gonna see this before, less desire to see it when I found out his views and this just makes me laugh at the coward. so yeah, i'll be waiting to here how is movie flops, bonus points if it sucks to.

and if that makes me a 'bigot for condemning bigots' so be it, least I'm on the side trying to fix the problem rather then perpetuate it.

I have a feeling a WHOOOOSH just happened.

probably?

that's been know to happen with me.

Lunar Templar:

Woodsey:

Lunar Templar:

no he doesn't. if he had a pair he wouldn't be trying to play nice now just to sell tickets to a movie that's probably gonna another generic action movie. cause, ya know, Hollywood.

anyway, wasn't gonna see this before, less desire to see it when I found out his views and this just makes me laugh at the coward. so yeah, i'll be waiting to here how is movie flops, bonus points if it sucks to.

and if that makes me a 'bigot for condemning bigots' so be it, least I'm on the side trying to fix the problem rather then perpetuate it.

I have a feeling a WHOOOOSH just happened.

probably?

that's been know to happen with me.

Your first paragraph was implicit in my comment and your third paragraph took seriously an attitude I was already being flippant about.

theApoc:

Jarimir:
People weren't opposed to gay marriage until gay people started trying to get married. There was a rush in the 70's across the US to enact and reword anti-gay marriage laws specifically because the wording of the laws on the books at the time was not specific enough to exclude gay people from getting married.

We didn't start this fight, but we aim to finish it. If you think "gay rights advocates" are bullies then you are woefully ignorant of the severity of bullying we've had to endure just to get to this point. When anti-gay marriage advocates start getting beaten and/or killed and we send THEIR children to re-education camps (similar to current pray-the-gay-away camps), then you can start complaining about how intolerant we've become. I am sure we both hope it never comes to that point.

Hell even as a homosexual I don't really care about gay marriage. If heterosexuals hate us so much why should I want to emulate them, but I do resent being told specifically that I cant, that I hold some lessor status in society, because some words in a magic book say that what I do in the privacy of my bedroom with a consenting adult is wrong.

You should choose your words wisely when debating on the internet. As a true minority(and yes I mean that as it sounds), I am painfully aware of what discrimination is and the effect it has on a group of people and your assumption of prejudice/ignorance belies your own intolerance.

SOCIETY determines what it accepts. The far left/right extremists may have the loudest voices but they do NOT represent society as a whole, and your generalization of both sides of this debate is extremely misguided. You know what I resent? Being told how to think. I have no problem following rules I don't agree with, but don't tell me I have to think the way you do in order for us to have a discussion. That IS bullying and it is no better coming from you than it is from some religious nut bag.

Intolerance and hypocrisy are not exclusive to left or right, straight or gay. But YOU don't get to decide how a community should govern itself. Don't like a town where they are intolerant, don't move there. Don't like a company that doesn't agree with your lifestyle, don't buy their stuff. But don't presume to be so high and mighty that you get to dictate what people should or shouldn't believe.

Everyone has a right to think or say what they like. And IMO, as long as they are willing to accept the consequences, it is not for your or I to tell them otherwise.

Vote, rally, change the laws for protection and LEGAL equality. But don't assume your beliefs are any more valid that theirs, they are not, they should belong to you and you alone, just like everyone else.

At what point does the legalisation of gay marriage tell people what to believe?

I will argue with a homophobe that their views are immoral until the cows come home (or more likely they get bored) but I would never order them to change their beliefs and nothing that gay-marriage proponents are proposing would do that either.

The only thing that is being proposed is that a restriction is removed, allowing people who are gay to marry the people they love and having no effect on anyone else.

If you are beating me with a stick and I (or someone else) tells you to stop then I'm not being intolerant.

What does "true minority" mean that wouldn't include gay and lesbian people, a group who have a minority population and power base and often suffer discrimination and lack of opportunities because they belong to that category. They more than qualify.

Woodsey:

Lunar Templar:

Woodsey:

I have a feeling a WHOOOOSH just happened.

probably?

that's been know to happen with me.

Your first paragraph was implicit in my comment and your third paragraph took seriously an attitude I was already being flippant about.

not sure its a 'whoosh' since only the first bit was aimed at you. the rest was my 2 cents on the topic at hand in my standard 'subtle as the Forge of Solus Prime to the head' kinda way (look it up, you'll get it)

personally I'm planning to go and see the movie, this decision has nothing to do with Card

I don't care about who gets the money from the movie, i don't care about what they believe or care about,
all "I" care about in a movie is weather I like the movie or not (this remains to be seen however i enjoyed the book so *shrug*)

for the record, personally, I support gay marriage, strait marriage, marriage between people and animals or space aliens or shoes and rocks, whatever, if you feel like you want to spend the rest of your life with someone/something, regardless of gender, race, species or physical makeup, you are welcome too it, aslong as its all consensual between all parties involved

i also support the right for everyone else to have their own opinions

so no, i will not "tolerate" his bigot-ness, but i will accept it and wont hold it against him

Breaking News: Orson Scott Card is a tool!

I enjoyed Ender's Game but he's no Wagner. His work isn't so good that I can justifiably ignore what an ass he is.

Living_Brain:
There was a boycott planned?
Oh c'mon people. There's a word for you which I can't remember right now, and it's not a compliment. Why would you care about what he said? There's simply no point.

Cause it's hateful and stupid and I don't think it should be supported?

Jotver:

I actually agree with you, art is art! it does not matter what the person does if you enjoy there art enjoy it, all you do by not watching it is to deny yourself, does it really matter if a hate monger gets a bit more money? will it change anything? but for you on a personal level if you miss a great book or movie that changes you! Just imagine if Beethoven was treated the same way for what he did! But no people cared about his music not the man. At the time enjoy the art, let history ruin him.

Ok, tell that to gay people who were denied rights by his organization. Are you just going to say "it's ok, the history books will say bad things about him." ?

amaranth_dru:
Like him or not, boycotting him for disagreeing whether bigoted or just plain "I don't care for it" isn't being tolerant. Treat others as you want to be treated is a good standard to live by. Boycotting works by a man who doesn't agree with something thats a hot-button issue doesn't solve the problem, and it is detrimental to the cause they're trying to support. You may not like what he has to say, but he damn sure has the right to say it, just like you have the right to be contrary to the "accepted norm".

Martin Luther King had it right. He didn't go all aggro on people who hated on him, he took the higher road and accepted that there would always be people who didn't see or agree with his point of view.

Yeah...MLK helped organize a boycott of his own, the Montgomery Bus Boycott.
Boycotting is NOT going against freedom of speech, it's an expression.

It would be intolerant if people demanded that the movie not be shown, it would be intolerant if people threatened the actors, how is it intolerant to say "I don't think you should see this movie?"

ObsidianJones:
snip

I just wanted to thank you. Your points are on the mark.

It's funny how people like this shithead Card only define tolerance, democracy and freedom of speech as 'everything I want, and nothing else'.

I don't let a person's social beliefs dissuade me from taking an interest in their work-

MinionJoe:
I went through a phase a few months back where I was reading a lot of alternate history novels. I found a copy of Card's "Empire" at the used book store and bought it based on cover art and back cover blurb. The entire novel was about how Democrats were teaming up with terrorists to kill the president and blame it on the Republicans in order to start a new American Revolution. And the only credible news source in the entire novel was Fox News. And the only person that could stop it was a U.S. Army Major who didn't have a problem with the "dykes" so long as they minded their own business...

I'm not usually a proponent of burning books, but it combusted quite nicely.

Yeah on second thoughts I'll skip his books altogether.

I am really wary about judging peoples political and ideological beliefs before buying things from them. Lots of people who I do business with agree with Universal Healthcare. I do not. Does this mean I have to stop enjoying their work? Yahtzee has said lots of things I disagree with, doesn't change the fact that I like his videos, and will watch and support him. I generally dislike feminism*, yet don't try and boycott those who agree with it. We need to recognize that all people are, well, people. Regardless of political views, or religion, or gender, or race, or, of course, sexual orientation. We should do our best to support our own views, and accept that other peoples views are, from your perspective flawed, but just like you they are trying the best they can to form a good system of ideology and ethics. There are lines, of course, and homophobia is certainly a bad thing, but I think we can forgive him his views on marriage.

Lonewolfm16:
I am really wary about judging peoples political and ideological beliefs before buying things from them. Lots of people who I do business with agree with Universal Healthcare. I do not. Does this mean I have to stop enjoying their work? Yahtzee has said lots of things I disagree with, doesn't change the fact that I like his videos, and will watch and support him. I generally dislike feminism*, yet don't try and boycott those who agree with it.

If all those people do is say "I support Universal Healthcare", for example, then boycotting them is a bit of an overreaction. If those people are part of political actions to enforce universal healthcare onto you and the rest of the population... would you keep supporting their businesses?

If one of them wrote an editorial in a newspaper that said "Universal Healthcare is simply caring about everyone equally, and those who don't support Universal Healthcare are greedy, evil people who only care about themselves. They've got theirs, everyone else can screw off. This attitude is entirely UnAmerican and we must do everything in our power to force these people to comply." would you still support their business?

Or would you take your business somewhere else, and tell people why you're taking your business somewhere else?

Lonewolfm16:
We need to recognize that all people are, well, people. Regardless of political views, or religion, or gender, or race, or, of course, sexual orientation. We should do our best to support our own views, and accept that other peoples views are, from your perspective flawed, but just like you they are trying the best they can to form a good system of ideology and ethics. There are lines, of course, and homophobia is certainly a bad thing, but I think we can forgive him his views on marriage.

You can. A large number of people - myself included - draw that line somewhere else, and we aren't going to give our money to him anymore. We're also making sure that we advertise why we aren't giving him our money anymore and encouraging others to do so as well. And we certainly aren't going to forgive him his views on marriage in any way, shape or form.

Nor should we.

Intolerant bastards asking for tolerance. Oh the irony,.

Lieju:
Boycotting is going 'I don't want to give you my money, and will tell other people not to give you money'.

That's what many critics do. "This is a bad movie, don't go see it."

How uncivilized.

That's not boycotting, that's taking advice. I have no issue with forgoing a movie, book or whatever because it sucks. I've never bought one of thise man's books because they don't interest me. But boycotting because he disagrees with a political view is what I disagree with. I don't think politics belong in the fields of entertainment, literature, academia, sports, science or medicine.

I don't have a problem with Card's privately held beliefs. I do have a problem with using money and influence in the media to push his beliefs on others out of a sense of righteousness, and anyone who thinks it's the government's JOB to 'regulate normalcy' is assbiscuit-crazy, IMO. I am NOT going to see 'Ender's Game'.

Card is homophobic, yes. However, up until a couple of years ago when you bought Nestle products they were produced largely by literal child slaves. I'd venture to guess that most of the clothing everyone posting here is wearing was made in sweatshop conditions. Isn't that more morally outrageous than an old man not liking gay people?

Damn near every product we all buy supports actual physical oppression. Until you can claim all of your goods are fair trade, boycotting a movie because of a powerless opinion its creator holds is morally naive.

I will see this film because the book was good.

edit - I do have to admit though that the timing of Card's somewhat retracting statement proves him to be as much a coward as any other frightened old man who doesn't understand a changing world. I don't hate him for it personally though, I just look forward to the eventual passing of his generation.

theApoc:
Um, you people do know that the power/responsibility being pushed back on the states is not akin to "gay marriage becoming law throughout the land", right?

Folks, I hate to break it to you, intolerance, especially when it comes under voicing an opinion, is not a crime. Being passionate about beliefs, also, not a crime. The vilification of anyone with different ideals is a far bigger problem for EVERYONE than whether or not a gay couple can get married. I used to be for gay marriage. Now I only support legal protections and equality for ANYONE who wants to share their estate. The hypocrisy of "gay rights" advocates is appalling to me and I refuse to condone that type of social bullying.

We ALL, gay, straight, and otherwise, CHOOSE the people we love. We are not pre-destined to be one way or another. That CHOICE is ours to make and we should ALL be free to make it. Cohabitation law as well as legal binding of estate should have always been the focal point of this argument. I should be able to CHOOSE who I partner with from a legal standpoint. Love, religion, marriage, that is not something that can or should be legislated by anyone. You can't make a law that makes people tolerant and we shouldn't be trying.

Card should have left his beliefs out of his work, separated the two. And if he can't, he should be willing to accept the consequences. Pandering to the masses is more offensive than anything he has said about his beliefs.

And for the record, being a bigot is not exclusive to the people against gay marriage, both sides of this coin are far too intolerant for my tastes...

I am not an expert on American Law, but while throwing the decision back to the states does not make it "gay marriage throughout the land" as it were, it does do two crucial things:
1. Delegate the decision to the states
2. Dictate that it is unconstitutional for states to create an institution that is like marriage but inferior in legal standing.

So, states can call it what they want, but in order to exist as a law that cannot be challenged, it has to comply with the equality aspect. So, separate but equal isn't quite there, but is almost there and in the states represents a good start.

I will show you the same tolerance that you have shown me and mine, Mr. Card.

You shall sit down with me and partake of the meal you have served me. You might learn a thing or two about empathy.

"Rights" Okay, sure internet, sure...

2012 Wont Happen:
Card is homophobic, yes. However, up until a couple of years ago when you bought Nestle products they were produced largely by literal child slaves. I'd venture to guess that most of the clothing everyone posting here is wearing was made in sweatshop conditions. Isn't that more morally outrageous than an old man not liking gay people?

Damn near every product we all buy supports actual physical oppression. Until you can claim all of your goods are fair trade, boycotting a movie because of a powerless opinion its creator holds is morally naive.

Is outrage an all-or-nothing thing, now? Can someone dislike one thing only if they exhaustively search for anything remotely (as your example is, at best, several tangents removed from the topic at hand) similar to one thing they dislike and make sure to only start disliking anything after completing such a search? If you're on this forum--or using consumer electronics at all--you're almost certainly using products made via (essentially) slave labor, constructed using conflict minerals, and that poor people in places you've never seen have died or suffered for.

This has to be the weirdest approach to supporting OSC (and his efforts to deny US citizens legal rights) I've seen, yet. I guess I'll give points for nonsensical creativity. (I am baffled by the phrases "powerless opinion" and "morally naive" though.)

bravetoaster:

2012 Wont Happen:
Card is homophobic, yes. However, up until a couple of years ago when you bought Nestle products they were produced largely by literal child slaves. I'd venture to guess that most of the clothing everyone posting here is wearing was made in sweatshop conditions. Isn't that more morally outrageous than an old man not liking gay people?

Damn near every product we all buy supports actual physical oppression. Until you can claim all of your goods are fair trade, boycotting a movie because of a powerless opinion its creator holds is morally naive.

Is outrage an all-or-nothing thing, now? Can someone dislike one thing only if they exhaustively search for anything remotely (as your example is, at best, several tangents removed from the topic at hand) similar to one thing they dislike and make sure to only start disliking anything after completing such a search? If you're on this forum--or using consumer electronics at all--you're almost certainly using products made via (essentially) slave labor, constructed using conflict minerals, and that poor people in places you've never seen have died or suffered for.

This has to be the weirdest approach to supporting OSC (and his efforts to deny US citizens legal rights) I've seen, yet. I guess I'll give points for nonsensical creativity. (I am baffled by the phrases "powerless opinion" and "morally naive" though.)

Outrage isn't all or nothing, but come now. If you aren't willing to put in the effort to fight objectively more egregious crimes against humanity than an ultimately powerless old homophobe getting money from a movie adaptation of his book then you're actions aren't guided by caring for humanity. If care for humanity was the source of your outrage you would be madder still at the more intense exploitation that produces your goods than a group not being allowed marriage rights. While bad, I'd rather not be allowed to get married than to be paid cents an hour and later left for dead when dangerous work conditions got the better of me. I'm sure the same would hold true for you. If you are not more outraged by death and physical exploitation than laws about who can sign what contracts then your outrage is valueless.

Furthermore, it is morally naive. It is naive to think you are a responsible consumer for not buying a ticket to Ender's Game when you continue to buy products that support slavery and death throughout the globe. It's something for people to sit around and pat themselves on the back for, thinking "look at me, aren't I such a considerate individual voting with my dollar", when at the end of the day what you're actually accomplishing is not seeing a movie that many on this forum would probably like and saving yourself a few bucks.

If you don't want to see the movie, that's fine, but don't act like you not seeing a movie does a damn thing if that's the extent of your efforts. If you want to help the gay community, this is about the most lazy way to go about that and it is laughable for almost anyone here to act like not seeing this movie gives them a moral high ground. If I see this film, you don't, and we're both wearing Nike, congratulations, neither of us can talk when it comes to supporting evil people with our money.

Ender's Game, the short story was pretty good when it fist came out. Everything past that was not worth reading, IMHO. That includes his views on not living a Mormon approved life. Or his pleas for money so he can continue to actively promote bigotry based laws. Coming for a Mormon the whole my bigotry is okay but your bigotry isn't is actually sort of funny. And just a little gay.

2012 Wont Happen:

bravetoaster:

2012 Wont Happen:
Card is homophobic, yes. However, up until a couple of years ago when you bought Nestle products they were produced largely by literal child slaves. I'd venture to guess that most of the clothing everyone posting here is wearing was made in sweatshop conditions. Isn't that more morally outrageous than an old man not liking gay people?

Damn near every product we all buy supports actual physical oppression. Until you can claim all of your goods are fair trade, boycotting a movie because of a powerless opinion its creator holds is morally naive.

Is outrage an all-or-nothing thing, now? Can someone dislike one thing only if they exhaustively search for anything remotely (as your example is, at best, several tangents removed from the topic at hand) similar to one thing they dislike and make sure to only start disliking anything after completing such a search? If you're on this forum--or using consumer electronics at all--you're almost certainly using products made via (essentially) slave labor, constructed using conflict minerals, and that poor people in places you've never seen have died or suffered for.

This has to be the weirdest approach to supporting OSC (and his efforts to deny US citizens legal rights) I've seen, yet. I guess I'll give points for nonsensical creativity. (I am baffled by the phrases "powerless opinion" and "morally naive" though.)

Outrage isn't all or nothing, but come now. If you aren't willing to put in the effort to fight objectively more egregious crimes against humanity than an ultimately powerless old homophobe getting money from a movie adaptation of his book then you're actions aren't guided by caring for humanity. If care for humanity was the source of your outrage you would be madder still at the more intense exploitation that produces your goods than a group not being allowed marriage rights. While bad, I'd rather not be allowed to get married than to be paid cents an hour and later left for dead when dangerous work conditions got the better of me. I'm sure the same would hold true for you. If you are not more outraged by death and physical exploitation than laws about who can sign what contracts then your outrage is valueless.

Furthermore, it is morally naive. It is naive to think you are a responsible consumer for not buying a ticket to Ender's Game when you continue to buy products that support slavery and death throughout the globe. It's something for people to sit around and pat themselves on the back for, thinking "look at me, aren't I such a considerate individual voting with my dollar", when at the end of the day what you're actually accomplishing is not seeing a movie that many on this forum would probably like and saving yourself a few bucks.

If you don't want to see the movie, that's fine, but don't act like you not seeing a movie does a damn thing if that's the extent of your efforts. If you want to help the gay community, this is about the most lazy way to go about that and it is laughable for almost anyone here to act like not seeing this movie gives them a moral high ground. If I see this film, you don't, and we're both wearing Nike, congratulations, neither of us can talk when it comes to supporting evil people with our money.

1) Card is neither powerless nor harmless. See the rest of the thread (or Card's wikipedia entry. Or any of his actions relating to NOM or oppressing homosexuals.)

2) You're making massive assumptions about a lot of people with no real basis for it--given that it's completely off-topic, there's no way for you to know what non-OSC things people in this thread (or who object to Card's words and actions) think. No one's claiming moral perfection in this thread (so far as I'm aware--I certainly wouldn't) or that they are "responsible consumers [because of their dislike of Card and unwillingness to support his products]."

3) Equating Card's direct actions against other Americans with immoral manufacturing practices of massive, diffuse, global corporate entities does not work (on several levels).

4) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nirvana_fallacy -- just because real-life solutions to problems are imperfect does not mean those solutions are invalid.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here