Ender's Game Author Asks For Tolerance After Boycott Threat

[Karloff]

Ender's Game Author Asks For Tolerance After Boycott Threat

Orson Scott Card thinks the gay marriage issue is moot.

Orson Scott Card, writer of Ender's Game [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/123823-Enders-Game-Trailer-is-Finally-Here], has said some pretty awful things in the past about gay marriage. It "marks the end of democracy in America" according to a piece he wrote for the Mormon Times. In that same article he goes on to say that "when government is the enemy of marriage, then the people who are actually creating successful marriages have no choice but to change governments, by whatever means is made possible or necessary." Things have changed since then, and a potential boycott of his film now has Card pleading for tolerance. The gay marriage issue is moot after the recent Supreme Court decision, says he; can't we all just get along?

"Ender's Game is set more than a century in the future and has nothing to do with political issues that did not exist when the book was written in 1984," Card now says. He is resigned to gay marriage becoming law [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/125413-SCOTUS-Overturns-Ban-on-Same-Sex-Marriage] throughout the land. "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.

An interesting plea, given that tolerance was definitely not on Card's agenda, at least not before his wallet was threatened. But time and bank balances soften even the harshest of critics into mild curmudgeons. Perhaps this is the dawn of a new Age of Aquarius [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=06X5HYynP5E]. We shall see.

Source: Mormon Times [http://insidemovies.ew.com/2013/07/08/enders-game-orson-scott-card-statement/]


Permalink

 

[Miyenne]

I really enjoyed his books, I've read them several times and probably will again.

But he'll never have any more of my money.

 

[Phrozenflame500]

"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.

And the "it's bigoted it hate bigots" dog rears it's ugly ahead again.

Tell you what Card, I'd happily stop throwing shit at you once you stop spewing shit at everyone else.

 

[Thaluikhain]

An interesting plea, given that tolerance was definitely not on Card's agenda, at least not before his wallet was threatened.

Spoiler: Reminds me of this

Relevant bit starts at 2:14

I also like how he pretends that people in favour of equality have won.

 

[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.

EDIT: I now see hate coming my way. Oh well. Not gonna retract.

 

[Fdzzaigl]

Honestly, I don't care what he said in regards to viewing the film or not. A few years back almost 30% of my country voted for an extremist party and today over 30% votes for a party that I really don't agree with.

However, when I go to the baker and grocer or when some other tradesman comes around to fix stuff in the house, I don't question or regard their political or ideological thinking either (even though the chance that some of them voted for said extremists is high). It's the work they do or the product they sell that's important.

I think the same way about the book and film: judge those things on their own merits.

You can judge the person of the author outside of that.

 

[Flatfrog]

Tell you what Card, I'd happily stop throwing shit at you once you stop spewing shit at everyone else.

Are you perhaps thinking of this?


Cyanide & Happiness @ Explosm.net [http://www.explosm.net/]
Read more at http://www.explosm.net/comics/3224/#3PbJgD1kqeiOoDq8.99

 

[Grouchy Imp_v1legacy]

Err, that's not how it works Card. If you want people to be tolerant towards you, you must be tolerant towards them.

 

[Lieju]

Yeah you have no right to ask for tolerance asshole.
"Well they better treat me better then I treated them."

And it's not like 'I don't think you deserve my money' is anywhere the same as 'I don't think you deserve equal rights.'

 

[Mumorpuger]

Unless a person incorporates their particular brand of prejudice into their works, I separate the creator from the creation. It seems like most people can't do that though.

 

[Legion]

"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.

Uh... why should they? Tolerating bigotry isn't a good thing you know, and claiming people are bigots for not tolerating bigotry is just idiotic.

It's akin to saying people who judge criminals are bigoted against criminals. You see, it's actually okay to be intolerant of people who do bad things.

 

[Charli]

Gee could he have been encouraged to 'soften' his views in the wake of his big movie release?

That's a yes. He is.

 

[Eppy (Bored)]

I'm never spending another cent on one of his properties. Yes, I DO think that an author's political opinions, if an author makes them public, should and indeed must color subsequent interpretations of (and the value of) their work, because LITERARY CRITICISM. Also, a man who can demand that we tolerate intolerance has...issues with reality.

Disclaimer: Speaker for the Dead is my favorite book OF ALL TIME U GAIZ.

 

[Zombie_Moogle]

...and then he remembered that LGBT's also buy movie tickets. Funny how that works

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.

EDIT: I now see hate coming my way. Oh well. Not gonna retract.

It's quite simple actually. He has the right to say whatever he wants, but that doesn't mean he'll escape consequences of what he chooses to say.

i.e.: He can choose to be a bigot, & those he offends can choose not to give him money.

Ain't capitalism grand?

 

[Flatfrog]

It's akin to saying people who judge criminals are bigoted against criminals. You see, it's actually okay to be intolerant of people who do bad things.

With my Devil's Advocate hat on again, it might be said that homophobes believe gay people *do* 'bad things' - and they would be in the moral majority in most places and centuries too. So in that respect I don't think it's entirely unreasonable for him to ask us to tolerate his views. Which I do. I just don't want to give him any money to spend on propagating them.

 

[jetriot]

Honestly, I don't care what he said in regards to viewing the film or not. A few years back almost 30% of my country voted for an extremist party and today over 30% votes for a party that I really don't agree with.

However, when I go to the baker and grocer or when some other tradesman comes around to fix stuff in the house, I don't question or regard their political or ideological thinking either (even though the chance that some of them voted for said extremists is high). It's the work they do or the product they sell that's important.

I think the same way about the book and game: judge those things on their own merits.

You can judge the person of the author outside of that.

THIS! People sit on their high and mighty horses seeking to destroy others for their political/social/religious opinions when it is they who are seeking to destroy free speech with boycotts. They make people afraid to dissent or speak their mind because it is politically incorrect. In the past I fell for the same traps until I realized that my boycotts were simply a tool of political correctness and speech policing. His opinion is VALID. We disagree with his opinion but we don't want to make other people afraid to have the same opinion and voice it.