Do you mean the Holocaust in particular, or anti-semitism in general? Cause the first doesn't work so well in context.amaranth_dru said:
Enders Game studio releases statement on Orson Scott Card's views
- Thread starter Saucycarpdog
- Start date
My point is this, there are people who have been oppressed for just being what they are for a long damn time, and still are. Its a neverending cycle, and its in us to do this to each other. Everyone has it, its called prejudgment. We see something we don't like, don't understand, don't do ourselves and we automatically dislike it, the person its connected to, etc. And generally traits are shared by many people, of different walks. Jews have had the longest history of oppression. One should consult them on how they deal with it (still happening millenia after Egypt's domination of the tribe).thaluikhain said:
I for one do not give any one group my full bleeding heart because there are so many damn groups of the oppressed that they all seem to jumble up.
I just hope one day I don't ever see pedophilia become the next "civil right".
Personally I have no problem with people's sexual orientation. I just generally don't always believe humanity is really capable of getting along globally, across the board.
And we all have the right in the US to say how we feel, even if it makes us come off like douchebags.
Tolerance isn't always acceptance. Its saying "I don't like it, but I can't stop it."
Sometimes I think in a way, we're all bigots at some level.
I wish we all could get along, I really do... Equal rights though is just equal misery.
Excuse me for rambling, but human nature is a tangential topic for me.
Ah, if I understand you, that's fair enough. I agree that we are all bigots to some degree, but this is something we can learn to more or less keep a lid on.amaranth_dru said:
However, Card isn't saying "I don't like gay people, but I will put up with them". He called for a revolution to overthrow the US government in 2008 for tolerating gay people, IIRC, and believes that gay people should be locked up in camps.
That's a fair cry from tolerating something he doesn't approve of.
Orson Scott Card and people like him always raise one question in my head;
"What if my view in life was only good enough for me?"
It really gives me inner peace. Knowing that while I might be very, very weird to someone else, it's ok because I'm only responsible and I only need to be true to me. My way of thinking, being, and acting came about because it was correct for me. That brings happiness to me.
I support Card's views as it's the views he has for himself. They work for him. Be he well and happy. But then he called for others to think like him. To subject a people to a punishment or ostracization because he can not get on board with how these people are living their lives. Can you see the difference? His views are perfectly ok (even if I vehemently don't agree with them), and he's free to have them. But the second he tries to create and enforce change that limits other people's views he becomes an asshat that I feel needs to be stopped.
Do whatever you want to do, do it with like minded people, have a freaking party. But when your actions limits or harms others to do likewise, anyone who wishes for that type of freedom should rise up and stop it. Freedom and the ability to express for all, or for none.
(and before people say the idea is hypocritical, I said freedom to express. He can express his distaste for gays marrying. Do it. But he can not infringe the freedom of gays actually expressing their love the way all humans should be able to.)
"What if my view in life was only good enough for me?"
It really gives me inner peace. Knowing that while I might be very, very weird to someone else, it's ok because I'm only responsible and I only need to be true to me. My way of thinking, being, and acting came about because it was correct for me. That brings happiness to me.
I support Card's views as it's the views he has for himself. They work for him. Be he well and happy. But then he called for others to think like him. To subject a people to a punishment or ostracization because he can not get on board with how these people are living their lives. Can you see the difference? His views are perfectly ok (even if I vehemently don't agree with them), and he's free to have them. But the second he tries to create and enforce change that limits other people's views he becomes an asshat that I feel needs to be stopped.
Do whatever you want to do, do it with like minded people, have a freaking party. But when your actions limits or harms others to do likewise, anyone who wishes for that type of freedom should rise up and stop it. Freedom and the ability to express for all, or for none.
(and before people say the idea is hypocritical, I said freedom to express. He can express his distaste for gays marrying. Do it. But he can not infringe the freedom of gays actually expressing their love the way all humans should be able to.)
They can complain about the 'great injustice' of the Zimmerman trial then.Desert Punk said:
Complaining about either one isn't going to change anyone's mind because you can't convince the other side and the vast majority of people who don't care are just going to get annoyed at you for it.
I'm liking the use of the word "literally". Americans will be broken and flattened when the gays take over. Seems legit.AccursedTheory said:For some reason, this made me think of the gay roller. Even though you didn't really describe it.
When I was a child there was a parade every day. Those were dark times...AJvsRonin said:
OT: It's good to know all the money won't go to funding homophobic organizations, the sad part is part of the money still will. Damn, this is the Chik-fil-a dilemma all over again.
If you think hundreds of years of imperialism, ignorance, bigotry and hatred can be solved because some old men made a few vague laws and some idealistic kids protested for better rights, then I want to visit whatever messed up fantasy world your livin because that place sounds fantastic.fi6eka said:
Also, Bulgarian or not, your English needs a little work there.
I think that you underestimate the influence of the internet.Zhukov said:
You can spread information to millions of people in a matter of minutes.
"A few people on the internet" have managed to stop things like SOPA (because it sure weren't the mainstream media), plus homosexuality is the big social topic these days so I don't think it would be too hard to rally people against both Card and the studio.
The studio knows that if they won't distance themselves from Card's views, it will lead to a bad reputation and might even translate to their future movies flopping.
Have you seen Hollywood Homicide or Firewall?Ikasury said:
The reality is that the message sent by Ender's Game is totally contrary to that posed by Scott Card himself. Arguably the themes are less obvious in Ender's Game as they are in the sequels, but his writings continually promote tolerance, personal moral relativism and the value of diversity. Therefore, it's totally irrelevant if Orson Scott Card himself is a bigot - he somehow managed to produce works of literature which do the opposite of further his social and moral beliefs. Given that, it's desirable that people should watch Ender's Game and be exposed to those ideas which are entirely positive for groups like the LGBT-rights movement. Regardless of his personal leanings, his literature sends the right message.FargoDog said:
How dare we not want our money going to evil causes! Jesus Christ people are so fucking quick to go "OH MY GOD THEY'RE JUST WHINING! THEY WANT TO LOOK ALL COOL".Desert Punk said:
The views of someone who gets the royalties of a work are important because buying that work gives money, and if said person gives money to promoting their idiotic and evil views than money you spend on work goes to promoting those evil views.
I can't find a source one way or another But really, the guy made a statement asking for 'tolerance' for his views when asking people not to boycott the film...I'd imagine he'd mention that he doesn't have a personal financial stake in the movie if he just wanted people to watch it and he wasn't getting paid.Desert Punk said:
I don't get what the big deal is? Yes, Mr card wrote the book and yes he has views that nor very open. But, can anybody guarantee that every single movie, book, piece of music, video game, food from a restaurant. That every single person who is responsible for getting that product to you is a good person.
What if the main camera operator on the Avengers was a racist or more extreme in there views the Mr Card. Should that mean we shouldn't go and see the movie?.If the desert chef at your favorite restaurant hates gays should you boycott the entire restaurant?
No, because there are a lot of other people at work at the restaurant. Same thing with the movie, if boycotting the movie means the company goes under and people lose there jobs. Then the stress leads to divorces and kids growing up without mothers and fathers and they only reason they have is that the LBGT wanted to teach an author a lesson. Well, then they will grow up hating the LBGT community and the cycle of violence would just continue again.
Before any one says how ridicolous that is, so too is the suggestion that it is morally right to not see this movie as it can only lead to funding attacks on LGBT
If someone could show me that Enders Game isn't a fantastical space but actually a cunning satire and the evil aliens are actual Orsons interpertation of LGBT people and Ender and his army are the Straight Edge superstars. Then I wouldn't want to support hate propoganda. But, while it is just a well written book
But, until Orson physically harms a LGBT individual then I will watch the films and even buy his Superman comics if the internet lets him write the great stories that he can and does.
What if the main camera operator on the Avengers was a racist or more extreme in there views the Mr Card. Should that mean we shouldn't go and see the movie?.If the desert chef at your favorite restaurant hates gays should you boycott the entire restaurant?
No, because there are a lot of other people at work at the restaurant. Same thing with the movie, if boycotting the movie means the company goes under and people lose there jobs. Then the stress leads to divorces and kids growing up without mothers and fathers and they only reason they have is that the LBGT wanted to teach an author a lesson. Well, then they will grow up hating the LBGT community and the cycle of violence would just continue again.
Before any one says how ridicolous that is, so too is the suggestion that it is morally right to not see this movie as it can only lead to funding attacks on LGBT
If someone could show me that Enders Game isn't a fantastical space but actually a cunning satire and the evil aliens are actual Orsons interpertation of LGBT people and Ender and his army are the Straight Edge superstars. Then I wouldn't want to support hate propoganda. But, while it is just a well written book
But, until Orson physically harms a LGBT individual then I will watch the films and even buy his Superman comics if the internet lets him write the great stories that he can and does.
Always hilarious when people accuse the LGBT community of whining when it was tantrums from Card that started the whole thing.Henrik Knudsen said:
He handled the matter with the aplomb of a two year old in a tantrum, but yes, it's the gays who are "whining."
I think that's flawed logic. You don't know that any given item in your kitchen isn't harmful; that doesn't mean you just go ahead and drink bleach or rat poison.terrangray said:
You don't know that any given person isn't a child molester. That doesn't mean you let the guy on the national sex offender registry watch your kids.
Those examples too harsh? Fine, let's go with a consumer service.
You can't guarantee that nobody in any given restaurant ISN'T spitting in your food. However, if someone is spitting in your food, do you shrug, say "well, can anyone guarantee there isn't spit in your food" and eat it anyway?
I can't really boycott Card, because I don't give a crap about his work, but at the same time, you're comparing imagined offense to a very real one. In this case, a man who has put money into denying gays rights, it's not illogical to refuse to give him more money to put towards it. In this case especially, the man is on the board for NOM.
Speaking of....
Perhaps English is not your first language, but people aren't saying it can "only" go to it. I'm not sure if you're intentionally misphrasing this as part of reductum ad absurdum or you just don't speak English all that well.
As a gay guy reading these comments makes me laugh.
Aside from Orson being a bigoted piece of work funding a disgusting organization, it was amusing to see Lionsgate basically making an appeal to LGBTQ+ folks to spend their money despite the collaboration with that author to bring the movie to the big screen. Corporations use to gleefully trample on representations of Queer and Trans* people in their films (still do in a lot of cases). But now that we're supposedly a profitable demographic, they now appeal for 'pink dollars' while their actions speak louder than words.
I support same-sex marriage, but of all the issues that affect LGBTQ+ people everyday I wouldn't have placed it as a high priority. So him thinking gay marriage is the end of civilization? Zero fucks given, he's delusional. But corporations making fake appeals to us for profit seems just as much an insult.
The studio producers and director knew they were getting themselves into the day they received the first edits of the screenplay. Orson has never been discreet about his views, he wrote a children's book featuring a pedophile main villain for crying out loud!
I've read Enders Game, bought it for .5 cents at a use bookstore so that no profit went toward the author. It was good, but the people on this thread saying that their nerd love trumps worrying about issues that have been mentioned in several posts already is pretty shallow. This contempt for even slightly acknowledging oppression and suffering in the geek community really bugs the hell out of me.
Aside from Orson being a bigoted piece of work funding a disgusting organization, it was amusing to see Lionsgate basically making an appeal to LGBTQ+ folks to spend their money despite the collaboration with that author to bring the movie to the big screen. Corporations use to gleefully trample on representations of Queer and Trans* people in their films (still do in a lot of cases). But now that we're supposedly a profitable demographic, they now appeal for 'pink dollars' while their actions speak louder than words.
I support same-sex marriage, but of all the issues that affect LGBTQ+ people everyday I wouldn't have placed it as a high priority. So him thinking gay marriage is the end of civilization? Zero fucks given, he's delusional. But corporations making fake appeals to us for profit seems just as much an insult.
The studio producers and director knew they were getting themselves into the day they received the first edits of the screenplay. Orson has never been discreet about his views, he wrote a children's book featuring a pedophile main villain for crying out loud!
I've read Enders Game, bought it for .5 cents at a use bookstore so that no profit went toward the author. It was good, but the people on this thread saying that their nerd love trumps worrying about issues that have been mentioned in several posts already is pretty shallow. This contempt for even slightly acknowledging oppression and suffering in the geek community really bugs the hell out of me.
It's a sci-fi movie, the chances of anyone not regularly spending time on the internet going to see it is slim at bestZhukov said:
Henrik Knudsen said:
Please, tell me more about how you get beaten up by police for being straight.Henrik Knudsen said: