View Single Post
Old July 10 2013, 05:24 AM   #96
Locutus of Bored
A Certain Point of View
 
Locutus of Bored's Avatar
 
Location: The Force
Re: Orson Scott Card "Please don't boycott my film!"

theenglish wrote: View Post
If you're referring to my reference about Bradbury, he stated that F451 is NOT about government censorship. Rather it is about the dangers of what later became political correctness. In the novel, the people demanded that books be censored because they were offended by racial slurs or content that offended people.
Yes, that's true. He also said it was about people no longer reading books in the future because of the invention of TV. So what?

Bottom line is, owning books was illegal, and possession of them meant you would be arrested and your home would be burned down. What entity wrote and enforced the law? Who employed the "firemen" who burned down the homes and books? The government. That's government censorship, regardless of how it got started with political correctness among the populace.

Bradbury is simply saying that government censorship was not his chief focus when he wrote it. Nuclear war was also not the chief focus of the novel, that doesn't mean it didn't happen in the book.

What were you talking about when you said this in the post I was responding to:

I am reminded of Fahrenheit 451. Books became illegal not because of an evil dictator but because they offended people. Part of living in a democracy means that we are all entitled to our opinions and are free to express them.

Books don't become illegal spontaneously. A government has to enforce that, whether it's the will of the people or not. Why talk about living in a democracy and freedom of expression unless you're talking about the possibility of those rights being taken away by the government?

The bottom line is, you're worrying about something which is not even an issue. His books aren't being banned. His movie isn't being banned. His writings in magazines and blogs aren't being banned. Some people are simply not going to see the movie. That's it. It's a paper tiger issue to drum up fear of something that no one here is asking for, and it's an attempt to mischaracterize the arguments of one's opponents.

By all means, we should voice our opinions against those of somebody like Card's in healthy, rationale debate -- but we should not try to censor him from having those opinions, as offensive as they are to most of us.
Again, who is censoring him? Not going to see his movie is not censoring him. The movie will still be in theaters.

This is not being "tolerant" of bigots, but it is defending their right to BE bigots if they so choose.
A right no one here is advocating should be taken away. So, congratulations once again on fighting the good fight against the thing no one was asking for.

DalekJim wrote: View Post
People have the right not to go watch Ender's Game, They do not have the right to never be offended, and their desire not to be upset should not affect other people's freedoms and happiness.
Whose freedoms are being trampled on or taken away? You just keep repeating this like a mantra. What, do you hope that if you say it enough times it'll suddenly become true and you will have been proven right?

As far as OSC's happiness is concerned, I don't give two shits about the happiness of a bigoted scumbag who advocates the violent overthrow of the government if it legalizes same-sex marriage and who thinks gays should be thrown in prison. Fuck his happiness.

Aggressive political correctness has only served to make liberals more sensitive when they do see material offensive to them.
You know, liberals aren't like Beetlejuice or Bloody Mary. They don't suddenly appear if you keep saying "Liberal! Liberal! Liberal!" over and over again like a broken record. You're the only one who's mentioned political ideologies in this thread. Everyone else has just stuck to the issue. Why don't you give it a try?

If people don't want to see Ender's Game because it'll upset them so much being reminded of the author's views regarding marital legislation, then that is fine. Weird, but fine.
There's nothing weird about not wanting to support a bigot who has used his money to affect legislation against gay people. It has nothing to do with being upset, like we're delicate flowers who can't handle the idea of a homophobe being out there.

If they don't want Orson Scott Card to receive their money because of his opinions, then that is also fine.
Then what the fuck is all the drama from your side in this thread about, since that is literally all that has been proposed?

But dismissing the book itself as being homophobic is infuriating to me.
One guy did it and was corrected by people on both sides of the issue. BFD. Get over it.

Shaka Zulu wrote: View Post
There's a really good other reason not to support either the book or the movie; the fact that it supports child soldiering indirectly by having Ender Wiggin and his pals be fighting a war. Why can't the Earth Government or whatever it's called just have a planetary draft, and get the troops it needs to fight the war that way? Why involve children?
Because that's what made the story interesting, especially for young readers who could relate to Ender and the other kids. To imply that it supports child soldiers in ludicrous. Christopher Nolan doesn't support vigilantism just because he directed Batman movies.

theenglish wrote: View Post
In some countries (Canada) this would be considered hate-speech. It is illegal. You cannot slur people just because of who they are.
I'm not even sure what your point is here. Are you commenting about it being illegal to use hate speech against gays or to call someone a douche (since that's the only thing in the post you quoted) in Canada?

Either way, neither myself nor Card live in Canada, so their hate speech laws are kind of a moot point here, and I will continue to call him a douche or worse with glee.

I believe that getting emotional and using emotionally charged arguments does nothing to further one's agenda and only alienates those who already disagree with your argument. As DalekJim mentioned, there are already people slurring others just because of a disagreement about the quality of Ender's Game itself or wanting to see the film. This was where my (admittedly exaggerated) comparison with the Westboro Baptist's came from.
Sorry, but the emotionally charged arguments about non-issues have been entirely on your and Jim's side of the discussion.

No one was talking about protesting the film until you brought it up. No one was talking about those protestors screaming epithets at movie goers until you brought it up (you admit to the exaggerated comparison about the WBC above). No one was talking about censorship until you brought it up. No one was talking about hate speech laws until you brought it up. The one and only thing people have been talking about is a boycott of the film by not buying tickets. That's not censorship, that's not infringing on anyone's rights, and it's not a protest in front of the theater (though if they eventually decide to do that, that's their right too). There will simply be fewer people at the theater, period. You guys are completely overreacting and getting defensive about a nothing situation.

Not going to this movie is a fine choice--getting so emotionally riled up (as some people on this board are) that you need to shout insults at people is unnecessary.
People have been perfectly fine despite repeated misrepresentations of their arguments.

And me typing insults about OSC is not shouting insults at a person, by the way, if that's what you're carrying on about. Though I'd gladly call him a bigot to his face if given the opportunity.
__________________
My name is Ozymandias, king of kings: Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!
Nothing beside remains. Round the decay
Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare
The lone and level sands stretch far away.
Locutus of Bored is offline   Reply With Quote