Brent Hartinger ([info]brentsbrain) wrote,
@ 2008-07-30 21:22:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
New Vlog! The Wrap (With Two Gay Guys)
It's the debut of our new vlog, where we "wrap up" the week's gay entertainment news! This week...homophobia in the new X-Files movie, why the critics might be dissing Mamma Mia!, and the controversy/debate over some extremely bigoted comments by science fiction writer Orson Scott Card, after the jump!

Gay video from AfterElton.com

It's all cool,

Brent Hartinger


My Books:

* Dreamquest
* Split Screen: Attack of the Soul-Sucking Brain Zombies/Bride of the Soul-Sucking Brain Zombies
* Grand & Humble
* The Order of the Poison Oak
* The Last Chance Texaco
* Geography Club

Explore "Brent's Brain"



(Post a new comment)


[info]tychoish
2008-07-31 01:07 pm UTC (link)
So I totally agree with you about being ambivalent about OSC. His books aren't nearly as politically dispicable as his comments in real life, and I think honestly, the books, not the one off comments are going to be his legacy.

I further rationalize by thinking that we're all more likely to radicalize a bit when we're on our own turf. I can think of ways that I'm probably "too radical" when I know my audience is other queer folk, vs. when I'm writing/speaking to a more mixed crowd, and I imagine that OSC is the same way. I mean, that doesn't make it better, but I think it makes it easier to not feel betrayed by what he says in those cases. Because while it sucks that he says these things in a very real way, I wasn't in any way surprised by these things; though I agree, if he wants to loose the homophobe criticism, this isn't the way to be doing it.

Speaking of, the biggest problem with his essay is, I think, not that it's bigoted, but that it's entirely nonsensical. He seems to fundamentally confuse (as many do) the whole separation between church and state issue. I mean if he had said something at the end to the effect of "since civil-sanctioned marriage is by nature fundamentally different than spiritual/religious ergo "real" marriage, then it doesn't matter if the government lets gays marry," the logic would hang together better, and we'd be saying "there OSC goes being a little off, but generally not despicable" as I, at least, have been saying for years.

So, in the end, I dunno. I'll probably still see the movie, if it ever gets made.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]brentsbrain
2008-08-02 07:29 pm UTC (link)
I'm surprised he can write coherent books given how INCOHERENT the essay is. His characters can seem quite intelligent in his books. Makes me think that this is a topic that forces him to lose all perspective and go completely psycho. Weird.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]tychoish
2008-08-02 10:42 pm UTC (link)
pretty much.

you noted in the video that he's included reasonably sympathetic gay characters in his work, and that's true. I just read a novella in an analog from the late 70s (I'm a bit behind on my reading, heh.) and I thought that he was pretty rational about the whole thing, which makes this whole mess even more odd.

Though I'm not quite interested in the answer enough to do the research, but, I suspect that this essay puts OSC a bit to the left of the mormon times' normal line, because his critique is--though oblique--focused on marriage issues, not right to exist issues.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]brentsbrain
2008-08-05 07:42 am UTC (link)
you're kidding! The mormons are MORE conservative that he is! Even Donny and Marie?! ;-)

(Reply to this) (Parent)
Song
(Anonymous)
2008-08-12 11:50 pm UTC (link)
Re: X-Files - I agree. Very VERY disappointing. It's really awful that such a thing is still allowed. In forty years, people are going to be watching this movie and shaking their heads.
(I don't think anything that has to do with the killing-women-and-putting-the-guy's-head-on-their-bodies plotline makes sense, but the woman's body thing, that may be a subtle undertone suggesting that the man wants to be a woman, or his partner wants him to be a woman, and they aren't actually gay/don't want to be gay. Perhaps I'm way off, but it's an idea. What do you think?)
Pedophile priest. Even better. [/sarcastic]
And no aliens! Inconceivable!

It's always disappointing when somebody you like or admire ends up with views that insult or offend you, especially when they would happily infringe on (or take away) your rights as a result. Remind me to avoid his books as well.

But you two- keep on truckin', do what you do, you're great at it.

PS- I read the article. Not only could his arguments be easily countered- as you did so- he's continuing the sad tradition of being offended at being called a homophobe for being homophobic. (The meaning of the word has changed, in case he hasn't noticed.) You mentioned this, but really.

(Reply to this) (Thread)
Re: Song
[info]brentsbrain
2008-08-15 05:42 pm UTC (link)
I don't understand why Gillian Anderson or David Dakovney didn't speak up. They're both pro-gay folks. I guess it made sense at the time. But still disappointing...

And it was the gay man's head on a woman's body thing that pissed me off too. They have to KNOW what kind of impression they're making with that!

(Reply to this) (Parent)

Create an Account
Forgot your login or password?
Login w/ OpenID
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…