outsider wrote:I didn't realize "rationalization" was synonymous with "grasping straws" or "axe-grinding". We've got a movie based on a book whose (not-that-famous) author is a bigot. If the aforementioned article is correct, Card will not receive any direct support from the movie's box office, only a secondary (probably tertiary) result of books sold. Most, if not all, of the people making the movie had no clue about Card's ideology, yet you're trying to guilt trip people into not seeing the movie? Why does it stop there? Marvel Comics and DC have paid Card, even when his bigoted ideology was well-known within the much smaller comics fanbase/industry. By extension, supporting Marvel or DC is "indirectly supporting homophobia".
Lulz aside, is the inconsistency of your guilt trip part of the click-generating show?
i haven't told anyone not to see the movie.
In looking around the net, I saw people (most notably, a thread on IMDB.com titled "Can We Just Forget About This Gay Rights Issue Already," making excuses for why seeing the movie is not the same thing as supporting what Card has done and may do in the future. I'm simply pointing out that, no, it IS supporting him, even if indirectly, and even if only a little bit, even if through tertiary book sales, even if by showing movie studios it's okay to buy books from bigots, even if because it causes someone to buy an Ender's Game coffee mug that was licensed from the book by mistake that makes Card 5 cents.
The only correct response to this is "Yes, it is supporting him to some debatable degree, but I don't care and I'm seeing it anyway."