Philosophy

Malice Towards None: Orson Scott Card, Gay Marriage, and the “Ender’s Game” Film Controversy, Part Two

by

Note: This is the second part of this essay. Part one can be found by clicking here.

“It was just him and me. He fought with honor. If it weren’t for his honor, he and the others would have beaten me together. They might have killed me, then. His sense of honor saved my life. I didn’t fight with honor… I fought to win.”
–Ender’s Game

“Somebody with that much compassion could never be the killer we needed. Could never go into battle willing to win at all costs. If you knew, you couldn’t do it. If you were the kind of person who would do it even if you knew, you could never have understood [them] well enough.”
—Ender’s Game

Perhaps one of the most troubling things to me about the whole Ender’s Game boycott is the chill and fear it creates not only for those who, on personal, religious or ethical grounds, oppose gay marriage, but also to those who choose to work and associate with them. In these scenarios, all tainted parties are punished, even those who happen to be supportive with the gay rights movement.  It’s a modern McCarthyism, creating a feeling that all people who do not pass that sociopolitical litmus test must be shunned and, if you do not shun them as well, you’re suspect as well. Thus, in the case Ender’s Game, Lionsgate, Harrison Ford, Gavin Hood, Asa Butterfield, and the rest of the cast and crew of the film would be punished by this kind of attitude, even though they have all come out staunchly in the favor of gay rights, and insist the story of Ender’s Game is a story about compassion and empathy, so has nothing to do with Card’s stance on gay marriage.

Fortunately, a lot of the more level headed members of the liberal community see the implications of such actions. Juliet Lapados at the New York Times, even though she hardly agrees with Card’s more extreme views, called out this sort of action:

Generally, boycotts are used to pressure companies or governments to end objectionable activities; consider the boycott of Chick-fil-A to protest the chain’s financial support of antigay organizations. What Geeks Out has in mind is closer to blacklisting. The group wants to “send a clear and serious message to Card and those that do business with his brand of antigay activism — whatever he’s selling, we’re not buying.” This isn’t about stopping the dissemination of antigay sentiments; it’s about isolating Mr. Card and shaming his business partners, thus cutting into their profits.

If Mr. Card belongs in quarantine, who’s next?

Read more

The Psychology of Anthony Weiner’s Photo Problems

by

2013-07-30 Weiner

With an odd blend of poignancy and frankness, Katy Waldman explains at Slate just how mistaken Weiner is if he thinks his, *ahem*, “self-portraits” are having their intended effect:

Is there anything more depressing than the crotch shot? Any other form of so-called erotic communication that telegraphs the same mix of loneliness and tawdriness? Amanda Hess finds Anthony Weiner’s newly-unearthed sexts boring. To me, they are more like the photos of oil-soaked birds that surface after a petroleum spill: greasy, helpless, and broadcasting a frantic need.

The rest continues in this vein and I think it’s worth the read precisely because it’s not trying to be funny. It’s a serious consideration of Weiner’s issues and, along the way, of what men so often get wrong about what women

(I’m sure there’s all kind of ridiculous fun I could have had with this headline, but I think I’ll just leave that to Matt Drudge. The self-portrait line is as far as I’m going to go.)

What Would Kirk Do?

by

Friend and DR commenter WalkerW posted a great article on the management lessons of one James Tiberius Kirk, Captain. Now, personally I’m a greater fan of Jean Luc than James T., but since WalkerW says it is “the first of (hopefully) many leadership tips from the sci-fi/fantasy world,” I have hope for the future. This first installment was largely based on a Forbes article, but the additional commentary and videos from WalkerW are a definite improvement.

I’ve got WalkerW started on the Dresden Files now, so maybe after Picard and Gandalf we’ll get Harry Blackstone Copperfield Dresden. Except, of course, that I just don’t think there’s any way to write an article about management lessons from that particular wizard without turning the premise around and writing from a “What Not To Do” perspective!

2013-07-17 Harry Dresden

 

Mahonri Stewart: Subcreation and True Myths

by

2013-07-17 PandoraI’ve read about Tokien’s idea of “sub-creation” before, which is basically the idea that when we as artists create worlds for our art (the way Tolkien did with Middle Earth) we are in a sense imitating the creative act of God in creating our world. I’m fascinated by this idea that artistic world-building is a kind  of godly act, and this idea of imitation or replication also has ramifications for mythology: where the same archetypes and stories surface time and time again in different cultures and contexts.

If these ideas interest you, too, then check out playwright Mahonri Stewart’s piece at Dawning of a Brighter Day.

Monday Morning Mormon Madness: Embodiment and Killing

by

2013-07-01 On Killing

This morning’s post at Times And Seasons is live. It’s a review of Lt. Col. Dave Grossman’s epic non-fiction study On Killing: The Psychological Cost of Learning to Kill in War and Society (which everyone should find interesting) and also how it relates to the distinctly Mormon belief that a spirit + mortal body is a step  up from a spirit alone (which is of narrower interest).

If that piques your interest, give it a read! Leave comments there if you’d like to discuss it. (I’m turning them off on this post.)

 

Texas Abortion Law Stalled

by

2013-06-26 Texas Abortion Law

The Texas Tribune is reporting that the GOP attempt to pass one of the nation’s strictest abortion laws in Texas failed last night / early this morning because the Republicans were unable to vote before midnight. The whole thing makes me so depressed.

  1. I give props to Wendy Smith for her legitimate, stand-up-and-talk-for-hours filibuster. I’m not an expert, but the GOP’s efforts to derail her seemed shady at best.
  2. I can’t give props for her reasoning. She said the defeat of the bill “shows the determination and spirit of Texas women and people who care about Texas women.” This is a bill that included safeguards for women that are desperately needed (Gosnell wasn’t alone, and we know that). Defeating the bill isn’t about supporting women. It’s about supporting abortion.
  3. The mob take-over of the legislature was, given the GOP’s shady handling of the filibuster, perhaps a necessary evil. But the raucous celebration of the chaos by Democrats is immature at best, and strikes me as ominous. If the majority of people have to seize power from their elected officials, even for a moment, that’s a serious and sober moment. But when a minority do so it is even more troubling. Even if you oppose the law, there’s nothing to celebrate at all in how it was defeated.

It depresses me and it shames me as an American. There may have been some few folks who acted out of principle, but all I see–on both sides–is a rowdy crowd rioting because their team won or lost a sporting event.

Adverse Childhood Experiences And The Truth About Everyone

by

2013-06-26 Dr. Felitti

In the first of three articles for the Huffington Post, Jane Ellen Stevens talks about one of the biggest public health studies you’ve never heard of.

Dr. Felitti ran an incredibly successful preventative health program, but one of the initiatives had a puzzling problem. Aimed at helping people who were significantly overweight, he found that about 50% of the population would drop out before completing the program, even though they were making good progress. His efforts to uncover this mystery led to something even bigger. In a massive study with over 17,000 participants, Dr. Felittie and others discovered that Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACEs)–things like physical or sexual abuse–created a staggering toll on adult health: “chronic disease,… mental illness, doing time in prison, and work issues, such as absenteeism.” What was really surprising, however, was the extent of the exposure to ACEs. Over 2/3rds of study participants had experienced at least one form of adverse childhood experience, and of that population, 87% have experienced two or more. Dr. Felitti, upon seeing the results for the first time, says “I wept. I saw how much people had suffered and I wept.” 

Read more

Beyond Bigotry: The Real Opposition to Same-Sex Marriage

by

2013-06-25 Gay Marriage Protest

A lot of things are disconcerting about the same-sex marriage debate. One of them–which I’ve already discussed–is the way that social conservatives were silent for too long in pairing a principled stand for traditional marriage (one Christian virtue) with sincere interest in the welfare of homosexuals as brothers and sisters (an even more important Christian virtue). But another comes from the opposite side of the political spectrum.

Eric Teetsel explains it harshly but clearly in a post for the Witherspoon Institute:

Sherif Girgis, Ryan Anderson, and Robert George recently wrote a masterful defense of what marriage is and why it matters. It is no exaggeration to say that their argument is the intellectual foundation for marriage advocates, used by the National Organization for Marriage, the Heritage Foundation, and others (including my own Manhattan Declaration).

What did the same-sex marriage movement do with this seminal book? They ignored it.

They don’t have answers to the authors’ claims; they don’t need them. Advocates of same-sex marriage aren’t concerned about the logic of their arguments or the precedents they establish. Forget facts; theirs is a more powerful weapon in the era of amusement: fad.

As I said: harsh. But I think Teetsel is largely right, even if it could have been expressed with more sensitivity. In almost all cases the “debate” goes something like this: support gay marriage or be tarred a bigot. With some exceptions that seems to be about it. It’s as though Americans who support gay marriage think that the Westboro Baptists genuinely represent the traditional marriage constituency.

They don’t.

With the upcoming Supreme Court decision, this debate may be winding down or moving on. Then again, maybe not. But in either case, I think it would be incredibly beneficial for those who support marriage equality to read the paper Teetsel referenced. It’s called “What Is Marriage?” and it appeared in the Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy. It’s not exactly short or light reading, but as Teetsel points out, it’s the actual expression of what defenders of traditional marriage actually believe. No matter how this debate plays out, I think that’s something worth understanding. Primarily, I might add, because I think while it may not be what gay marriage supporters want to hear (obviously), it’s notably free of what bigotry, animosity, or intolerance as a motivation. Vocal minority of fearful idiots notwithstanding, that’s not what the traditional marriage movement is really about.

So go ahead: give it a read.

Monday Morning Mormon Madness: Modesty and Feminism.

by

Check that alliteration out! That’s a 5 in a row and 5 out of 7. Don’t try this at home!

Anyway, here’s my weekly post for Times And Seasons, in which I jump into the fracas over (former Power Ranger, current swimwear designer) Jessica Rey and her comments about bikinis, modesty, and empowerment.

2013-06-24 Jessica Rey Power Ranger

This one is definitely less heavy on the Mormon terminology and more universal in scope, although it does address more the concerns of religious (not necessarily Mormon) social liberals and social conservatives. I’m going to turn comments off on this thread, so feel free to weigh in over there if you’d like.

If You Really Care: Take Risks but Speak Carefully

by

When it comes to politics, ignorance really is bliss. I didn’t really know very much at all about politics until I felt obligated by civic duty to start paying attention around 2006. One of the things that I chose to do was expose myself to different voices, so I started listening to conservative radio (starting with Rush Limbaugh) as well as looking for liberal radio (which was harder to find, but I found some). It definitely degraded the happiness level of my life, but I learned a lot. I learned, for example, that the mainstream media frequently misquotes Rush Limbaugh and that, for his part, Rush Limbaugh frequently says misquotable things. It’s a co-dependency: each relying on the perceived injustice of the other to rally their own side (and drive advertising dollars, of course).

Rush Limbaugh: Pretending to care since 1984.
Rush Limbaugh: Pretending to care since 1984.

I also learned that when Rush Limbaugh has to pick between his principles and his ratings, he picks his ratings every time. The most vivid demonstration of this comes every four years during the GOP primary

Read more