A Dangerous Game?

Last year, I stepped up on my soapbox for a moment and tried to explain my opinion on the then-topical proxy battlefield for LGBT rights, Chick-fil-A. Yes, the chain is more a symptom of the problem than the problem itself, but they do make considerable "charitable" donations to organizations that stridently oppose equality. I find myself traveling similar mental and moral ground in thinking about a movie coming later this year.

Ender's Game was a science fiction novel published in the mid-80s. It's a fairly acclaimed book that has been kicking about Hollywood for years, despite once being categorized as "unfilmable." Someone has finally cracked that problem (perhaps), and the film is scheduled for release on November 1, 2013. It seems there's already considerable buzz about it; both in person and on Facebook, I have friends reading the book for the first time and talking about their anticipation for the film.

Orson Scott Card, the author of the book, is profoundly anti-gay. And I don't mean "this one time, he said something without thinking" anti-gay. He is a board member of the National Organization for Marriage, one of the largest political organizations working against marriage equality. He has published essays and op-ed pieces on the subject, including the marvelously offensive "Homosexual 'Marriage' and Civilization." Some of his most choice quotes on the subject:

"The dark secret of homosexual society—the one that dares not speak its name—is how many homosexuals first entered into that world through a disturbing seduction or rape or molestation or abuse, and how many of them yearn to get out of the homosexual community and live normally."

"Instead they are attempting to strike a death blow against the well-earned protected status of our, and every other, real marriage. They steal from me what I treasure most, and gain for themselves nothing at all. They won't be married. They'll just be playing dress-up in their parents' clothes."

"Regardless of law, marriage has only one definition, and any government that attempts to change it is my mortal enemy."

There are countless more within Google's easy reach; I won't foul up my blog any further by listing more.

Orson Scott Card isn't exactly a household name, and even as the movie approaches, I don't expect most people will know who he is. Even among those who have heard of him, I don't expect everyone will know his views on gays. I didn't. I first became aware of Card when I was assigned his "How to" book on writing in a college course; I only learned of his views on gays and lesbians earlier this year when controversy erupted over his being hired to write a Superman comic storyline. So I don't hold anything against anyone who didn't know. (For that matter, my own boyfriend just read Ender's Game for the first time this past winter.)

But now I do know. And now that you've read this, so do you. What then to do?

If it were just a matter of picking up a book or not, it would be simple -- don't buy the book. Don't give Orson Scott Card any money. I could even still read the book if I wanted to. A friend (who paid for the book long, long ago) has loaned me his copy, should I choose to read it; I could read the version on my boyfriend's Nook; I could check it out of the library.

If it were just a matter of one idiot having an idiotic opinion, it might not even be worth taking note of in the first place. People are entitled to opinions, of course -- idiotic or otherwise. Going through life boycotting and cutting off all contact from people with contradictory opinions is no way to live. Even if that opinion happens to be that I should not be able to go through my life on my own terms. But freedom to have and express and opinion does not carry with it any entitlement to be insulated from any consequences of that opinion. Here again, the dividing line comes in the fact that this particular man with this particular opinion puts his money where his mouth is, serving in an administrative capacity to support the work of an organization that is actively trying to make my life worse. So we're back to: don't give Orson Scott Card any money.

But the film incarnation of Ender's Game is hardly the work of one man. One could even argue it's not even primarily the work of Orson Scott Card. (After all, World War Z is coming out this summer, and by all reports it has absolutely nothing to do with Max Brooks' novel of the same name.) Indeed, the sheer number of people involved in making a film of this scope and budget assures that several of the people who worked somewhere on this movie are themselves gay. Quite possibly they, like me, had no idea of Card's views. (And before last year's controversy blew up, you could have reasonably argued the same about low-level employees of Chick-fil-A, and their knowledge of their executives' "charitable" practices.)

Then there's the math of movie profits. Even if Ender's Game is a huge hit, not much of that money is likely to end up in Orson Scott Card's pocket -- surely a great deal less than the book itself has earned him in nearly three decades.

Where to draw the line?

There are many people (often those who object to gay rights on religious grounds) who assert that it's actually equality supporters who are being intolerant -- intolerant of their deeply held personal convictions. I think that's pure nonsense; it's not intolerance to reject bigotry. But I have to acknowledge that there must be a point where principled opposition gives way to an unsustainable "scorched earth" level of boycotting. Or, put another way, do I know the gay rights positions of every person/business/corporation I do or don't give my money to?

No. Some, yes. Not all.

I think maybe I'm hoping that when October rolls around and the movie reviews start to trickle in, that they're just universally awful. Then I don't have to make any decision at all. It's not difficult to "boycott" a movie for being terrible.