Vile homophobe alert: John C. Wright

[feuervogel]

Science fiction writer John C. Wright lets his vile, rampant homophobia loose in his LJ. He compares... well, I'll let John speak for himself here:

I will explain. The parts where I am hoping various sexual perversions will be portrayed in a positive light in future shows is sarcasm. The part where I condemn Sci-Fi for their political correctness is on the level.

The part where I question how we, as a nation, got into a situation where the failure to promote sexual perversion is regarded as shameful is a serious question.

I am equating homosexuality with sadomasochism, pederasty, necrophilia, bestiality, and other sexual neuroses. While a technical distinction can be drawn between them, they share the fundamental property of being objectively disordered appetites.

Well then. I'm voting with my wallet, and I'm sure others of you might consider doing so as well.

ETA, 8/14/09, 8:20 am: He closed comments and they all went poof. He's also claiming that only "one or two people" said they'd boycott his book. ROFL. When I last looked around 8 pm last night, it was a lot closer to one or two HUNDRED.

ETA: 8/14/09, 4 pm: He nuked the whole post!

Comments

[m-banu.livejournal.com]

Not everyone can be Robert Heinlein. :)

It seems as though one of the concerns that gets masked by his disapproval of homosexuality in general is the point that the Sci-Fi Channel's visible homosexuality will probably just be part of an increase in the pulpy alien sex-bot style of science fiction programming, rather than the sort of thoughtful sci-fi that a lot of people keep hoping for.

In an elaboration he makes in the comments section, it seems as though he is actually directing his anger at same-sex advocates whom he feels are insincere about the cause and are using it as a front to hide the fact that they are really attempting to promote an irresponsible hedonism. (Although admittedly his dislike of homosexuality is also pretty clear.)


Is an irrational lust and longing to mimic the mating act with a sex with which one cannot mate, at its root, any more or less disconnected to reality than an irrational fear and hatred of a Negro?

If you remove the bias dripping from his rant, this is actually kind of an interesting question, considering that both racist fear and homosexual love are primarily emotional in nature.

Runner up quote-of-the-rant!

Why is it that the lack of self control in sexual matters, where self control is paramount, is held to be immaculate and beyond reproach, whereas the lack of self-control when it comes to something trivial smoking tobacco is scorned?

For those coming in late, http://74.125.155.132/search?q=cache:http://johncwright.livejournal.com/269139.html?thread=8182099

(Although this also raises the concern of Google apparently caching things and simply not including a cache link rather than actually respecting robots.txt exclusions)

[kirin]

I know you're just playing devil's advocate here, but hey, I can play... uh... angel's advocate? Sure.

On the first quote: Man, I don't care what he thinks is "disconnected from reality", I'd still rather much rather discourage irrational hate than irrational love. (Also, the whole "sex is for procreation" argument is totally bogus but I don't think I'd get far with him on that front.)

On the second quote: It takes a fairly marginal amount of self control to make sex pretty darn safe, whereas no amount of self control is gonna keep smoking from giving you a really high chance of lung cancer. And people who happen to be *nearby* someone having irresponsible sex don't have any chance of catching second-hand AIDS.

Also, backing up to your first few paragraphs, I really like the time in Babylon 5 (not that it was on Sci Fi, but whatever) where two male characters were going undercover, and there cover story was that they were a couple on honeymoon, and it basically just went without comment beyond the minor eye-rolling you might get from having to pretend to be in *any* sort of relationship you're not actually in. It was just a perfectly plausible story.

[m-banu.livejournal.com]

And people who happen to be *nearby* someone having irresponsible sex don't have any chance of catching second-hand AIDS.

A very good point. :)