« AFI Jury Awards | Main | DP/30 - Slumdog Millionaire's Danny Boyle, Dev Patel & Freida Pinto »
November 09, 2008
What Would Harvey Do?
There is a kinda crazy idea out there about boycotting the Sundance Film Festival and even more so, Utah skiing, in response to Mormon funding of Prop 8 here in California.
Let me be even more direct. The idea of pressuring Sundance or Redford to abandon this year’s festival and their 8 figure commitment to move an event which cannot be realistically moved is stupid.
Cruel, really. Festivals are in as much financial trouble as anyone and they tend to wear their liberal politics on their sleeves. There are plenty of people to rage at, but the Sundance Film Festival is not on that list, no matter where the location happens to be at this moment.
And the idea of boycotting members of a religious group because they gave money – in good faith, however wrong headed – to the other side of a campaign for a vote is exactly as stupid as attacking Iraq because it was filled with brown people who look and speak, to the American eye, a lot like the people behind the attack on the World Trade Center.
I understand the perception that Mormons follow their leaders without much questioning. But we don't know what every individual feels about this issue. And Mormons didn't cast the votes that made it go the way it did. Wouldn't it seem absurd to boycott Baptists or religious Christians or blacks... or whites for that matter?
And the idea of boycotting a state, with the intent to damage its economy, because some of the residents of that state believe you are immoral because of their religious beliefs… well, I’m sorry… it is incautious bias as evil as any and it is smearing, just as others would smear gay America.
Equal rights for gay America means, in part, being hated by some percentage of the population… same a blacks, hispanics, jews, catholics, and everyone else, from the obese to the myopic to the red-haired. You want it, you got it. Get used to it. It’s wrong, but we’ll be working on it long after we have our first gay president. (Unless… hmmm… you gotta know that someone has floated that closet…)
THAT SAID…
What would Harvey do?
It’s right there in Milk. The neighborhood businesses in The Castro - once an Irish neighborhood before it became a central home for gay San Franciscans – who supported the gay community got to enjoy the power of the financial power of the gay community. Those who were anti-gay lost the financial support of gay SF… and closed their doors.
The real opportunity here is to work a bit harder than John Aravosis, the blogger who started this buzz, and to actually target the individuals who were funding the Prop 8 effort… and their businesses, many of which are likely to be in Salt Lake City and Park City.
In Aravosis’ blog entry, not the AP story, he is specifically targeting Brent Andrus, who contributed $20,000 to Yes on Prop 8 and who used to work for and now owns some Marriot Hotels.
The Huntington Hotel Group website is – ha ha – “down for maintenance” right now. (More likely, the wave of anger was being expressed on the website all morning.) But here is the problem… according to a 2005 HHG document, cached on Google, Andrus’s company does own a number of Marriott franchises, primarily in California – direct hit – but not in Utah.
More specifically, the “host hotel” of the Sundance fest is the Park City Marriott, owned by Sunstone Hotel Investors, Inc., of San Clemente, CA. Will it turn out that this company is owned by someone who funded Prop 8 as well? Perhaps. (It seems that “Sunstone” is also the name of a Mormon community organizing structure.) And if so, I would agree that Sundance should make a real effort, even at the costs of scores of thousands of dollars, to get out of that hotel and to not cause a moral dilemma for fest participants.
But that would be a specific call to action, not a general one. The Hotel is not owned by Mr. Andrus or anyone who has been directly tied to a large donation to Yes on Prop 8. The CEO of the company that does own it (Sunstone Hotel Investors), Robert A Alter, did give money to Mitt Romney... but he didn't give money to projectmarriage.com, which is where Andrus' $20,000 contribution was sniffed out by Aravosis. This is the problem with guilt by association. It doesn't prove that Alter is not a Prop 8 guy... but there is no proof that he is. Or that all of Marriott deserves to have Prop 8 weighting it down financially.. All there is here is some indication that Alter is probably a mormon.... which is no more of our business than whether he is gay.
But I digress...
Essentially, a movement against those who deserve disdain from INSIDE Utah… while at the Sundance Film Festival… with the media there in force, all looking for stories to write… with even one or two reasonably high-profile examples of Park City business people who sent money to California for ads… that becomes a massive story.
Movie City News will spend a lot of money in Park City to cover Sundance this year. I will be happy to pledge, right now, that we will not spend a dime that money in businesses that were financial supporters of California’s Prop 8.
So… activists… make that list. Make it honestly. Don’t tell me all Mormons are evil or that the entire state is off limits. But if a local gas station company is owned by a Prop 8 funder… we will fill up elsewhere. If a local restaurant or grocery or ski shop or taxi service… anything like that… if the owner sent money to California to strip gay Californians of their rights… I will be honored to not support that person with my business and to be as loud as I can about making that choice.
Breaking a window may cost a few hundred bucks to repair. But multiply that loss by hundreds or thousands of lost customers and you have made a real impact.
I will look for that list…
Posted by dpoland at November 9, 2008 02:45 PM
Comments
I agree, and hope the closeted studio execs get lovely resort accomodations...with huge walk in/out closets.
Posted by: steamfreshmeals
at November 9, 2008 04:57 PM
I dunno Dave. I agree with your sentiment about not punishing a states economy because of some religious creeps buuuut...aren't Mormons required to give like 10% of their annual income to the church? And don't a huge percentage of Mormons live IN Utah? Therefore, if there was a collective boycott of ski season there (and I agree that boycotting Sundance is silly talk) and Utah suffered then wouldn't those suffering be largely Mormon?
If they don't like that, they should have minded their own states business and stayed the hell out of ours.
Posted by: don lewis (was PetalumaFilms)
at November 9, 2008 05:15 PM
From a logical standpoint, Dave is right. But I also agree with much of what Don said above. I know that it isn't fair to condem all Mormons or all Utah residents, but are any of those people who are against Prop 8 organizing and speaking out against their own? I'm not sure that targeting specific businesses out is really going to make the statement that needs to be made here on the national stage about staying out of the politics of other states (just as the government should be staying out of people's personal lives).
Ultimately, Utah had the second-lowest percentage of people that voted for Obama (34% to Wyoming's 33%), so as far as I'm concerned they can all rot.
Posted by: lazarus
at November 9, 2008 05:39 PM
DP's principle is sound. Let's imagine that Utah had a state constitutional amendment that would penalize homosexuals, wouldn't it be fair for Californians to spend our out-of-state money to find the opposition campaign? 'Utah' isn't the problem, it's specific individual Utahns and people from other states soo.
Posted by: jeffmcm
at November 9, 2008 05:49 PM
Oh dear.
Many analysis that came out after the election actually rationalized correctly that part of the reason SSM was voted down in California was - because- of Obama supporters.
Remember, Obama helped increase the African American and Hispanic vote to come out for him...that vote is largely morally conservative. Many outlets have pointed that out. That is the main reason why Obama has been contradictory at best on the issue. In this respect he is not dumb. He knows that SSM will not fly amongst a good portion of his contstituents.
Same thing happened in Toronto several years back. Statistically, TO had one of the highest ratios of anti-SSM backers in the country even though they overwhelmingly vote left-wing. It was the immigrant vote that is largely fiscally liberal but religious (Christian, Catholic, Orthodox Jewish, Muslim, Buddhist, Hindu) and morally consevative.
Many articles in mainstream papers have pointed out that an Obama presidency might not actually be the death knell for moral consevatism that many think. It might actually mean the revivial of it in a way that no longer attaches it to the old image of white southerners. Trust me, Obama is aware of this. Read any of his interviews on SSM and he is accurtely aware of this.
Posted by: Nicol D
at November 9, 2008 05:55 PM
I think you mean 'socially conservative', Nicol, not 'morally'.
Posted by: jeffmcm
at November 9, 2008 06:03 PM
I'm with Laz: let them rot. If this is how it's going to be. If they are going to come into another state, and get in matters they do not belong. Someone has to pay.
Moral conservatism? Oh yeah, THAT DOESN'T MATTER ANYMORE! Prop 8 will be shot down. It's unconstitutional. Always has been. Always will be. Only a backwards fucking hate-filled piece of shit would see it another way.
Posted by: IOIOIOI
at November 9, 2008 06:12 PM
Posted by: KamikazeCamelV2.0
at November 9, 2008 06:39 PM
Jeff,
No.
Posted by: Nicol D
at November 9, 2008 06:43 PM
That is a severly idiotic idea (and I say this who was completely against the passing of Proposition 8).
Here's another idea: no matter who founded it, it took people in California to vote for Proposition 8. So why not boycott them? Oh wait...
Posted by: Roman
at November 9, 2008 07:59 PM
Speaking of politics IO, don't forget you either owe me the post where I said I was going to vote for McCain, or an apology, or a dick-sucking. It's not going to be the first so I'll let you choose from the latter two options.
Thanks,
Bitch Perm
Posted by: The Big Perm
at November 9, 2008 08:05 PM
Nicol is from the north, so perhaps his terminology is a wee bit different. You know, like colour vs. color.
Because, taken literally, the idea of moral conservatism vs. moral liberalism is to suggest that the latter means a loosening of moral standards -- and not a different, but equal, set of morals. If that's what he's arguing, then he's simply unintelligent and can remain living in the 19th century and pronouncing nuclear as nucular.
Posted by: mutinyco
at November 9, 2008 08:07 PM
Perm, to quote Magnolia: "You really need to shut the fuck up." If you do not remember that you stated as much in September, then you really are a sloppy mess.
Posted by: IOIOIOI
at November 9, 2008 08:21 PM
Just accept you lost. This is a country where the people decide and they voted against gay marriage. Tons of money was spent of both sides, which is foolish because most people don't need a elaborate campaign to make up their minds about this subject. It's decided early on. Should McCain supporters walk around and protest Obama? There was a fair and democatic election, the will of the people have spoken.
Posted by: Radewart
at November 9, 2008 08:37 PM
There's a difference, Radewart.
When McCain lost the GOP was banned...
Posted by: mutinyco
at November 9, 2008 08:45 PM
WASN'T...
Posted by: mutinyco
at November 9, 2008 08:46 PM
Didn't John Stewart say it best when he said "leave it to Californians to vote to give chickens more leg room but then ban gay marriage." So true.
Posted by: don lewis (was PetalumaFilms)
at November 9, 2008 09:17 PM
If the country was really run by the "will of the people", as opposed to constitutional tenets, then we'd still be counting black people as 3/5ths of a person. Thank god for progress. It'll come eventually.
Posted by: matro
at November 9, 2008 09:30 PM
"If the country was really run by the "will of the people", as opposed to constitutional tenets, then we'd still be counting black people as 3/5ths of a person. Thank god for progress. It'll come eventually."
Where on Earth do you think progress comes from if not from the "will of the people"? The last time I checked, it was the will of the people which prevailed over the constitutional tenets that counted blacks as only 3/5 a person. You're living in a fantasy land if you think progress simply occurs as if by magic.
As for the issue at hand, I would venture that resorting to bigotry and persecution of a religious group, even one as unpopular as the Mormons, is not a very good way of convincing someone who believes it will that legalizing gay marriage does not threaten religious freedom. Not to mention that Mormons make up a whopping 2% of California's population. I am pretty sure 2% does not equal 5 million votes. The reaction is irrational but understandable. The Mormons are low-hanging fruit, an easy target: visible and unpopular, and marginal. As has been pointed out, protesting those actually responsible for passing Prop 8 would be nearly impossible. After all, how do you protest the whole state of California? Throwing temper tantrums may feel good, but ultimately it is a sign of immaturity. Which is probably why in so many ways those in favor of gay marriage have in this instance replicated the worst behaviors of their foes.
Posted by: Blackcloud
at November 9, 2008 10:25 PM
Sorry IO, no. I never said such a thing. Since you know what I said and when I said it, why don't you link to it. Or prove yourself as terrible as McCain himself. No, scratch that...you're more like Bush. You have lied, and now you are engaged in a cover up. In my opinion, you are no better than the average baby-raping Republican.
Know this. Live it. Or as I've offered you...prove me wrong.
But you won't, because you're a liar. You make Obama cry.
Posted by: The Big Perm
at November 9, 2008 10:41 PM
"It’s wrong, but we’ll be working on it long after we have our first gay president. (Unless… hmmm… you gotta know that someone has floated that closet…)"
James Buchanan, he's your man. Although I'm not sure gays want to claim a guy who always ranks in the top two or three worst presidents ever. And how does one float a closet?
Posted by: Blackcloud
at November 9, 2008 10:44 PM
Bi(tch)g Perm...
I don't really care much for political topics, nor do I need to fight IO's fight for him.
But I too always thought you were a big Republican (not that there's anything wrong with that.)
A four-second Google search reveals the post "I'm a Republican" from May 6, and more recently some thread in August has you saying something about "...and say that as someone who likes McCain."
Neither of these, of course, are really about who you voted for and could easily have been said by many folks who ultimately went with Obama.
Again, I barely care, but just saying it's not like IO made it out of thin air and you've 100% come off as some firebrand liberal since way back when.
Posted by: LexG
at November 9, 2008 10:56 PM
"Jeff,
No."
Nicol, first of all, I know what a "social conservative", is but I think the phrase "moral conservative" appears to mean a number of different things. In this particular context, it makes a lot more sense to argue that African- and Latino-Americans are 'socially conservative' because they tend to be relatively religious and, obviously, opposed to gay marriage.
Second, there's something wrong with you that makes you continuously snide and arrogant, despite the best efforts of people like myself to have a meaningful exchange with you. Thanks for the reminder that you don't want such things.
Posted by: jeffmcm
at November 9, 2008 11:58 PM
This is bullshit.
I'm not 100% for the boycott, but to those of you who say "it's the will of the people" or some such thing, just go fuck yourself, seriously. Unless you're ready for me come to your state and start a ballot initiative to vote on your heterosexual marriage.
Maybe we can start a ballot initiative to remove your children from the home if there's no father present? Maybe we can start an initiative to have a woman sterilized if she wants to have a baby but hasn't finished paying her student loans.
Sound unreasonable? Well guess what...
There is no defense of the Mormons. You can call them low-hanging fruit if you want, but they know exactly what they're doing.
Calling it wrong headed but acting in good faith is the moral equivalence of turning the other cheek when Grandpa complains about the negro at the coffee shop.
I hope they keep marching in California and keep making noise. After this amazing, watershed week, it is especially painful to see headlines trumpet the end of racism while prejudice lives on.
Boycotting Sun City had an impact. Maybe Park City needs it, too.
Posted by: hepwa
at November 10, 2008 01:08 AM
Hey, I'm all for banning ALL marriage.
While they're at it, can they ban having kids?
That would RULE.
At the very least, they should ban ALL MARRIAGE, GAY OR STRAIGHT, BEFORE THE AGE OF 3O.
But I guess that thwarts the bullshit AMERICANA where the FOOTBALL STAR marries the CHEERLEADER at age 22 and they live a street away from THEIR EQUALLY BORING AND SQUARE AS FUCK FAMILY.
Posted by: LexG
at November 10, 2008 01:26 AM
22? More like 17 (see Palin, Bristol).
Posted by: jeffmcm
at November 10, 2008 01:30 AM
Lex, I see I made that Republican post so you'd kill yourself. Sadly, I failed.
BUT, I never said I'd vote for McCain even though I may have said I liked him, so IO is still a liar and owes me an apology for being a lying lair who lies.
However, I did see a post where I correctly predicted the failure of Speed Racer. IO assured us all it would be huge. He was wrong there, too. Don't mess with the Perm. You fail.
Posted by: The Big Perm
at November 10, 2008 08:26 AM
I should also add that I like McCain a lot less once the pod people took over him and he sold out.
Posted by: The Big Perm
at November 10, 2008 08:29 AM
Maybe the Mormons are getting back at the rest of America for banning polygamy? No one ever thought of that did they!! I say we ban sacred jammies to get back at them next.
Posted by: don lewis (was PetalumaFilms)
at November 10, 2008 11:01 AM
hmmmmm...more boycott news from aravosis:
http://www.americablog.com/2008/11/never-ever-cross-show-queen.html
Posted by: scooterzz
at November 10, 2008 11:41 AM
Uhm...there are better ways to fight for gay rights than boycotting a film festival. It seems petty and doesn't necessarily shed a very positive light on the gay movement.
Posted by: waterbucket
at November 10, 2008 11:58 AM
Seeing various and sundry fretting about how terrible it would be to boycott Sundance is starting to make me think it would actually be a GREAT idea. Never happen, of course. But the fact that enough people are concerned enough about it to quiver over what a terrible idea it is makes me wonder. I'm not going, myself, but that was decided a while ago.
David Poland asks, "What would Harvey do?" Well, you saw the movie—he led a boycott of Coors, for one thing.
Posted by: Glenn Kenny
at November 10, 2008 02:39 PM
Perm: THE DARK FUCKING KNIGHT. Go look it up. The lot of ya... THE LOT OF YA... did not believe. Who was right on that one? Uh me. It's not my fault assholes like you did not get behind one of the best family movies made in recent years. This does not change the fact that I called something the LOT OF YA did not see coming.
So what have we learned? YOU SHOULD NOT PLAY. Do not play, you stated you would vote for McCain, and you are a flip-flopper. You make Jay Mariotti proud... ass.
Posted by: IOIOIOI
at November 10, 2008 05:20 PM
IO...
Re: Dark Fucking Knight. It was a huge hit? Wow, what a shock. No Batman movie had ever been a big hit before! Way to go on a limb.
Re: Speed Racer. You failed. Don't make excuses. And I hear it actually IS your fault. I'll tell you how after:
Re: Me voting for McCain. Never said it. And there's one easy way to prove me a liar, fuckface. Go do it.
You lose. You played, but you learned that this playground has crushed glass in the sand. You got cut, little boy. You got cut deep. Now go cry to your mommy.
Posted by: The Big Perm
at November 10, 2008 05:49 PM
fwiw -- i watched 'speed racer' again over the week-end.... like paris hilton, it's kinda pretty and still blows......
Posted by: scooterzz
at November 10, 2008 06:13 PM
IOI, take your goddamn medication.
Posted by: jeffmcm
at November 10, 2008 06:40 PM
I know nothing about Park City or who runs it, but wouldn't a Sundance boycott do as much or more economic damage to those who sympathize with gay marriage rights as those who don't? Seems like there ought to be a better way.
Posted by: yancyskancy
at November 11, 2008 12:48 AM
Yeah yancy, Park City is really where Utahns go to get away from Utah. It's a very cool city and guilt by association will sadly apply.
Posted by: don lewis (was PetalumaFilms)
at November 11, 2008 07:22 PM
Post a comment
Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)
(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)