After a week of attention-getting protests against Proposition 8, gay activists and allies are ready for their next big target — and some, like blogger John Aravosis, are suggesting a boycott of the Sundance Film Festival. Sure, the Prop, 8-pushing Mormon Church has no direct ties to Sundance, but the Park City fest could be affected by a growing movement to boycott not just Mormon-owned enterprises but the entire, caffeine-fearing state of Utah in general. So, should Robert Redford be shaking in his stylish snow boots? We think not, for these reasons:The boycott talk is coming from outside the industry, not inside. So far, calls for a boycott are mainly coming from bloggers, not influential directors, producers, and actors. We don't see that changing, unless the cash-poor Harvey Weinstein decides to make a dramatic nonattendance statement as a way to save face (and plane airfare). A boycott big enough to matter is unlikely. The young filmmakers accepted into the festival would crawl over their own mothers to be there, and the Sundance hangers-on like Paris Hilton have never been bastions of activism. Without enough straight allies who could bear to part with their tickets to Park City, there's no chance to make a big dent, because... The gay presence at Sundance has waned. Back before your associate editor took up blogging and adopted the royal "we" at Defamer, I held a regular gig as The Advocate's film critic and attended several Sundances working the gay beat (not as hustler-ish as it sounds!). Though the film festival has a deservedly gay-friendly rep, it's gone through some pretty sparse queer years as of late. At the 2007 festival, the gay slate had so little on it that the centerpiece was a Chad Allen movie. If Sundance was boycotted by gay filmmakers and queer-themed films, the lineup wouldn't change that much. We're all about new and novel ways to protest (what's this we keep hearing about "A Day Without a Gay"?), but the Sundance idea seems DOA to us, especially when everybody's already got their plane tickets set for January. Next year might be a different story — there'll be a lot more lead time — but let's hope there won't be reason to protest then, OK? [Photo Credit: AP]
Deep down in our hearts, where we keep our darkest fears hidden, we knew this day would come: the day when you find out after the fact that a hit song is actually an advertisement. Let the tears of rage flow. Chris Brown is not the vessel of true love that you thought! When the R&B star sang "We can go anywhere, go anywhere/ But first, it's your chance, take my hand, come with me," he wasn't talking to you, girl; he was talking to your Wrigley's Doublemint gum. But the company is only revealing its sponsorship after Brown's song, "Forever," had become a top-10 hit. We don't want to appear as if we invest the music of Chris Brown with any meaning whatsoever; but now would be an appropriate time to begin boycotting Wrigley, if you would like to have the option of listening to songs that aren't sponsored by mega-corporations in the coming decade.
Staten Island-all of it!-is threatening to boycott Belmar, NJ because the mayor there made derogatory remarks about "guidos," the overtanned, hair-gelled, well-muscled gentlemen who I say are just fine, so that I don't get jumped next time I go to the gym. "The mayor should watch his f- - -ing mouth!" one Staten Island resident told the Post. Ha, right you are, my friend! Do you care to read the entire press release about this grievous insult from Staten Island Good Neighborhood Association president John "JE" Englebert, for some reason? Then click through and do so! [UPDATE: And a sample of the mayor's original gentle insults!]:
As we reported last week, the Associated Press sent a copyright complaint to a harmless little left-wing news aggregating site demanding they remove posts that featured "39 to 79 words" of their precious, precious copy. Over the weekend, after outrage from various blogs, they retreated. But they're not giving up! Blogs will bow to them! They will set standards, and blogs will naturally decide to follow these standards on their own accord, because that's how bloggers act!
Have you bought your Absolut Rainbow bottle yet? It's only available at Colette through July 1! It's "a tribute to support diversity and individual rights. The rainbow also stands for happiness and now for party...with Absolut!" Hey, the homosexual agenda is at least as scary as the Mexican takeover agenda. Where's the boycott? [via Selectism]
Jackie Warner, the personal trainer star of Bravo's reality show Workout and popular fantasy girlfriend of straight women, is facing a fan backlash for acting rude on the show. They're calling for a boycott! Apparently she fired a guy named Peeler (rudely), and now she's being branded as a "negative icon to the gay community." Harsh! Shouldn't that type of forceful condemnation be reserved for, you know, Perez Hilton? [LA Rag Mag]
"The Resistance," which describes itself as a "Christian Group" but, judging by its website, is more of a "Wacko Conspiracy Theory Group," has just launched a boycott of Starbucks. They object to the coffee chain's new retro-style logo, which features a mermaid who wantonly possesses boobies. They "might as well call themselves Slutbucks"! In the past, The Resistance has lobbied celebrities like Paris Hilton and Tom Cruise to change their "ridiculous" behavior. So their calls for action have clearly been huge failures thus far. The full, weird press release is below.
Global liquor conglomerates, take note: a hastily constructed website is calling for a boycott of Absolut. Run a humorous ad in Mexico and face financial ruin, Pernod Ricard corporation! "Absolut vodka is trying to sell liquor to Mexicans that aspire to control the Southwest United States," reveals boycott organizer William "Yosemite" Gheen. Now if he can only get Matt Sanchez on his side...Despite its insistence on spelling the company's name "Absolute," the website has already attracted more than 120 visits and nearly 7 comments. But its visual and documentary evidence of the brewing Mexican separatist movement that threatens American freedom may be its most powerful tool:
After last weekend's flash of rebellion threatening to engulf parents' basements across America with smoldering dork rage, the Weinstein Company announced late Monday that it would in fact release the Star Wars-devotee dramedy Fanboys on DVD in both a cancer-subplot-free edit and the original, disease-of-the-geek version preferred by the angry fans at StopDarthWeinstein.com. But that's not enough for the fanboy offensive, who lashed out in protest yet again this morning:
Insane fundamentalist Christian group American Family Association has declared victory in a two-year boycott against Ford Motor Company and its "significant support of the homosexual agenda." This, despite the fact that Ford says it negotiated no settlement, and is still involved with groups that work in support of gay marriage [Mixed Media]. It's the "Declare victory and go home" strategy, apparently. The AFA is very opposed to any ads "aimed at the homosexual community specifically." Except maybe ads for [jokey regular product with a gay reputation—suggestions?]! But the truth is that auto ads targeting gays have been standard for quite a while now, in America and internationally. After the jump, some of the most obvious examples.
There's nothing that will tear your heart out quicker than seeing one of your immortal heroes decide to sell out. Hearing the "conscious" rapper KRS-ONE declaring "The revolution is basketball" in a Nike ad back in the 90's was a particularly dark day for me. But at least living people havethe free will to decide to sell out. An even more despicable practice is waiting until an icon is dead, then pimping their image out to the highest bidder. Some responsibility falls on whoever licensed their image for commercial use. Some of it falls on us, the consumers, for making these campaigns financially worthwhile. But most of it falls on the damn ad people who co-opt someone's cool without their attendant philosophy. And now that Gonzo extraordinaire Hunter Thompson has popped up in a Converse ad, it's time for some serious boycott action. Some things just aren't right. Right?
Yesterday's surprise announcement that Steven Spielberg would not, in fact, be contributing to the Beijing summer games—having enacted the force genocide clause of his contract that allowed him to pull out if he found the host-country to be bankrolling a very unsportsmanlike systematic human slaughter—caused human rights groups the world over to sing the director's praises. (Amnesty International went so far as to issue a statement absolving the director "of all perceived misdeeds, including the last 7 minutes of War of the Worlds.")
Ah, those anti-pedophile hunters. How can anyone criticize them without coming off as a perv-lover? Let's try.