My letter to Claude Brodesser-Akner and Matt Holzmann
Hi Claude & Matt.
I just heard your editorial note about Rich Raddon and Prop 8 on the podcast. I generally love your show, but I was astonished to hear you compare people who took issue with the head of a major film festival donating to the active effort to take away an existing right from a minority to McCarthyites from the 50s. It is-- at best-- appallingly wrongheaded.
Nobody chooses to be gay. You guys probably know this. Just ask any gay person. And I appreciate your saying Raddon's support of Prop 8-- with all its lies and "we're going to teach your kids about sodomy" ads-- was "wrongheaded." That's one way to put it, at least.
And you're also correct on a certain level: that Raddon's stewardship of the LAFF has been praised and has lived up to the mission of Film Independent to be inclusive. All that should matter to Raddon's retaining his position should be how well he does his job.
But here's the flaw in your argument.
His job requires him to work with gay people. Not just gay people who work at FIND, but gay filmmakers, artists, programmers, members who care about gay people, anybody who thinks that taking away the rights of gay people is wrong. I'm a filmmaker and have been a Film Independent member for years, but if he hadn't resigned, there is no way I'd have anything to do with that organization.
This isn't because I support a "blacklist" of people who don't agree with me about whether I should have the same rights, as a gay man, as everybody else. It's because I and people I care about have been personally attacked and I have a modicum of self-respect. And many of my straight friends have also said they'd leave FIND as well and avoid the LAFF.
This isn't a witch hunt from the 50s. This is about correctly regarding what Prop 8 is: a direct attack on the rights of gay people, rights we had on the books that a bunch of pious bigots spent $40 million to scare people into voting away.
Raddon's support of Prop 8 isn't just an inert political belief. He has every right to believe gay people shouldn't have the right to marry. He could have proclaimed it from the rooftops-- it's a free country and I'll personally fight for Raddon's right to believe whatever he wants about gay people and what we deserve, or anything else for that matter.
But Prop 8 was about TAKING AWAY rights.
You guys have to consider the difference between a "belief" and an "action". Raddon didn't just believe something, he DID something tangible, that was inarguably bigoted and hurtful to an entire population of people. If he had come out against mixed-race marriages or the rights of any other minority, would you guys be comparing his subsequent resignation to a black list?
I've been with my partner almost ten years. We were going to be married in January, on our anniversary. It's because of people like Raddon we can't do that now. And I don't feel it's wrong for people who care about the rights of others to boycott organizations that are run by people who support things like Prop 8. It seems a mild, necessary and measured reaction given the amount of hate that's been thrown on us.
Put it this way: if the head of a company came out saying something horrible about a minority and was forced to resign, that's one thing. If he resigned after it was discovered he gave money to take away the rights of that minority, and the company was in part dependent on that minority to function... how in hell is that a black list?
I don't feel particularly like people like me belong in the same category as HUAC.
Best,
David Kittredge
Triple Fire Productions
--
www.triplefire.com
I just heard your editorial note about Rich Raddon and Prop 8 on the podcast. I generally love your show, but I was astonished to hear you compare people who took issue with the head of a major film festival donating to the active effort to take away an existing right from a minority to McCarthyites from the 50s. It is-- at best-- appallingly wrongheaded.
Nobody chooses to be gay. You guys probably know this. Just ask any gay person. And I appreciate your saying Raddon's support of Prop 8-- with all its lies and "we're going to teach your kids about sodomy" ads-- was "wrongheaded." That's one way to put it, at least.
And you're also correct on a certain level: that Raddon's stewardship of the LAFF has been praised and has lived up to the mission of Film Independent to be inclusive. All that should matter to Raddon's retaining his position should be how well he does his job.
But here's the flaw in your argument.
His job requires him to work with gay people. Not just gay people who work at FIND, but gay filmmakers, artists, programmers, members who care about gay people, anybody who thinks that taking away the rights of gay people is wrong. I'm a filmmaker and have been a Film Independent member for years, but if he hadn't resigned, there is no way I'd have anything to do with that organization.
This isn't because I support a "blacklist" of people who don't agree with me about whether I should have the same rights, as a gay man, as everybody else. It's because I and people I care about have been personally attacked and I have a modicum of self-respect. And many of my straight friends have also said they'd leave FIND as well and avoid the LAFF.
This isn't a witch hunt from the 50s. This is about correctly regarding what Prop 8 is: a direct attack on the rights of gay people, rights we had on the books that a bunch of pious bigots spent $40 million to scare people into voting away.
Raddon's support of Prop 8 isn't just an inert political belief. He has every right to believe gay people shouldn't have the right to marry. He could have proclaimed it from the rooftops-- it's a free country and I'll personally fight for Raddon's right to believe whatever he wants about gay people and what we deserve, or anything else for that matter.
But Prop 8 was about TAKING AWAY rights.
You guys have to consider the difference between a "belief" and an "action". Raddon didn't just believe something, he DID something tangible, that was inarguably bigoted and hurtful to an entire population of people. If he had come out against mixed-race marriages or the rights of any other minority, would you guys be comparing his subsequent resignation to a black list?
I've been with my partner almost ten years. We were going to be married in January, on our anniversary. It's because of people like Raddon we can't do that now. And I don't feel it's wrong for people who care about the rights of others to boycott organizations that are run by people who support things like Prop 8. It seems a mild, necessary and measured reaction given the amount of hate that's been thrown on us.
Put it this way: if the head of a company came out saying something horrible about a minority and was forced to resign, that's one thing. If he resigned after it was discovered he gave money to take away the rights of that minority, and the company was in part dependent on that minority to function... how in hell is that a black list?
I don't feel particularly like people like me belong in the same category as HUAC.
Best,
David Kittredge
Triple Fire Productions
--
www.triplefire.com