She didn't mean to be offensive... - The Family Stone (2005) Discussion

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] setokaiba238 12 years ago

First of all, the next person who tries to act like "gay" and "black" are the same thing is going to get my fist shoved up their ass. Second of all "racism" and "prejudice" are also not interchangeable terms.

Finally, if you want a more apt comparison I suggest you substitute the word "infertile" for "gay". As in "I wish all my children would be infertile so they would never leave me". I personally would find that very offensive because it is an extremely selfish thing to wish your children have to go through the pain of knowing they'll never have children that are truly their own just so you can be overbearing and nurse the wounds you wished on them in the first place.

Naturally infertility isn't a perfect comparison because infertile people don't necessarily have to deal with years of feeling like an outcast, confusion, more than likely suicidal thoughts, hiding a part of yourself, being much more likely to never find the love of your life, and bullying.

Obviously the cow was joking when she said that but Meredith's character would not pick up on that. And if I was sitting in a room with someone who legitimately wished infertility on their children I would stick up for them too.

This movie is absolute trash.

reply

[–] fauxindigo 12 years ago

People compare 'gay' with 'black' for a multitude of reasons, not because skin color and sexual orientation are exactly the same thing- but because both are immutable traits that human beings possess and have struggled to find equality in regards to; if you can't see the similarities, you are either ignorant or in denial. Like the character of Meredith for example, suggesting that being gay might not just be an innate characteristic, but because of the 'nurture' from the gay persons parents, family etc. and their environment; hence his mother getting pissed off- it's not the parent's fault their child is gay (not for 'nurture' reasons at least), and what about the other sons and daughters who were raised by the same parents- they're not gay! Meredith inadvertently suggested that the parents were somehow to blame for their son being gay. And there shouldn't be any blame to place anyway! Being gay IS normal; gay people have existed throughout history, science shows homosexuality to be normal- how much more proof do you need? There is no legitimacy to suggest that gay people are gay for any other reason than because that's how their brains are wired. Another reason Merediths comments/questions were offensive; insinuating that gay people are not normal. And the only reason being gay is so hard is because of societies ignorance and prejudice! That's no reason to wish your child isn't gay. It's like when people blame the victim instead of the bully; people shouldn't have to worry and want to change who they are because it's 'hard' and people give them $hit.
And side note- Maybe some people ARE overly politically correct, but if anything- it's just a reaction to how offensive some people are. It really shouldn't be that difficult to not offend someone.

reply

[–] setokaiba238 12 years ago

First of all, I am well aware of why people compare gay and black so you can put that 'you must be ignorant' talk right back into your belt. The problem is more often than not, by comparing the two, people inadvertently delegitimize the civil rights movement. When I was in high school I was amazed how many people knew virtually nothing about slavery other than the fact that it existed.

Second of all I legitimately believe gay people were born that way. You would know that if you had actually read my post. I was talking about infertility. I have no idea how you concluded that I must believe in nurture over nature from that.

Third, I think you misunderstood Meredith too. At no point did she say or imply it was the parents fault that their child was gay. The Stone family were the ones saying the mother was trying to "make them gay". Meredith didn't say anything wrong until she brought up the "normal" thing, unfortunately, the family representing the PC world we live in, chose to jump all over her the moment she started talking. Yes it was wrong of her to say the "normal" bit, but this society has to learn forgiveness. You don't change the minds of people who don't understand with suppression and anger, you change them with open dialogue. My problem with buying into PC too much is we don't solve the problem of prejudice, we just suppress it. It's still there. Furthermore we turn a blind eye and put on rose colored glasses about obvious issues. Is it right for the Stone family to pretend the son's boyfriend is not black? No. That's who he is. I'm sorry if you can't understand that.

Finally, I don't believe in calling people ignorant. Despite it's original meaning "ignorant" has just become a word lazy people throw around to tell someone they're wrong without explaining to them why they're wrong. So you'll forgive me if I don't partake in name-calling to make my point.

reply

[–] fauxindigo 12 years ago

I never call someone ignorant because I'm lazy. In regards to someone being anti-gay, I'll say someone is ignorant because they don't even understand homosexuality, yet hold strong convictions against it. And saying someone is ignorant is not name calling, it's describing their attitude/behavior; like being clueless and rude.

If you're well aware of why people compare black civil rights with gay civil rights, you should know that civil rights are civil rights! - regardless of if it's for black people, gay people, women or ANYONE! To suggest that the civil rights movement for black people in America was somehow more severe or substantial than the rights gay people are *still* fighting for is absurd and offensive (uh oh, somethings offensive, sorry if my political correctness offends anyone). Yes, black people suffered through slavery in America and I don't intend to demean that, but there have been slaves all over the world throughout time of every race. Gay people may not have been targeted specifically for slavery like black people were, but gays have faced equal, if not more, adversity and I will argue that fighting for the right to live your life authentically with the person you truly love is just as important as black people fighting for their basic freedom or women fighting for their right to vote. Civil rights are not exclusive to black people- and I know you will say that's not what you said, but it's what you insinuated. And comparing being gay to being infertile is faulty reasoning because being gay doesn't make you infertile- and there was never a civil rights movement for infertile people.

In the end, I don't agree with how all the characters jumped down Meredith's throat for her questions/comments; she is the kind of person who is innocently ignorant- not a bigot- but just misinformed. I actually felt bad for her.

reply

[–] setokaiba238 12 years ago

And therein lies the problem. You're so busy looking for supposed implications in what a person says that aren't actually there, that you're ignoring what they're saying. I never once said or insinuated that civil rights are exclusive to black people. I am a woman. It would not make sense for me to think that. I'm sorry if you took it that way, but it's really starting to seem like you're determined to be offended no matter what I say. Gays, women, people of various ethnicities and religions, etc. are all still fighting for the same basic principle, Civil Rights. What I have a problem with are the commercials that say things like black people were fighting for the right to marry white people so it's the same thing. The right to marry white people was at the bottom of the list. And if all Civil Rights are exactly the same, why didn't the original poster ask whether it would be okay for someone to say to someone else it was wrong for them to wish they had a daughter, because women experience more sexism than men? Because issues like these are not transitive.

Now I am also in no way saying black people have struggled the most. Do you want to know why I am not saying that? Because I can only look at the world from my perspective as a black person. I can never say being black or being gay or being any ethnicity, sex or religion is harder in this day and age because I am not all of those things. And why is everyone always so determined to scream out "I've suffered the most!" That's why when people say things like "Would you feel comfortable if she had been at a Black family table, and asked the mother why she had children? Because it's true Black people have it worse than white people, so shouldn't Black people stop having children altogether? right?" is inherently wrong and offensive reasoning. Yes I can get offended too. I would never try to compare slavery to the Holocaust because I am not Jewish. No matter how much I know about the Holocaust I will never truly understand the issues Jewish people still deal with today. Your argument that other people were slaves too and the popular argument that some white slaves existed as well is a perfect example of how you will never understand what it is to be black, just as I will never understand what it is to be gay or white. And no gayness and infertility are not the same. I was relating them in terms of reproduction. Two men or two women in a relationship have just as much of a chance biologically reproducing together as an infertile man and woman.

The point is I would rather engage in direct dialogue and acknowledge that I will never truly understand what a person has gone through than pander to them and pretend I get it. I can understand it from a historical perspective, or a political one, but not from a personal perspective. Yes Meredith is misinformed but I would rather engage her in open dialogue than display hostility or look down on her. Treating someone with pity when they are confused or "innocently ignorant" or saying things like you feel bad for that person is just another form of hostility and suppression, not to mention elitism.

Now a friend of mine once advised me that when you bring up Nazis in an internet discussion there isn't much room to go from there. I've already clearly offended you so she may have a point here.

reply

[–] rissa-rissa 12 years ago

"To suggest that the civil rights movement for black people in America was somehow more severe or substantial than the rights gay people are *still* fighting for is absurd and offensive"

Right because nowadays we have separate schools for straights and homosexuals and we also see gay people being mistreated the way blacks are in this clip:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o54n7HXwOhc

Furthermore, from what you are saying, it's just as easy to locate a homosexual person amongst a crowd the way it is a black person...

Gays to a certain extent can understand what black people went through but the two issues are NOT entirely the same.

reply

[–] Joebrhill 12 years ago

From my perspective as a gay guy, I think that both the family and Meridith made mistakes:

1. Meridith made a mistake in that she wasn't able to pick-up on the cues that the family was uneasy with her opinion on gay children and the hardships they go through. So to wish all your children to be gay would be sentencing them to turmoil. The conversation was initially light-hearted, but Meridith was too socially inept to realize it and took it seriously.

2. The Family was WAY too politically correct to even attempt to understand Meridith's perspective. I know in my family, I'm loved and supported, yet we can openly talk about the hatred and bigotry gay people experience regularly. It's reality. I feel the Stone family was trying too hard to make the son feel loved by pretending homosexuals don't experience life differently from heterosexuals, which is simply not true. Then they decided to just use it as more ammo against Meridith.

So the communication breakdown occurred when the mother was being light-hearted with her comment, likely in an attempt to make her gay son feel welcome, but Meridith interpreted it literally and couldn't express her opinion without the overly PC family taking offense.

reply

[–] fauxindigo 12 years ago

Well if everyone in the world reacted how the family reacted to Meredith when she suggested that it'd be crazy to wish your child was gay because their lives are apparently so different than straight people- there would hardly be a problem. Like I said before, the only reason life is or has to be any different/harder for gay people is because of ignorance like Meredith's- that a gay persons life is innately harder; the ONLY reason it's harder is because of social stigma. The family was too hard on Meredith, but I love how loving, accepting, smart and understanding the family was; it sets the perfect example of how people SHOULD think about gay people and their gay children.

reply

[–] extranormalchaos 12 years ago

People compare 'gay' with 'black' for a multitude of reasons, not because skin color and sexual orientation are exactly the same thing- but because both are immutable traits that human beings possess and have struggled to find equality in regards to; if you can't see the similarities, you are either ignorant or in denial.

It is generally a bad idea to compare having black children to having gay children--at least in the context of what was said. Black parents are always going to produce black children, while it is almost uncertain (it is somewhat predictable) whether or not someone will have gay children. We can ignore the fact that they are both "immutable" traits--as you call them (and I agree)--because Meredith never disputes whether homosexuality is a choice.

they're not gay! Meredith inadvertently suggested that the parents were somehow to blame for their son being gay.

This is not a very strong argument because Meredith's central question is an really more of an ethical one, than a moral one.

Being gay IS normal; gay people have existed throughout history, science shows homosexuality to be normal- how much more proof do you need?

No, no, no. I get so angry when people say stuff like this. Being gay is still not normal and who should know this better than a gay man himself. Heterosexuality is still the prevailing model of the normal lifestyle. Tell me that homosexuality is normal when the institution of marriage no longer exists, gay teenagers are no longer bullied, and the terms for lgbtq are dissolved. Heterosexuality is built so deeply within our social systems and as a gay man, I can tell you that we are still being marginalized because of this.

Being gay IS normal; gay people have existed throughout history, science shows homosexuality to be normal- how much more proof do you need? There is no legitimacy to suggest that gay people are gay for any other reason than because that's how their brains are wired.

This is false. There is evidence to support nature and nurture. A good example is identical twins because they suggest that both forces are at work. I won't explain because you can look for it yourself. Also, look up "homosexuality epigenetics" for evidence supporting nurture.

It's like when people blame the victim instead of the bully

No, just, bad argument... I don't know why you make this an argument about choice at the level of the child. No one is debating this! She is not questioning whether Patrick or Thad has a choice in their gayness. All arguments have to be before the mother has even had the child because we are debating the question of whether anyone would wish for their child to be gay.

Once again I am gay and if I had the chance to change myself, I would not. But yet, I would not WISH for gay children. I would be accepting of/love either, but I would not go back and make all my children gay if I had the power. This is such a silly thing to say.

reply

[–] fauxindigo 12 years ago

"No, no, no. I get so angry when people say stuff like this. Being gay is still not normal and who should know this better than a gay man himself. Heterosexuality is still the prevailing model of the normal lifestyle. Tell me that homosexuality is normal when the institution of marriage no longer exists, gay teenagers are no longer bullied, and the terms for lgbtq are dissolved. Heterosexuality is built so deeply within our social systems and as a gay man, I can tell you that we are still being marginalized because of this."

------You're talking about social issues, but homosexuality as a human condition is natural. Being gay IS normal;just because it's not common doesn't mean it's not normal.

"This is false. There is evidence to support nature and nurture. A good example is identical twins because they suggest that both forces are at work. I won't explain because you can look for it yourself. Also, look up "homosexuality epigenetics" for evidence supporting nurture."

------My statement is NOT false. Being gay to begin with is nature; homosexuality is how people's brains are wired. All nurture does is affect HOW a gay person behaves.

"No, just, bad argument... I don't know why you make this an argument about choice at the level of the child. No one is debating this! She is not questioning whether Patrick or Thad has a choice in their gayness. All arguments have to be before the mother has even had the child because we are debating the question of whether anyone would wish for their child to be gay.

Once again I am gay and if I had the chance to change myself, I would not. But yet, I would not WISH for gay children. I would be accepting of/love either, but I would not go back and make all my children gay if I had the power. This is such a silly thing to say."

-------I 100% stand by my statements, and they are in no way silly you ass. Debating the question of whether anyone would wish for their child to be gay: The mother of the family was obviously joking when she said she wished all her boys were gay, but her sentiment painted a larger picture of her (and the families) unconditional love and acceptance and understanding of her gay son. By her saying she wished all of her sons were gay, she not only made her gay son feel loved and normal- but revered; why is this a bad thing? To put the gay son on a pedestal- for once?! Like I said, it's Meredith's sentiment (that it'd be absurd to wish for a child to be gay) that in turn MAKES gays marginalized; it's a vicious cycle when the idea of the 'gay lifestyle' being so hard or horrible in turn actually does make the 'gay lifestyle' hard and horrible. As if there aren't great qualities that gay men have that a mother wouldn't want in her son? The way this family treated the gay son and his partner is the Christian and loving example that everyone should live by.

You're negative opinions and feelings about a mother possibly wishing her children were gay perpetuate gays self-hatred. Stop hating yourself.

reply

[–] lswirth 9 years ago

thank you so much for your input. I completely agree with what you said.

reply

[–] lilmarkuk 12 years ago

Im gay BUT i do also belive not many parents who are pregnant want their child to be born gay

BUT that does not mean they are against gay people, its just not something you think about, untill it happens lol

reply

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Mr_Ectoplasma 12 years ago

I've seen this movie several times over the years and I really don't think it matters much WHAT she said, but more HOW she said it. It's clear by her body language and her voice that what she was saying wasn't coming from a place of hatred or disgust; she was just concerned and interested and wasn't able to get her words out right. It fundamentally sounded bad in the circumstances, but I don't think that was her intent. The family jumped on her a bit hastily I think; granted, it was their dinner and their home, but still, give the girl a break, or at least start a discussion rather than flip out on her. And for the record, I am gay.

reply

[–] Kimrubymoon 9 years ago

I feel your comment is accurate about her behavior and therefore, thought it might be a good spot to interject my thoughts. I have an opinion here that may or may not be true but it's definately one that has not been explored.

Some threads on this post about the movie that have discussed Meredith's behavior, intentions and motives have touched on everything from her being pitied -- to her being vilified. Some have discussed her social awkwardness but no one has supposed it goes beyond a simple anxiety issue.

I propose the idea that she may have Aspbergers Syndrome. I'm actually serious. I have some professional AND personal experience with this. A cousin of mine has these exact types of faux-pas in social situations; which is only intensified if he (my cousin) feels cornered. The clearing of the throat, the nervous fidgeting, smelling the soaps and generally looking emotionally uncomfortable (to the point of being physically uncomfortable). The telling feature is the NO FILTER she exhibits.

Again, when I first saw this I said--- Oh! That behavior reminds me of my cousin! And let me tell you---- HE could definately piss off the Pope with ease.

Anyway, I also have some nursing and psych training that backs this up. Again, a lot of what we know about Aspbergers is still murky, a bit subjective, and up for debate---but this is my opinion. SEVERE social anxiety may explain also, of course, and we'd have to know more, but I'd be interested to talk with whoever conceived of Meridith and hear from them what their idea was when writing her.

Would love to hear from anyone with any education or experience and get their point of view.

reply

[–] Black_Mumba1 12 years ago

Race has NOTHING to do with sexual preference.

Comparing the two is like comparing oranges and pigs.

Not everyone agrees with homosexuality and it does not make them racist, it does not make them wrong.

Everyone is entitled to have their own opinion, not everyone wants to accept homosexuality and they should not have to.

reply