Stephanie Meyer's 'Twilight' saga has been wildly successful - especially amongst an audience that embraces romance, the supernatural and the concept of 'true love will out.'Which is why Stephanie Meyer's publicity hounds are scrambling desperately to cover up accusations that Meyer, a devout Mormon who attended Brigham Young university in Salt Lake City*, donated a 'substantial' amount of money in support of 'Proposition 8.'
Prop 8, as I'm sure you already know, was the controversial voter referendum in California, which amended the constitution to redefine marriage as 'between a man and a woman' - thus rendering 18,000 same-sex unions null and void and banning gay marriage for the foreseeable future.
(The California supreme court upheld the amendment on appeal, but legitimized the 18,000 existing marriages.)
This isn't exactly surprising. 45% of out-of-state donations in support of Proposition 8 came from Utah, while 80% to 90% of all door-to-door campaigning against Gay Marriage was carried out by Mormons and members of the Church of Latter Day Saints**.In all, Mormons donated approximately $20 million dollars to ban same-sex unions in California (some families donated their life savings and their kid's college funds.)
At the very least, a significant amount of money from Meyer's 10% 'tithe' she pays to the Mormon church would have been used to support Proposition 8.
However, accusations still abound that she donated more money directly to the campaign.
In any event, I know this would upset many fans of the 'Twilight' saga.
Most of the ones I know were avid opponents of Proposition 8 and would be very disappointed to learn that Meyer's romanticized version of 'true love' only extends to those of different genders.
NB - Bob, of the blog The Mormons Are Coming! refuted my claim in his blog post 'Did Twilight Fans Help Pass Prop 8?' He points out that no cash contributions were made to the 'Yes on Prop 8' campaign by the church. That being said, over $190,000 of 'in-kind' services were donated in direct support of Proposition 8 - which still leaves their members (including Meyer) culpable.
* ...actually Provo, Utah, an hour south of Salt Lake City, as corrected by the lovely Ashley - Kitty Copy Editor
** ...actually the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, as corrected by Ashley - Kitty Copy Editor
23 comments:
I'm not quite sure what the point of this post is... ???
I guess we could start making a list of all authors, actors, sports figures etc... and find out where they stand politically and what causes they support. Are you implying that Meyer somehow has an obligation to her fans to not support something they would be against? Meyer puts out a product and it is the choice of consumers whether to buy that product. If enough of them have a problem with her religious and/or political views then they'll stop buying her books. It is really of no effect to the readers what she does with her money. No one is forcing them to pay for her books. She is not being financed through tax dollars to write her books.
Yes, Meyer is a Mormon but, I would not call the Twilight series a religious work. There's abstinence presented in both sex before marriage for the leading couple and the abstention from drinking human blood by a small group of vampires that believes it is wrong. Is there some devious attempt by Meyer to lure her readers to abstain from sex before marriage or to attempt any sort of control over "natural" urges? Ummmmm... I've read these books (the 4th was so stupid it about killed me to finish it) and there's plenty in these books that goes against traditional religious teaching. The Twilight books are nothing more than romance novels using the fascination of forbidden love and the desire of girls/women to have the boy/man they love truly put them first.
If her readers feel strongly enough about her supporting Prop 8 (first by being a Mormon and tithing... and then if she did personally as well) then they can refuse to read her works or see movies based on her works. She may or may not feel it in her pocketbook... and she may or may not care if it impacts her financially.
I reserve the right to not see the movies of a certain Chavez loving loud mouth. That is totally my perrogative. If those people who listen to a particular genre of music are upset by a very popular group bad mouthing our president while abroad and they choose to no longer support them... that is their perrogative. If people don't want to shop at certain stores because of causes they support... that's their perrogative.
My goodness.
Well, poo. You don't have your archives listed by labels on your sidebar! I seem to recall you being rather complimentary of Meyer before learning she was a Mormon and was wanting to wrangle up some evidence to support that!
http://rolandhulme.blogspot.com/2009/02/dissecting-twilight.html?showComment=1235590920000
Brigham Young University is located in Provo, Utah, an hour south of Salt Lake City. Also, the correct name of the church is the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. There is a style guide available at lds.org if anyone is interested. If you're going to be so very adamant about your position on the LDS Church, please do use its name correctly and fact check before posting. As Coffee Bean mentions, I think the beauty of agency is anyone's ability and prerogative to choose what they do and do not support. Take that away and we've got some serious trouble.
Thanks ck! That is the post I was thinking of!
And thanks Ashley! I learn something new every day and today you are the teacher!
P R E R O G A T I V E
I wasn't sure on how I was spelling it, and too lazy to check, LOL! No matter which way I would have spelled it, I wouldv'e gotten it wrong.
Sorry Ashley - I should have checked all the details.
Anyway, guys - this isn't a criticism of the Mormon church (although I think that family which donated $50,000 are thoroughly irresponsible. They should have sent their kids to college with that money.)
My criticism isn't even of Meyer herself - in all honesty, she's made no secret of her Mormon faith and all that it entails.
I criticize the publishers, who have specifically downplayed this BECAUSE Twilight has such a large and popular following amongst teenage girls, the majority of whom (I imagine) would be upset to know she supported Proposition 8.
But really, it's more about writing a blog post to inform people of her beliefs - because these things do matter to some people and it's fair to let them know about it and make their own minds up.
I stand my exactly what I said in my closing statement:
"In any event, I know this would upset many fans of the 'Twilight' saga.
Most of the ones I know were avid opponents of Proposition 8 and would be very disappointed to learn that Meyer's romanticized version of 'true love' only extends to those of different genders."
I haven't criticized her, or her beliefs. I've just said - absolutely correctly - that many of her fans might be disappointed to learn that she thinks that way.
"At the very least, a significant amount of money from Meyer's 10% 'tithe' she pays to the Mormon church would have been used to support Proposition 8."
Not true. See http://themormonsarecoming.blogspot.com/2009/05/did-twilight-fans-help-pass-prop-8.html
for an explanation and links that prove her tithing money had nothing to do with Prop 8.
That's a fascinating link, Bob! Thanks for sharing.
Stephanie Meyer has been conspicuously silent on her personal beliefs regarding gay marriage - and there is still a rumor (unsubstantiated) that she donated money herself to the cause - but I have NO evidence to support that claim.
I'm going to post that link in the body of my post - as I think it's particularly pertinent.
How do you know the publishers specifically downplayed the fact that Meyer is a Mormon? The only time I hear about an author's personal beliefs is when their books are about them.
Well... I take that back. I did hear that Philip Pullman who wrote The Golden Compass series is an atheist but, those are children's books and I heard it through the Christian community. There was nothing in secular circles about his beliefs or anything negative about his books.
Other than that... I can't think of any instances where an author of fiction has some sort of disclosure to the public about their privately held beliefs.
Roland, Roland, Roland...
You are as bad as those on the "other" side with their conspiracy theories and speculation about things. Maybe Pullman's publishers deliberately downplayed/hid his atheism so that those that loved the stories but held differing beliefs wouldn't be offended by him.
Ha! Actually, Coffee Bean, you're on the right track with Pullman - except his publishers deliberately played UP the whole anti-religion angle, as it was tons of free publicity when the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights and Focus on the Family 'objected' to his books.
I'm in no means a conspiracy theorist. I work in marketing and I'm a writer! I know exactly how it works - and I suspect that the publishers of Twilight would want to downplay Meyer's religion because, as you're well aware, Christianity isn't 'cool' at the moment and Mormonism is the LEAST cool of all of the Christian sects!
All the publishers are interested in is selling more books - this is why, for example, JK Rowling was only able to 'out' Dumbledore as gay AFTER the book series had ended.
Did you see Bob's link, though - interesting stuff.
In some ways I am very much out of the loop. I didn't hear Dumbledore was gay... LOL!
I did go look at Bob's link. I decided to look at a few other posts and found a very interesting little tidbit I did not know. We all know Glenn Beck is Mormon...but, did you know that Harry Reid is as well???
Just a minute... back to Dumbledore...
The Harry Potter series is a work of fiction, how is it that Dumbledore was revealed as being gay after the books were all released? Does Dumbledore exist outside the Harry Potter series? Do all of the characters have back stories we do not know? That has got to be one of the MOST retarded things I have ever heard. What is the point of revealing after the fact that Dumbledore is gay. LAME-O.
Culpable of what? She is a private citizen and she can support whomever she wants.
So she can, Rose! But if she loses popularity, readership and sales as a result of her beliefs, that's something she should accept responsibility for.
Many of Twilight's readers would object if she was against same sex marriage.
most people i know who've read that dreadful tween "novel" or seen its awful motion picture counterpart are, in fact, queer. i'll definitely let them know about this news and follow up on its validity as more information becomes available. if you think us queers and our allies in california won't boycott another bigot in a hot new york minute, you've got another thing comin'!
I'm very sure of the point of this post: the author of Twilight is a homophobic Mormon who gave oodles of $$$$ in support of Prop 8. Spread the word and *boycott* her books!
"Many of Twilight's readers would object if she was against same sex marriage."
Says who?
Don't automatically assume that most people support gay marriage. In fact the majority of people do not - that is why it has passed in 30+ sates including California twice.
Sorry, Rubes. Guess I was just giving them the benefit of the doubt and assuming the majority of Twilight fans weren't homophobic idiots who felt that their retarded morality was more important than the constitutionally protected right to marry whoever you want (Loving vs. Virginia) and the overarching and fundamental American principle that this is a free country in which no religious denomination has the right to tell you what you can and can't do (First Amendment.)
Just because you do not support gay marriage doesn't make you a "homophobic idiot".
"retarded morality" - very nice. Anyway citing Loving v. Virginia proves nothing. It may be primary law in VA but it would only be persuasive elsewhere; it obviously is not as most states have rejected it.
The 1st amendment has no bearing as if it did the federal law would have superseded all state law (Supremacy Clause).
No religious institution made any law. The people voted for the law - there are so many assumptions coming from you that it's killing me. You automatically assume that the people who vote for these things are "morally retarded" religious people. Most of them probably are religious but it is a far cry from saying that a religious party told people "can and can't do".
Our right to vote is a constitutional right as well.
Rubes, the fact that you don't support gay marriage doesn't make you a homophobic idiot. Possibly just homophobic.
The fact that you don't even know what Loving vs. Virginia is or represents DOES make you an idiot (it's the case which allowed interracial marriage. Google it, for Christ's sake.)
The United States was founded on a separation of church and state - so if your religion says that homosexuality is a sin, that's not a good enough reason to make it illegal, even if the majority of people think so.
The US was founded on INDIVIDUAL FREEDOMS not majority rule. If we did everything on majority rule, we'd still have slavery (or at least segregation) and the death penalty in every state.
So many of these right wing positions are so in opposition of everything the Founding Fathers stood for that they're just laughable.
I stand corrected about Loving - It was a supreme court case. But that opens up a whole other debate which I will not get into.
I am not homophobic either. I have plenty of people that I associate with that are gay. I have no problem with them at all. I am not anti-gay, or anti-gay rights. I am pro keeping the definition of marriage the same - as it was intended. Give gays all the same rights - I have no problem with that - just call it civil union.
Anyways, If our founding fathers saw what we were doing to our country they would be rolling over in their graves. If they saw the stunt Gavin Newsom from San Francisco they would not be able to believe it. What he did was a direct attack on the rule of law and on the constitution itself.
What he did was establish the will of the government over the will of the people and with out their knowing and without the correct measures. What he did was the EXACT thing they LEFT England for. Don't bring them into it because they would not be pleased.
There is another awesome assumption that these are "right winged" ideas. California, a mostly democratic state - has repealed this law twice.
"I am pro keeping the definition of marriage the same - as it was intended."
---
Interesting that you should mention keeping marriage the same- considering that marriage has changed a good deal over the centuries. Would you have been for keeping it the same when child brides, multiple spouses, and the definition of women as property were all part of the definition of 'marriage'?
Coffe Bean: You are correct that it is up to the consumer whether or not to support a product based on the creator's or manufacturer's political/social/religious stance.
Ginger's post provides useful knowledge to help some of us determine whether or not we choose to continue to support Meyer's work, or support the publisher, whichever. So to answer your question, THAT is the point of the post and I am grateful to Ginger for the insight.
Post a Comment