John August

Rant

Winning marriage in Washington State

Rant

Four states will be voting on marriage equality this November, and for a change, I think it’s worth winning this round.

For new readers, a brief recap: I [got married](http://johnaugust.com/2008/i-got-married) to my husband back in 2008, during the months before Proposition 8 passed and took that right away. I’m still married in California, kinda-sorta married in some other states, and single in the eyes of the Federal government — except for taxes, for which I have to fill out [phantom returns](http://www.kiplinger.com/features/archives/2008/01/domestic-partner-joint-tax-returns.html). Yes, it’s frustrating; no, I wouldn’t do anything different. Marriage is great.

Since 2008, I’ve focused my time, money and attention on the *Perry* Prop 8 case, which is currently awaiting a hearing before the U.S. Supreme Court. ((The Court will also be considering one or more DOMA cases, which is actually more relevant for my situation, since DOMA addresses federal issues.)) I believe the courts are ultimately the correct place for these matters; the rights of minorities shouldn’t be put up for a popular vote.

With this philosophy, I’ve basically ignored the other states with same-sex marriage votes over the past four years. I fact, I wondered whether a state victory might send a dangerous message: *see, it’s perfectly fine to vote on civil rights!*

But this year, with four states voting on same-sex marriage, I think it’s worth winning at least one of them.

Last week, I donated to [Washington United for Marriage](http://washingtonunitedformarriage.org), which is working to approve R74, a measure to extend marriage to same-sex couples while protecting the rights of churches to do their own thing. (You can read the exact wording on Ballotpedia.)

The same measure already passed the legislature — couples should be getting married right now — but opponents got it placed on the ballot for the same reason they always do:

> Every time the electorate has had the opportunity to cast a ballot, the people vote for traditional marriage.

That’s Chip White, the deputy campaign director for Preserve Marriage Washington, reiterating a standard talking point.

I think it’s time to prove him wrong, and Washington is a great place to do it.

Here’s why a win matters: Federal judges are not oblivious to popular opinion, and no poll is as clear-cut as a vote. Winning same-sex marriage in Washington State would show that public opinion has crossed a tipping point, and that a pro-equality ruling would not be ahead of the curve.

So far, polling in Washington State has been strong but not decisive, with 55 percent of voters in favor of marriage equality. Just like California, the vote will probably be closer than that. But a lot has changed in four years, with popular support climbing over the 50 percent barrier for the first time. Most Americans assume marriage equality will happen. If it isn’t already the mainstream opinion, it seems destined to get there.

Why donate to Washington, and not one of the other three states with marriage issues on the ballot? I think they’re all worthy. I can only speak to my thought process in making my decision.

In polling, Maine’s marriage equality bid seems to have an even bigger lead than Washington’s. Just looking at the map, geography suggests destiny, completing a northeastern block of states with happily-married gay people. I think they’ll get marriage regardless of my dollars.

Minnesota is voting on a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage, much like Proposition 8. I think all these constitutional amendments will be struck down by the Court at some point. Spending money to defeat this one doesn’t immediately help couples get married, which is my priority.

Maryland’s Question 6 feels very much like Washington’s R74: passed by the legislature, then placed on the ballot for an up/down vote. I chose to support Washington over Maryland largely out of West Coast bias; I wanted another state on my side of the country to get marriage equality.

I still believe what I wrote at the start: I don’t think we should be voting on marriage at all. But I’m donating money this time because it may be our best opportunity to never vote on these issues again. With even one or two wins for our team, the other side loses its perfect-record narrative. Take away their talking points, and there’s not much left to them.

So that’s where I’m at. If you feel similarly, consider [sending some money](https://salsa3.salsalabs.com/o/50436/p/salsa/web/common/public/content?content_item_KEY=10090&track=home_topnav) to help win marriage in Washington.

Phil Coulson and the failure of IMDb

Less IMDb, Rant

If you click over to my [IMDb profile](http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0041864/), you’ll see two new projects: “Phil Coulson: Agent of Shield” and “Coulson’s Day Off.” I’m listed under the writer section, having contributed characters.

Only I didn’t. At all.

I’d never heard of these shorts until I saw them on my profile page. Yes, I worked on the original Iron Man, but I’m not a credited writer and didn’t have any input whatsoever on the character played by Clark Gregg in the franchise.

I’m fairly certain the director simply attached my name — along with Joss Whedon, Fergus & Otsby, Marcum & Holloway — to attract attention to his Marvel fan film. And now that I’m blogging about it, he probably will get some attention.

He’ll also probably get a scary letter from Marvel legal.

Maybe I should feel bad about that — but I really don’t. Fuck him. He’s drafting off my name (and Whedon’s much bigger name) by misrepresenting my involvement in his short film.

If he wanted me to see his movie, he could have sent me a link. Lord knows I’m [accessible](http://twitter.com/johnaugust). I often plug stuff I like. But he didn’t give me that chance. So, as I said, fuck ‘im.

Now, it’s possible that the director himself didn’t link my name to this. ((Click through his other credits and you’ll see the same pattern.)) IMDb credits can be edited by just about anyone, so someone else could have done it.

Which is why I’m saving the bulk of my opprobrium for IMDb.

C’mon, IMDb. Why do you have to suck so much?
—–

My team can make a [browser plug-in](http://quoteunquoteapps.com/less-imdb) that makes your layout less terrible, but we can’t fix your data. That’s on you. You have to do better.

Here’s a simple way you can start: I’m a registered user, so why doesn’t your system kick out an email to confirm a change like this? I know I didn’t work on this. It should never have showed up on the page.

I have a movie coming out, and I’m starting to do publicity. All is takes is one lazy journalist looking at IMDb to assume I’ve been reduced to doing crappy superhero knock-offs.

True, one idiotic fan film isn’t going to hurt my reputation much, but what happens when I’m listed for acting in a porn film, or producing a inflammatory religious documentary? To me, that’s a lot worse than [revealing an actress’s age](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/07/huong-hoang-actress-suing-imdb-amazon_n_1191236.html).

Because there’s no real competition, we’ve come to rely on IMDb. That’s a mistake, but there is not yet a viable replacement. ((On The Talk Show, we speculated that Apple might come out with their own Siri-integrated solution for film credits.))

For now, I could use some reader help — and if you have a few minutes, it’s a useful exercise for seeing how the current IMDb system can be gamed so easily.

1. If you have an IMDb login, head over to [my page](http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0041864/) and click the Edit Page button. (Less IMDb has to be turned off to access it.)
2. In the Filmography > Writing Credits section, choose Correct/Delete.
3. Click Continue.
4. On the next screen, choose Delete for the two Phil Coulson credits.
5. Click “Check these updates.”
6. You’ll get an error message asking you to state why these credits should be deleted. I leave this to your creativity.
7. Click “Recheck these updates.”
8. Click “Submit these updates.”

And you’re done! Maybe! There’s nothing to indicate whether a change is really in the works. Some updates show up quickly, but the auto-generated email lists 7-10 days as normal.

Which says a lot about how seriously IMDb is taking its mission.

**Update:**

Eight hours after posting this — and three days after first filing the credit notice — IMDb has excised the two Phil Coulson shorts from my profile. Thanks to everyone who submitted on my behalf.

I suspect some higher-up at IMDb paid attention, because the other writers who had been listed (including Whedon) are also now unlinked. But the same director is still drafting on credits for other filmmakers. IMDb has corrected one mistake, but not their system.

The scorpion and the frog

Rant

Most versions of this parable run something like this:

> Unable to swim, a scorpion asks a frog to carry him across a rising river.

> The frog worries that the scorpion could sting him. The scorpion argues that if he stung the frog, the frog would sink and the scorpion would drown as well.

> Convinced, the frog agrees and lets the scorpion climb on his back. Halfway across the river, the scorpion does in fact sting the frog, dooming them both.

> “But why?” asks the frog.

> “It’s just my nature,” says the scorpion.

It’s a useful parable that illustrates several principles:

* Creatures can’t change their basic instincts, even for self-interest.

* It’s folly to think you’ll be the exception to the rule. (He’ll keep his word just this once.)

* Scorpions are dicks.

As parables go, it feels more inherently dramatic than most: trust! betrayal! poison! Compare that to another favorite: The tortoise may win the race, but his life was never in danger.

There’s nothing wrong with the scorpion and the frog. But as screenwriters, let’s stop having characters actually recite it. It’s been done before. [A lot.](http://www.enotes.com/topic/The_Scorpion_and_the_Frog) So now it feels like a hacky and desperate way to make villains seem cool by rationalizing their actions.

A friend writes:

> Really was digging the MAGIC CITY pilot until the mob boss dude asks Jeffery Dean Morgan, “Do you know the story of the scorpion and the frog?” to which, of course, JDM replies, “No, I don’t.” — and then the fucking mob boss proceeds to tell the entire fucking parable.

> Can a brother get a moratorium on that bitch or what?

Perhaps a brother can.

Smug ignorance

Rant

I haven’t said much about SOPA/PIPA, largely because the whole thing makes me so depressed about the industry I work in and the lawmakers who are too stupid or too lazy to understand what they’re voting on.

As [Mike Davidson puts it](http://www.mikeindustries.com/blog/archive/2012/01/sopa-and-the-new-gatekeepers):

> If you want to pass any sort of bill that affects the internet, you better vet it with the people who control the internet. […]

> It would be like the EPA trying to sneak through a law that automobiles get 100mpg by year’s end without even talking to the car companies first.

But that’s just what Congress did, and was shocked when freedom-loving citizens and giant corporations — never best buds — rose up together in protest.

When you stir stupid and lazy together, they form a toxic compound called Smug Ignorance. It’s non-partisan and always fatal. The symptoms are phrases like, “I don’t know much about computers, but…” or “Look, no one knows if climate change is real.”

Senator, someone knows. It’s your job to ask.