# I don't get people who say "so and so supports a cause I don't agree with so I won't see his mov **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [May 30, 2010, 2:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-dont-get-people-who-say-so-and-so-supports-a-cause-i-dont-agree-with-so-i-wont-see-his-mov/541251 "2010-05-30T02:40:43Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 16\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![valleyofthedolls](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/a4c791/32.png) [@valleyofthedolls](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/valleyofthedolls)\ **Post date:** [June 2, 2010, 1:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-dont-get-people-who-say-so-and-so-supports-a-cause-i-dont-agree-with-so-i-wont-see-his-mov/541251/61 "2010-06-02T01:13:43Z")
> [@amarone](#): > > Why does it have to make a difference to the boycotted person? I will not pay to see a Mickey Rourke movie because he gave financial support to the IRA. I do not want any of my money, even though the amount is infinitesimal to him, going to Rourke (and definitely not to the IRA). It makes a difference to me, and that’s enough for me. I don’t get this kind of thinking either. Do you buy bananas? chocolate? cell phones? oil/gasoline? All the above (and many more products) are produced by looter companies that have, IMHO, done a lot more damage than Roman Polanski. Not that I don’t think Roman Polanski shouldn’t go to jail. He should but I’m not going to get on my high horse about seeing his movies when I just bought Dole bananas the other day. ---
**Author:** ![jordanr2](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/838e76/32.png) [@jordanr2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jordanr2)\ **Post date:** [June 2, 2010, 2:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-dont-get-people-who-say-so-and-so-supports-a-cause-i-dont-agree-with-so-i-wont-see-his-mov/541251/62 "2010-06-02T02:55:50Z")
> [@Lamia](#): > > Congratulations, you have managed to write one of the most condescending paragraphs I’ve ever seen in this forum. Have you seen _Roman Polanski: Wanted and Desired_? ---
**Author:** ![jordanr2](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/838e76/32.png) [@jordanr2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jordanr2)\ **Post date:** [June 2, 2010, 2:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-dont-get-people-who-say-so-and-so-supports-a-cause-i-dont-agree-with-so-i-wont-see-his-mov/541251/63 "2010-06-02T02:56:52Z")
> [@Grumman](#): > > As **Lamia** said, Riefenstahl will become relevant when someone tries to tell me her movies are worth watching, and not a moment sooner. As far as my viewing decisions are concerned, she might as well not exist. I think her films, at least one or two, appear on most established canons. You’re free to disregard her work but she’s a huge figure in film history. ---
**Author:** ![Lamia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/8e7dd6/32.png) [@Lamia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lamia)\ **Post date:** [June 2, 2010, 3:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-dont-get-people-who-say-so-and-so-supports-a-cause-i-dont-agree-with-so-i-wont-see-his-mov/541251/64 "2010-06-02T03:42:59Z")
> [@jordanr2](#): > > Have you seen _Roman Polanski: Wanted and Desired_? Didn’t you say you were done here? If you’re so determined to defend Roman Polanski’s honor, maybe you should start a new thread about it. ---
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [June 2, 2010, 4:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-dont-get-people-who-say-so-and-so-supports-a-cause-i-dont-agree-with-so-i-wont-see-his-mov/541251/65 "2010-06-02T04:43:38Z")
The Polanski case is one where the person in question conducted a clearly bad act, but seeing one of his movies wouldn’t necessarily be contributing to another bad act. I’d let the chance of another bad act factor into my decision in that kind of case. I don’t like Tom Cruise the actor or the Scientologist, or Scientology, but he hasn’t raped any children or aided a monstrous dictator to my knowledge. Like other people who do and say things I don’t like, Cruise isn’t committing crimes. So I’ll see their movies and buy their chicken without worrying about contributing to evil. But there may be somebody I just don’t like, and I can boycott their movie, and eat something else if I feel like it. Reminds me of Ty Cobb. He may have been the best baseball player of his time, and one of the most hated men. Life is full of strange dichotomies. ---
**Author:** ![amarone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e0b2c6/32.png) [@amarone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/amarone)\ **Post date:** [June 2, 2010, 11:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-dont-get-people-who-say-so-and-so-supports-a-cause-i-dont-agree-with-so-i-wont-see-his-mov/541251/66 "2010-06-02T11:05:10Z")
> [@valleyofthedolls](#): > > I don’t get this kind of thinking either. Do you buy bananas? chocolate? cell phones? oil/gasoline? All the above (and many more products) are produced by looter companies that have, IMHO, done a lot more damage than Roman Polanski. And I just don’t get the kind of thinking that says you are perfectly happy to have your money go to people you despise and to help them continue funding activities that you loath. As consumers one of our weapons is to vote with our wallet. Yes, I do avoid some products, retailers and service companies for various reasons, including not agreeing with how they spend their money. To do otherwise seems very shallow to me. Yes, he supports murdering scum but hey, the movie’s pretty good so that’s okay then. ---
**Author:** ![valleyofthedolls](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/a4c791/32.png) [@valleyofthedolls](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/valleyofthedolls)\ **Post date:** [June 2, 2010, 2:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-dont-get-people-who-say-so-and-so-supports-a-cause-i-dont-agree-with-so-i-wont-see-his-mov/541251/67 "2010-06-02T14:12:15Z")
> [@amarone](#): > > And I just don’t get the kind of thinking that says you are perfectly happy to have your money go to people you despise and to help them continue funding activities that you loath. > > As consumers one of our weapons is to vote with our wallet. Yes, I do avoid some products, retailers and service companies for various reasons, including not agreeing with how they spend their money. To do otherwise seems very shallow to me. Yes, he supports murdering scum but hey, the movie’s pretty good so that’s okay then. Not that I don’t agree with you, it’s just impossible to avoid. As I said, it seems silly to get in a lather over Mickey Rourke or Roman Polasnki when every time you turn the ignition on your car or buy groceries, you’re helping to fund companies that have committed crimes on an order of magnitude far worse than the above. How do you justify one but not the other? ---
**Author:** ![amarone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e0b2c6/32.png) [@amarone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/amarone)\ **Post date:** [June 2, 2010, 2:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-dont-get-people-who-say-so-and-so-supports-a-cause-i-dont-agree-with-so-i-wont-see-his-mov/541251/68 "2010-06-02T14:25:25Z")
> [@valleyofthedolls](#): > > Not that I don’t agree with you, it’s just impossible to avoid. As I said, it seems silly to get in a lather over Mickey Rourke or Roman Polasnki when every time you turn the ignition on your car or buy groceries, you’re helping to fund companies that have committed crimes on an order of magnitude far worse than the above. How do you justify one but not the other? I choose the things that offend me, others choose the things that offend them. If Dole’s activities offended me as much as funding terrorism, then I would not buy Dole products. (I don’t buy Dole strawberries, but that is because they are tasteless). So I do not need to justify not boycotting someone/thing that you find offensive. Personally, I find the IRA’s activities to be far more offensive than Dole. How many bombs has Dole set in pubs, restaurants and shops? Maybe I have a different perspective on this as I am British, but when I was a young adult living in London there was a small but finite chance that when I went out to eat, drink or Christmas shop I would be blown up by people funded by Mickey Rourke. ---
**Author:** ![BwanaBob](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bwanabob/32/2985_2.png) [@BwanaBob](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BwanaBob)\ **Post date:** [June 2, 2010, 2:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-dont-get-people-who-say-so-and-so-supports-a-cause-i-dont-agree-with-so-i-wont-see-his-mov/541251/69 "2010-06-02T14:44:44Z")
> [@Snowboarder\_Bo](#): > > But it’s not as simple as that. > > Your friends have some problem with this Christian attitude, I assume. > > Well, if your friends continue to eat there, that means they are giving the owners money. The owner’s wealth will increase, thus giving them more discretionary income to spend on lobbyists. Lobbyists who might push a law urging that no fast food place can be open on Sunday. CfA owners can push the law on 2 fronts and feel good about it: it helps them financially by shutting down their competitors 1 day a week just like they shut down 1 day a week, and it promotes their Christian ideology, which offends your friends so. They can spend more money, thanks to your friends patronizing their business, on elected officials who espouse views much like their own fundamentalist Christian views (the same views that your friends don’t care for much). > > Giving someone money to spend on promoting views you find abhorrent is stupid, IMO. I try not to do it. > > Do you donate to the presidential campaign of the guy you aren’t going to vote for? Unless you have evidence that the owners do actually spend money on fundamentalist lobbyists, this sort of boycott is extremely paranoid behavior. It’s a big stretch from “I don’t work on Sundays” to “There ought to be a law”. ---
**Author:** ![valleyofthedolls](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/a4c791/32.png) [@valleyofthedolls](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/valleyofthedolls)\ **Post date:** [June 2, 2010, 3:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-dont-get-people-who-say-so-and-so-supports-a-cause-i-dont-agree-with-so-i-wont-see-his-mov/541251/70 "2010-06-02T15:32:29Z")
> [@amarone](#): > > I choose the things that offend me, others choose the things that offend them. If Dole’s activities offended me as much as funding terrorism, then I would not buy Dole products. (I don’t buy Dole strawberries, but that is because they are tasteless). Dole (as an example) has funded terrorism. As has Chiquita. As have most oil companies. [Quote=amarone] So I do not need to justify not boycotting someone/thing that you find offensive. Personally, I find the IRA’s activities to be far more offensive than Dole. How many bombs has Dole set in pubs, restaurants and shops? [/QUOTE] Please note, I’m not asking you to justify yourself. It’s my mistake that I quoted you specifically when I should have targeted my comments to a much more general level. That said my opinion still stands, it’s hypocritical that a great deal of people would boycott a a movie because of an actor or director’s crime but have no qualms about purchasing products from companies that have done far, far worse. [QUOTE=amarone] Maybe I have a different perspective on this as I am British, but when I was a young adult living in London there was a small but finite chance that when I went out to eat, drink or Christmas shop I would be blown up by people funded by Mickey Rourke. [/QUOTE] From my perspective, you and many more have an extraordinarily small monkeysphere but then what do I know? Between choosing whether to worry about the IRA or getting my drink on in the Irish bars that lined 2nd Ave in NYC (bars that I’m sure funneled money to the IRA) I always went for my gin and tonics. ---
**Author:** ![amarone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e0b2c6/32.png) [@amarone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/amarone)\ **Post date:** [June 2, 2010, 4:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-dont-get-people-who-say-so-and-so-supports-a-cause-i-dont-agree-with-so-i-wont-see-his-mov/541251/71 "2010-06-02T16:02:41Z")
> [@valleyofthedolls](#): > > Between choosing whether to worry about the IRA or getting my drink on in the Irish bars that lined 2nd Ave in NYC (bars that I’m sure funneled money to the IRA) I always went for my gin and tonics. That’s risky behavior - they could mark you as being English if g&t is your favorite tipple. ---
**Author:** ![Terraplane](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/74df32/32.png) [@Terraplane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terraplane)\ **Post date:** [June 2, 2010, 6:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-dont-get-people-who-say-so-and-so-supports-a-cause-i-dont-agree-with-so-i-wont-see-his-mov/541251/72 "2010-06-02T18:43:35Z")
> [@BwanaBob](#): > > Unless you have evidence that the owners do actually spend money on fundamentalist lobbyists, this sort of boycott is extremely paranoid behavior. > > It’s a big stretch from “I don’t work on Sundays” to “There ought to be a law”. Chick-Fil-A is a sponsor of [Focus on the Family](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Focus_on_the_Family), a very vocal and active opponent of gay rights and abortion rights. Chick-Fil-A might not be trying to make everybody close on Sunday, but they’re definitely using their profits to fund fundamentalist lobbyists. ---
**Author:** ![Wheelz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wheelz/32/5718_2.png) [@Wheelz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wheelz)\ **Post date:** [June 2, 2010, 7:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-dont-get-people-who-say-so-and-so-supports-a-cause-i-dont-agree-with-so-i-wont-see-his-mov/541251/73 "2010-06-02T19:34:13Z")
> [@Snowboarder\_Bo](#): > > Well, if your friends continue to eat there, that means they are giving the owners money. The owner’s wealth will increase, thus giving them more discretionary income to spend on lobbyists. Lobbyists who might push a law urging that no fast food place can be open on Sunday. CfA owners can push the law on 2 fronts and feel good about it: it helps them financially by shutting down their competitors 1 day a week just like they shut down 1 day a week, and it promotes their Christian ideology, which offends your friends so. They can spend more money, thanks to your friends patronizing their business, on elected officials who espouse views much like their own fundamentalist Christian views (the same views that your friends don’t care for much). > > Giving someone money to spend on promoting views you find abhorrent is stupid, IMO. I try not to do it. > > Do you donate to the presidential campaign of the guy you aren’t going to vote for? Not the same thing at all. There is a clear distinction between paying for a specific product or service, and donating money directly to a political or religious cause. My god, do I have to vet the beliefs of every individual who may profit from how I spend my money? Who could do that, realistically? Sometimes buying a chicken sandwich is just buying a chicken sandwich. ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [June 3, 2010, 1:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-dont-get-people-who-say-so-and-so-supports-a-cause-i-dont-agree-with-so-i-wont-see-his-mov/541251/74 "2010-06-03T13:11:31Z")
> [@jordanr2](#): > > It’s intriguing that this logic isn’t applied to the films of someone like Leni Riefenstahl. Actually, I would apply that logic to the films of someone who prostitutes the cinematic art to the dissemination of propaganda lies (coffBenSteincoff). ---
**Author:** ![Telemark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/telemark/32/372_2.png) [@Telemark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Telemark)\ **Post date:** [June 3, 2010, 1:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-dont-get-people-who-say-so-and-so-supports-a-cause-i-dont-agree-with-so-i-wont-see-his-mov/541251/75 "2010-06-03T13:23:11Z")
> [@jordanr2](#): > > It’s intriguing that this logic isn’t applied to the films of someone like Leni Riefenstahl. Actually, this is exactly the reason why I’ve never seen or considered purchasing a very highly regarded skiing film with Riefenstahl in it. ---
**Author:** ![Baal\_Houtham](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/baal_houtham/32/13604_2.png) [@Baal\_Houtham](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Baal_Houtham)\ **Post date:** [June 3, 2010, 3:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-dont-get-people-who-say-so-and-so-supports-a-cause-i-dont-agree-with-so-i-wont-see-his-mov/541251/76 "2010-06-03T15:05:51Z")
> [@ArchiveGuy](#): > > You know who didn’t drug and rape a child? The hundreds of other people who work on the film with him. (…) there are a lot of other people’s livelihoods at stake in his films, not just his. Those people have already gotten their paycheck, and a low box office won’t hurt their future industry opportunities. Possibly their royalty checks might be slightly tinier. But if the headliners – stars and directors – don’t do well that can hurt their future income. The two sets aren’t mutually exclusive – a bad gross might make the cinematographer less marketable – but there really isn’t much overlap. And if someone watches the second best movie available instead of the best one (featuring the repugnant star), they are still supporting a similar number of industry professionals… just different ones. Personally I avoid Tom Cruise movies, but am not obsessive about it. If the movie got great reviews I’d go along with a group of friends to see it. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-dont-get-people-who-say-so-and-so-supports-a-cause-i-dont-agree-with-so-i-wont-see-his-mov/541251.md?page=3)