Slog News & Arts

Line Out

Music & Nightlife

« The Weather Outside Is Frightf... | Where's That Nail Gun When You... »

Friday, March 28, 2008

No Fun Home

posted by on March 28 at 13:14 PM

Here’s a news story about a group trying to get Alison Bechdel’s comic book memoir Fun Home banned from their school:

The issue is with Fun Home, a book assigned for reading in a mid-level English class at the University of Utah. The class introduces students to different literary genres. In the case of Fun Home, it’s told in the style of a comic book. The story centers around the author as she comes to terms with her own and her father’s homosexuality.

Drawings depicting sex acts are included in the 230 page novel. A student in the class was offended and approached the group “No More Pornography,” which made headlines earlier this year when it staged a successful protest of music videos shown a gym in Provo. The group has started an online petition in protest of the book.

Here is No More Pornography’s home page, with links to a petition with 111 signatures, demanding that the University pulls Fun Home.

Now, I’ve read Fun Home. I liked Fun Home a lot. And there is no way that anybody without an Alison Bechdel fetish would be able to masturbate successfully to Fun Home. The sexual content is mostly on the subject of repression and self-loathing. If you look at the news story’s comments, it becomes pretty clear that the real issue isn’t with the sex, but the fact that the book portrays homosexuals as humans. Some comments:

Beware of the pornification and homosexualization of our culture!


You are a pathetic excuse for a complex organism. If “growing up” is accepting immoral behavior and same-sex attraction and the like, then you and I are living in different worlds and it’s time for you to wake up, grab the next bus out, [of Utah] and never turn back.

Let me tell you what my version of “growing up” is. It is facing the statistics and facts that homo’s, lesbi’s, and “sexually diverse” people cannot help perpetuate the cycle of human life. In fact, that way of life is contrary to what is “natural” and, since you are so religious, contrary to what God intended. Nuts and bolts my friend; male and female. NOT bolts and bolts or nuts and nuts. Very unproductive, unnatural, and useless. You don’t have to be LDS to figure that one out genius.

Second, do I want my children to be as open-minded as you? Do I want my children growing up thinking pornography is ok, and valueing virtue and staying moral is a thing of the past and unacceptable? Do I want my children to grow up becoming rapists or child molestors or hermits watching playboy because they can’t get enough? Not in a million years. Look at the studies; look at the numbers. You are living in a dream-world and are deceiving yourself.

The Mormons prove to be just as classy as I’ve always known them to be.

RSS icon Comments


Just more evidence that Mormons are completely out of touch.
Who watches Playboy anymore?

Posted by Justin | March 28, 2008 1:37 PM

That comment is hateful to hermits.

Posted by flamingbanjo | March 28, 2008 1:41 PM

Given the rather liberal jack/non-Mormon temperament of the faculty in the English department at my alma mater (from whom I learned a great deal), these pencil-dicked, dust-cunted homophobic protesters will not drum up enough interest to dislodge even one weenie wagger from the bathrooms at Orson Spencer Hall. Send them 40 miles south to BYU, where the girls are girls and the boys are, too.

Posted by Spoogie | March 28, 2008 2:13 PM

Seriously, isn't Utah the nation's largest consumer of porn?

Posted by question | March 28, 2008 2:16 PM

I suspect those in Utah secretly get off getting so upset about gay sex.Why else would they spend all that time thinking about it, making websites in protest of it, etc.
Nuts indeed.

Posted by orangekrush | March 28, 2008 2:33 PM

dear douche bags,

if you don't like the book, don't take the class...

thank you

Posted by michael strangeways | March 28, 2008 2:51 PM

The "homo sex violates God's law of procreation" argument just slays me. If homosexuality really could lead to a reduction in human population, wouldn't the Chinese have "all homos, all the time" policies to go along with their "one child" law?

This is the most ridiculous deflection and a transparent attempt to justify bigotry.

Posted by Westside forever | March 28, 2008 3:12 PM

#4: Yes. Provo, Utah is a major producer of porn and sex entertaiment in the US.

Posted by Jay | March 28, 2008 3:27 PM

if you apply a cartoon voice to this rant as you read it, maybe something along the lines of south park or the simpsons, it makes way more sense.

Posted by douglas | March 28, 2008 4:28 PM

Watching porn is the first step on a 12-step process of becoming a rapist. Step 2 is denouncing God in all forms....

Posted by robot2501 | March 28, 2008 4:58 PM

China? Uh, thanks to their one-child policy (hooray!) and then then parents preferring boys (in no uncertain terms, if you know what I mean) they've got a generation coming of age with a lot of excess young men with lots of, you know, man juice & energy. So, guesstimates are that this will lead to possible:

a) civil unrest/rebellion

b) mlitarism and foreign adventurism (hey, that's OUR dept!), an army is a great place to put/control/dispose of lots of young males

c) something else? emigration? colonialism? Lots of the gay?

I'm hoping for that last one. Not that I have a dog in this hunt, I just wish people would make love, not war.

Ooh, here's an idea:
d) More video games! It sure seems to keep the Koreans entertained, and us, too.

e) Or more porno. If not more porno for Chinese hermits, then polyandray, and fuck what the Mormons think of it all!

Posted by CP | March 28, 2008 6:12 PM
12 now gays are completely incapable of helping to "perpetuate the cycle of human life"? Last I checked, they're still equipped. They just choose a lifestyle where procreation is less likely.

So are those of us who choose not to make babies just as evil?

Posted by Sarah | March 28, 2008 6:22 PM

#12 - Gays are evil ~ EVIL ~ because they so often choose not to contribute to the overpopulation of the planet. After all, didn't G-d tell the first two non-gays to go forth and multiply? The thing is, I don't remember that sort of command happening later on, when the Earth was pretty well all populated up -- as if, perhaps, there was some sort of cut-off point where the resources couldn't keep up with the multipying? Hm. Must think about this. Maybe get some help from Papa Ratzi while I'm at it.

Posted by Calpete | March 28, 2008 8:47 PM

What about those of us who DO have an Alison Bechdel fetish...?

Posted by cb | March 30, 2008 1:03 AM

Comments Closed

In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 14 days old).