majorjoe23

It's been interesting seeing how the MST3K people have changed their approach over the years. When The Mads (Frank & Trace) riffed Glen or Glenda live last year, they were very up front about how they wouldn't be making anti-trans jokes, at how that probably wouldn't have been the case in the 90s. Similarly, Bill Corbett made a joke about a trans Transformer on Twitter a few years back and some trans fans called him out and he apologized and has become a defender of LGBTQ rights. Part of that may tie in to his own teenage son coming out as gay a few years back.

My guess is it was The Incredibly Strange Creatures Who Stopped Living and Became Mixed-Up Zombies that IBJoel was having trouble with. It's definitly a tougher to watch episode given the anti trans jokes they make.

It was interesting in the reboot's riff of Avalanche a few years back, when Rock Hudson's name flashed up on the screen, Jonah said something like "We're not going to touch that," and when his character said something like "I'm up to my armpits in men here" he similarly said something like "Just ignore it, guys." I feel like the Sci-Fi era of the show wouldn’t have had that restraint.

story

Those are actually really good rifts because it pokes fun at an older way of doing things and satirizes the pull some feel toward cheap shots. Very meta, well done.

IBJoel

That was the one I just stopped watching, yes haha. Horror (Terror?) of Spider Island had one or two, I could also be misremembering. Might've been Devil Doll.

majorjoe23

They did watch alongs of older episodes with different cast members. They were kind of themed, with Tom Servo voice actors doing one, Crows on another and female cast doing another. It was kind of a wall of babbling sound at times, but also pretty fun.

Count Dooku

Elliot Page’s new memoir, Pageboy, comes out next week. One chapter is titled “Famous Asshole At A Party.” Page discusses an incident that occurred when he first came out as a lesbian.

According to Page, the Famous Asshole approached Page at a party and said, “You aren’t gay. That doesn’t exist. You are just afraid of men.” The man in question then told Page in an aggressive and threatening manner, “I’m going to f—k you to make you realize you aren’t gay.”

Ummm . . . my opinion is that if Page is not willing to name the person, then Page shouldn't tell the story.

There's a reason why memoirs are called "Tell Alls."

RichC2

Sounds similar to the Ratner story

Troy Stiffler

But Hollywood is such a wholesome place.

Count Dooku

Because you aren't going to find men who think like that anywhere else in the US?

Troy Stiffler

Oh I was just making fun of the mystery man. Who I’d assume is one of the well known douchbags. I don’t think Tom Hanks walked up to Elliot and said that.

Kurt D

Hanks would totally say that, but he wouldn't walk up, he'd kinda sliiide up.

Count Dooku

We shouldn't have to assume or guess who it is. If it happened, and Page says there were other people there who heard it, then Page should identify the person. Why protect their identity?

People say we have to respect it when people tell "their story" or speak "their truth." Then just tell the fucking truth, tell the whole story. Like Stabler and Benson always said, they can't really believe you if they know you are hiding something.

Josh-da-man

'Cuz he'd be facing a defamation lawsuit from a Hollywood power player, and probably end up on a blacklist for being troublesome.

Count Dooku

It's not defamation if it is true, and Eliot Page does not have much of an acting career anyways.

Hazel Motes

You’re right, he owes it to you.

Count Dooku

That is not what I said. Page does not owe ME anything. Page owes it to himself and others who want their stories to be believed.

Hazel Motes

​​​​​​​Right.

Count Dooku

Quote everything I said.

We shouldn't have to speculate who the person is. Page should tell the whole story. If people want THEIR STORY to be accepted as an honest and truthful reporting of events, then they should honest and truthfully tell THE WHOLE STORY.

If someone is omitting information from the story, it casts doubt on the veracity of the story.

The omission does not hurt me. It doesn't affect my life if someone said something awful to someone else at a Hollywood party, but it affects the movement that Page is a part of and advocating for because now people who want to will have an excuse to dismiss the experience.

Runaway

Perhaps Page just don't want the book about "burning" a famous person. If Page decides to say "Hugh Jackman wanted to fuck the gay out of me" the book isn't about Page anymore. It doesn't become less honest, without knowing the name.

Count Dooku

It's absolutely less honest.

The truth, the WHOLE truth, and nothing but the truth is how the saying goes.

TomOpus

You must be a treat over in Book Talk. You have a list of other "Less honest" books?

Kurt D

Aha! You're getting 'writing a memoir' confused with 'testifying under oath in a court of law.'

DVD Polizei

We have to respect Elliot's choice to not name the person. Elliot is not obligated to do shit.

To say that one must name a person in order for an event to be valid...is ridiculous and is more than likely only said so that the person can be virally exploited within the media for viewership gains.

The problem is way more than just the person...it's the thought process of many people who ignorantly say this to gay people. That was Elliot's point. Not the person who said it.

maxfisher

Saying all memoirs are tell alls is like saying all comedies are farces. That is, a tell all is a type of memoir and there are plenty of memoirs that choose to not identify some or all of the people other than the author.

Maybe you are the unicorn who would actually believe Page if the person in the incident in question were named. The vast majority who say he’s lying now would continue to say he’s lying if he named the person and they didn’t confirm it themselves. And if they did confirm it, many of those saying Page is lying would switch to saying he was exaggerating or making a big deal out of a harmless joke or whatever.

Additionally, there are plenty of very legitimate reasons Page would choose not to name the person. As mentioned, he might not want to get embroiled in a defamation suit that relies on a he-said-he-said situation from years ago, especially if the person who made the comments has anyone who would lie on their behalf. Perhaps the person in question has sincerely improved themselves and Page doesn’t think it fair to have the person they’ve become suffer for the person they were. Or maybe, seeing as people are shades of gray, the person in question does some real good in another area and Page doesn’t want to damage that for what would likely be very little satisfaction from naming the person. It’s his business whether he names the person, not anyone else’s. The idea that someone telling their story shouldn’t be able to share parts of it unless they name everyone involved is nonsense.

Count Dooku

It is a court, and it is a trial.

LGBTQ rights, especially the rights of trans people, are under attack in the US. Everything that has to do with the trans community is on trial in the court of public opinion.

A high-profile trans individual like Eliot Page releasing a memoir is not just a celebrity putting out a book, it is evidence being submitted in that court of public opinion.

Eliot Page telling his story at this moment in US history is him acting as a voice for the entire trans population. This memoir of his life experiences is an act of advocacy on behalf of a population under attack, meant to encourage understanding and empathy.

Page sharing his life experience is a plea on behalf of every trans adult and child that their life experience be seen as valid and valuable.

That's why I say his story has to be above reproach. Don't crack open the window of opportunity for people to dismiss his story as false in any way.

If you are evaluating the standards of honesty required for this memoir against what is acceptable for most celebrity memoirs, then you are failing to appreciate what the memoir of a high-profile trans celebrity represents at this moment.

I want to reply to maxfisher's post, but I have to go back to work now.

Neil M.

It's also possible the he respects the person's talent and doesn't want to ruin their career over this. Also, the point of the story wasn't about this one incident. Page said that there are many versions of this same story in Hollywood. Pointing out exactly who it was distracts from the point that there is a systemic problem that allows this behavior to exist.