Comments

  1. says

    The majority of the gay community is sick and tired of people lumping them with child molesters. There’s just one problem…

    Allen Ginsberg was a member of NAMBLA. He was very open about it.

    Daniel Radcliffe has never spoken about it.

    Come to think of it… Towleroad has never addressed this either.

    Gay people need to have a zero tolerance policy for NAMBLA and its members, not promote movies about them.

  2. David From Canada says

    @Come On Guys! Allen Ginsberg lived back in the day years ago when NAMBLA almost went unnoticed because of the very naïve, innocent times, and people had little or no understanding of this issue, unlike today.
    A fair number of activists, period, back then were also Communists because they were attracted to extreme beliefs in order to get their point across to a very slow-moving society.
    Don’t toss out Ginsberg and others like him simply because they belonged to extremist groups. In a way they were simply Society’s Child, a product of their time.
    Also, don’t completely crucify someone simply because they were confused about themselves and certain issues many years. You can still find the talent and good in their life.

  3. GB says

    That Savannah is grating as an interview, with her fake enthusiasm. The set looks changed, but the artificial flowers remain. The orange couch is OUT, but I don’t think they got the memo. Daniel was the only real thing.
    People who freak over NAMBLA deny a part of gay history. Send a comment about everything you do in bed, and we can see how that compares. Being afraid of NAMBLA doesn’t make you any better than some small town bitty. Gay has a wide reach, if you are gay — or just one of today’s monogamous clones.

  4. gregorybrown says

    I agree with David From Canada and GB: every one us reflects and inhabits the time we live in. Ginsberg’s gifts as a poet are of greater significance than membership in NAMBLA, just as Harry Hay’s approval of that organization is less important than his effective and practical opposition to the oppression of queer people. Broad and thoughtless condemnation of those associations is on a level with the comment I read once that categorized classic Greek methods of initiating young men into manhood as “child abuse”. The NAMBLA members I’ve met have not been people I like but they are an embarrassing and disreputable part of our common lives and can’t shut them out with sanctimonious ease.

  5. gregorybrown says

    Getting back to DR: his frank approach to that non-issue is really refreshing. He’s an actor: he acts and doesn’t do all the whingeing and carrying on about how difficult and/or challenging it is to kiss another man or any of the other things that straight actors generally put into the “Icky” box. DR is either a decent man or he has a remarkably controlling and effective PR consultant, and I’ll opt for the first part of that.

  6. says

    Start making the world a safer place for children and stop making excuses for those who obviously want to harm them. NAMBLA exists solely for its members to abuse underage boys. Anyone who defends the organization or sympathizes with members past or present is delusional. Get over yourselves!

  7. Rowan says

    COME ON GUYS! What are you on? Who is making excuses??? Can’t you read?

    So if as a religious academic I am writing about Catholicism and the church; shall I ignore the child abuse that happens because I don’t like it? Even though it is synonymous with the religion (young men recruited when they are young to join the priesthood etc)?

    Is that what you are saying? Because then you agree with all the Catholic church leaders who deny 100 years of child abuse in the catholic church. Great. I’ll know to ignore anything you post from now on.

  8. jomicur says

    @ Come on guys!: If you work hard enough and look deep enough, you can find a reason to say the same thing about ANY artist. So-and-so drank too much, or had affairs, or supported Hitler, or fought with his wife, or… None of that negates their importance or the importance of their work. Using that fact that an artist was flawed (which Ginsberg certainly was) as an excuse to expunge him from the historical record accomplishes what, exactly?

Leave A Reply