Y'know, I really hate liars. One of my childhood friends was an inveterate liar and, years later, in adulthood, I eventually stopped having anything to do with him because of it. Liars are evil, because they rob you of the truth to which you are entitled from your fellow human beings. People who lie to you don't respect you, and people who don't respect you aren't deserving of the courtesy of your time and attention when they only want to abuse it. So, the subject of today's post is liars - which brings me neatly to Mr. TONY ISABELLA.
Mr. Isabella has worked for various comic companies such as DC and MARVEL over the years, and although I've never considered him to be a 'major' talent, or in the top tier of comicbook creators, I thought him deserving of some respect for being there in the 'Bronze Age' when comics were more entertaining than they are now. I accorded him that respect when I joined his blog after discovering a link to it on another site. Whenever I visited, I would observe him indulge in a tirade of vitriol and invective against any poor commenter who didn't happen to agree with him.
The more I read, the more convinced I became that he was a thoroughly unpleasant, obnoxious little man with a huge chip on his shoulder, so I stopped following his site and removed my avatar from his list of members. I kept a link to his site in my blog-list though, to provide a service to my own readers who might like to read his more informative posts which didn't involve him insulting people for no justifiable reason. I still visited his site myself on occasion and, I must confess, sometimes wondered whether his abrasive and aggressive manner was a facade - a part he was playing for entertainment value.
"Well, hold on a moment, Kid", you may be saying. "Mr. Isabella may be no STAN LEE or ARCHIE GOODWIN or DENNY O'NEIL, but he's made a far bigger splash in the comicbook biz than you ever did."
True, but the main difference between us is that I've always been fully aware of my status as virtual non-entity and been quite content with it. Even when I was a full-time working contributor to comics like 2000 A.D. and being asked for my autograph because of it, I obliged rather sheepishly because I knew I was bathing in the reflected glory of something greater than myself, and that my signature wasn't being sought on its own merits, but merely for the link it provided to someone's favourite mag. As I've said before, had I only been the 2000 A.D. teaboy, I'd still have been asked for my autograph, such is the rabid desire of some fans to connect to it in some way. (And I'm not knocking that in the slightest.)
One only has to read Mr. Isabella's blog posts to see that he considers himself to be one of the more important comicbook writers of his generation. And there may even be people who agree with his generous self-assessment. I'm no expert on his career, admittedly, but adding the word 'Black ' to the names of two minor characters who never truly made the grade hardly strikes me as an act of creative genius. I'm not saying his work was bad, mind, but it was hardly memorable, or in the same league as the true giants of the industry. (And we all know who they are.)
Regular readers will likely know of the recent disagreement between myself and Mr. Isabella (for those who don't and want to read the full details, click
here). Basically, I left some perfectly innocuous comments on Mr. Isabella's blog and was lambasted for them. It didn't help that someone in pursuit of settling a grudge on behalf of one of his friends jumped in to stir the pot. I suspect that he meant to comment anonymously, but in his haste forgot, because similar comments have previously been left on other blog sites I've visited. Yes, it really is true - at least one saddo is on a mission to malign me whenever he perceives an opportunity to do so, so obsessed is he with turning internet opinion against me. (Hey, as if I need any help with that.)
"But we know all this - you've covered it already" you cry. Yes, but here's the latest. On a recent blog post, in which Mr. Isabella once again assumes the role of campaigning crusader in rabid pursuit of crushing all dissent to his 'valorous' view of things (thereby forcibly thrusting himself into the limelight and stealing a disproportionate share of attention - must have a garage sale coming up), he makes this obvious reference to me.
"Almost all of the comments I received were supportive of whatever decision I made. (That's perhaps having his cake and eating it. Some said he should go to the convention he said he wasn't going to go to, others said he shouldn't. I'd say that means that opinion was divided, but what do I know?) Some of my readers and Facebook friends gave me a lot to think about. I was pleased that only one clearly homophobic reader - and from another country at that - posted to this bloggy thing with his tired 'you're intolerant because you don't respect my intolerance' crap. Excuse me as I pause a moment to roll my eyes at his hate-fueled idiocy."
Let's deal with that distorted and dishonest representation of my comments. First of all, they were not intolerant. Society as a whole tolerates homosexuals - but that doesn't mean that those who are uncomfortable with the gay lifestyle on the basis of religious, cultural, or an instinctive aversion to it, have to approve, endorse, or embrace it - or subjugate their opinions or beliefs to those who hold a different view. As I was merely trying to suggest that we should all behave courteously and respectfully to those we disagree with (and that includes Mr. Isabella), I don't think that my attitude can fairly be described as either 'intolerant' or 'homophobic'. (It appears that only people like Mr. Isabella are allowed to categorise our concerns, not ourselves.)
Mr. Isabella is fully entitled to express opinions entirely different to mine or anybody else's. However, just because he may not understand a point of view, it doesn't mean that he, in his ignorant incomprehension, is entitled to to lambast, insult, denigrate, or be dismissive of folk merely on the basis that they hold a different opinion to his. Not everyone who has reservations over the spread of gay culture is a 'homophobe' (a ridiculous word, in my opinion, used only to diminish the opinion of those who have concerns on the subject), because they don't hate gay people, they just aren't comfortable with what they represent. Do you think they're wrong? Fine, but they're entitled to their opinion - a traditional opinion that goes back many years.
Remember, however absurd you may think it is for some baker to decline to make a cake for a gay wedding, should he be stopped from not wanting to be involved, even in a small way, in something which he feels would compromise his beliefs? If you wanted a Muslim baker to make a cake with an image of the prophet Mohammed on it, should he be compelled by law to do so? Remember, no-one's advocating that gays should be denied medical aid or hospital treatment, or police protection, or demanding that they be locked up, or verbally or physically abused, or any of that nonsense; all that the Indiana legislation is designed to do, it seems to me, is protect religious-minded people from having to compromise their conscience in the matter of being forced to do things that they don't feel comfortable with.
Let's be clear. Small things, nothing major that would seriously impact on the life of a gay person with a choice of options (and bakeries). And as Mr. Isabella is so fond of calling for boycotts of those he sees as 'bigots', why doesn't he simply advocate that, rather than insist on being served by an alleged 'bigot', the would-be customer just take his business elsewhere?
It seems to me that a balance needs to be struck to accommodate people of different persuasions, and however clumsily it may have been done, that's what the Indiana legislation was trying to do. Which doesn't mean that everybody who voted on it was necessarily singing from the same hymn sheet - some may well have had different agendas - but it's likely that, on the whole, it wasn't so much 'anti-gay' as 'pro-straight'. Some people will think that the latter automatically translates as the former, but all I mean is that it was trying to acknowledge that it's not only gay people who have rights in America. Could the bill be misused by those determined to do so? Sure, but so can any law until the wrinkles get ironed out.
I don't think I've ever hated anyone simply for thinking differently to myself. On this 'ere blog of mine, you've seen for yourselves that I'm perfectly willing not only to allow people to express dissenting opinions to my own, but to discuss and explore a topic, and try to get to the heart of the matter - purely in pursuit of understanding. People like Mr. Isabella however - angry, bitter, self-opinionated, hate-filled people who resent anybody thinking differently to them, and who insult, denigrate, abuse and malign anyone who does - while posing as the champion of the oppressed and downtrodden in an attempt to increase their public profile, well - we should perhaps feel pity for them. Mr. Isabella, in wilfully misrepresenting my comments and their motivation (eagerly egged on by those pursuing an obsessive grudge), has revealed that he is a man bereft of honesty, and worthy of no respect whatsoever. At least, not from me, he isn't!
Except, perhaps, for his impressive ability in the 'art' of shameless self-promotion.
.jpg)
.JPG)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.JPG)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.JPG)
.JPG)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
