Book Review: The Song Of Achillies

 The Song Of Achilles

Author:                          Madeline Miller

Publisher:                      Bloomsbury

Type:                              Soft Cover

Pages:                             352

Genre:                            based on a true story

Published:                      2011

ISBN:                              978-1-4088-1702-5


 This is a large softcover with metallic gold card just behind the cover i am not quite sure if that make it a special edition or something but it is beautiful. Its a historical novel so sadly no artwork adorns the pages. 

 Everyone should know the story of Patroclus they are one of the most famous gay couples in history. While most focus on the abduction of Helen and the siege of Troy this work actually fills in the gaps in the historical record of the love between the two men.

 If you have ever considered watching the movie Troy, don't as it encourages straight-washing, pick up a copy of this book instead. 

 You will know the fate of the protagonists but the beauty is in the journey. And it is a beautiful journey brought alive by a talented writer. keep in mind this isn't erotica and everything is kept very tasteful. 
  
 This is a great book, it should be read by anyone who doesn't understand the gays. It should be on every high school library shelf. You should read this book.

 Homophobes often forget that humanity has a very queer history as is being demonstrated in Australia as the LGBTQ community is being defamed and terrorised by bigots (some Nazi, some not) arguing we shouldn't have equal rights. Just today A homophobic politician Cory Bernardi has claimed that marriage equality is a "rainbow Trojan horse" he is rather silly so he probably doesn't realise the irony of his statement.

 

The Liberals need to be a bit more liberal.

 Take a few steps to the left Malcolm.

 Just a quick bit of back ground. Tony Abbot outraged Australians with his far right opinions and his policy attacks on the poor, sick, refugees, and gays. He seemed to be set on breaking every one of his election promises. He made more and more ridiculous comments and was eventually ousted by Malcolm Turnbull. 

 Turnbull was believed by many to be more middle ground in his views, for instance he favored a marriage equality vote in Parliament rather than a costly and decisive plebiscite.
But when Malcom Turnbulll got in he continued on with Abbot like policy, he now wanted a plebiscite, he attacked medicare and leading up to the election he kowtowed to the radical right wing nuts in their attacks on children. 

 He ignored the fact gays were the victims when first commenting on Orlando. He later promised to have zero tolerance for homophobia but example after example saw him not speaking out against it. 
 It surfaced a few days before the election that the government was going to give taxpayers money to anti-gay hate groups so they could argue against equality, in the lead up to a plebiscite.

 So the election doesn't look good for the Turnbull government with the two major party's pretty much neck and neck, there has been a large swing against Turnbull's government but neither party look likely to have the numbers to form a majority government.

 Cory Bernardi is a far right wing homophobe, conspiracy theorist and member of Turnbull's government. Cory has come out calling on Turnbull, if he manages to form government, to ignore the voter backlash and stall the plebiscite. He went on to claim that equality, is just a 'trendy, fringe issue'. I totally disagree, i  think equal rights, preventing youth suicide, upholding our constitution,  and protecting children from bullying is an extremely important issue. 

 He seemed to be implying that the swing against Turnbull was because the Turnbull government wasn't far right enough... I maybe could understand this argument if the swing had been to further right partys, like the dreaded Fred Niles abomination party, or Family First* (*conditions apply) but it wasn't, the swing was towards Labor which is slightly left of Turnbull's party and is in favor of a parliamentary vote on equality and is against the homophobic plebiscite.

 Now Cory is one of those radical right wingers that try to turn the tables on their victims, you know the type, claiming that straight people would be personally harmed if gays had equal rights. I think this outburst from him is just along similar lines, the people showed in the election that they are against the costly, homophobic and non-binding plebiscite, that they are for marriage equality. 

 But Cory cant have that, so he tries to flip the table and claim that the voters moving to a (slightly) more left party is evidence that the voters want a more right wing government, i know it makes no sense but little he has said ever does.

 Personally i feel that both political partys in Australia need to shuffle to the left a bit. 
 When people like Cory Bernardi, and George Christensen are welcome in your party (Coalition) you know your teetering on the edge of the far right and need to run left a ways.
 Labor looks set to form a minority government but I do hope that Turnbull and his Coalition takes the election result as clear confirmation that we demand truth in politics and we demand equality. We need a leader that will stand up to homophobic insanity, we want our equal rights.

Update:

 It looks like a small percentage of this swing against Turnbull did go right wing, with Pauline Hansons racist One Nation getting a seat. 
 One could argue that this might still be in support of the LGBT community as much of Australia's news media in Australia, misrepresented the Orlando hate crime as a terror attack and failed to disclose its homophobic nature. 
 I can imagine some low information voters voting for the Islamophobic Hanson in misguided support of gay people, without realising how backwards and misinformed her views truly are.

Sources:

http://vtr.aec.gov.au/HouseDefault-20499.htm

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2016/apr/04/marriage-equality-corey-bernardi-says-plebiscite-question-a-fifth-order-issue

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2016/jul/03/marriage-equality-cory-bernardi-says-no-need-to-hurry-on-plebiscite

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/federal-election-2016/election-2016-liberal-senator-cory-bernardi-says-malcolm-turnbulls-future-is-up-for-debate-20160704-gpxuqe.html

 https://www.greenleft.org.au/node/17142

Bigot Point: "Gay marriage leads to bestiality."

Bigot Point: 

"Gay marriage leads to bestiality."

 Some creepy people have tried to link homosexuality with bestiality, when there is in reality no link between the two. 

 With homosexuality being naturally exhibited in about 10% of humanity, we can extrapolate that the number of homosexuals who exhibit Zoophilia

would be far less then the number of heterosexuals that do. 

 So if those arguing against allowing marriage equality (due to a fear of animal-human marriage) were serious they would be arguing for same sex marriage and trying to outlaw heterosexual marriage as heterosexuals would be more likely to suffer from zoophilia.

 But they are not because its clear those saying this kind of hate speech are only interested in spreading homophobia.

Definitions:

Zoophilia: Sexual fixation on  animals. 

Bestiality: Sexual acts with animals.

For this post when i write animals i am referring to non-human animals.

 But this argument is even worse as none of the marriage equality legislation has even hinted at allowing human-animal marriage. Of course none of the bills have even mentioned decriminalizing bestiality. The reason for this is that allowing same sex couples equal rights is a completely different issue.  

 Again this point is made to simply vilify gay people, to try to associate their desire to have equal rights with something that is seen as wrong by our society. As those seeking to deny marriage equality have to stretch this far , it shows that there really are no valid arguments against marriage equality.

 I see nothing wrong with the legal definition of marriage being the union of two* consenting adults.  

 As soon as anyone tries to argue that we don't need the participants to be consenting (and adult) i (and i hope most Australians) would have a serious problem with that. 

  * The number of consenting adults allowed in any given marriage is a completely different point.

 If the government ever tries to make human-animal marriage legal i will oppose that, as the animal can not consent. But there is no reason why we should oppose equal rights to gay people, lets address one issue at a time, lets not try to muddy the waters with fear-mongering nonsense. 

 If someone is trying to use this argument against marriage equality, you would be better served finding someone who is more honest and actually knows what they are talking about.

 Remember hate speech and vilification of gays is homophobia and homophobia leads to hate crimes.

----

Bigot Points Debunked:
 

"Children need both a biological Mother and Father."

"Same sex marriage isn't biblical marriage."

"homosexuality is a choice."

"Same-Sex marriage isn't Traditional Marriage"

"Homosexuality is Unnatural"

 "Marriage Equality threatens religious freedom"

"Same-sex marriage isn't natural marriage."

 "Marriage equality will destroy free speech"

 "Same-sex marriage will be forced on everyone."

"Marriage is about procreation."