An Open Letter to Irish Voters

On May 22nd, the people of Ireland are being asked to vote on an addition to our constitution:

"Marriage may be contracted in accordance with law by two persons without distinction as to their sex."

In the interests of openness, let me state, clearly, that I am voting yes to this amendment. I am straight, I am married, and I have three wonderful children. I don't believe there is any morally-sound reason for saying that a person should have fewer rights in their life choices than me on the grounds that their sexual or romantic preferences differ from mine.

In an ideal world, that is all this referendum would come down to. However humans are flawed things, and susceptible to the effects of fear and uncertainty. We resist change, particularly when it relates to something we consider "other", or different to us. 

And there are always those who will prey on those instincts to fulfill their own ends.

To say I've been emotive on this subject would be an understatement. The referendum will not affect me. But it will affect friends of mine, and it may affect my daughters in the future. I want them all to have the same rights I do. However I'm conscious that many people in Ireland are still undecided, or are deciding to vote no, or abstain, for various reasons. I'd like to try and set aside my emotional responses today and address, rationally, why I think voting yes is the right choice, in the hopes that people who do not want to vote yes will reconsider, or at least approach me to discuss their choice. 

The No Campaign's focus coming up to this referendum has been quite controversial. They, smartly, shy away from citing religious reasons for a no vote. The Irish people don't have the best relationship with the Catholic Church anymore. What the No Campaign has done, is to bring up rather chilling ideas, but ones that none the less might seem reasonable to many Irish people. The notion that a child deserves a mother and a father. That the purpose of marriage is to bear children, and as a same-sex couple can't have children of their own, allowing them to marry would cheapen or invalidate the marriages of different-sex couples. That marriage and civil partnership, which is presently available to all, regardless of gender, are functionally the same. And the concern that gay marriage will lead to women's bodies being "rented" for surrogacy. 

However, none of these arguments actually hold weight.

For one, same-sex couples are already allowed to adopt. The adoption process is not weighted in favour of married couples, but by the fitness of the individual(s) involved. It has been made very clear that the marriage referendum will have no impact whatsoever on the adoption process in Ireland, so that's that argument put to bed.

For another, ask yourself why the No Campaign, despite this insistence that children raised by a man and a woman are better off than those who are not, hasn't suggested that there's anything wrong with a single parent raising a child on their own? 

Why, if the No Campaign believes that the purpose of marriage is to bear children, do they not argue that the marriages of people who can't, or don't want to, have children be rendered null and void? 

There are approximately 160 differences between civil partnerships and marriage, many relating to matters of inheritance, social support, and constitutional rights. To say that they are the same is clearly false.

And there is no evidence whatsoever that children raised by same-sex parents are in any way disadvantaged compared to those raised by a man and a woman. Aside, of course, from the prejudice of those who view this as unnatural. 

In fact, even the Iona Institute, which champions the idea that only a mother and a father can provide a healthy environment for a child, released a report which admits that enacting any adoption laws in the future that would favour different-sex couples over same-sex couples would be unconstitutional, because it cannot be proven that having opposite-sex parents is necessary for a child's healthy upbringing. 

So with these points out of the way, where do you stand? Do you doubt the facts shared above? 

I'd like to take some time to look at history. This is not the first battle fought in the war for equal rights, and it certainly won't be the last. What occurs to me, though, is the side resisting change frequently uses the same arguments and justifications. We've seen these points made by the No Campaign:

"Gay couples don't need marriage, they can have a civil partnership."

"Two people of the same gender can't provide a suitable family environment for a child."

"Allowing same-sex marriage will lessen the meaning of different-sex marriage."

"We can't let same-sex couples marry because it would redefine what marriage means."

If you'll indulge me, here are some of the No Campaign's points paraphrased to suit other human rights issues:

"Women don't need to vote, they have husbands who can vote."

"Black people don't need to sit at the front of the bus, they can sit at the back."

"Black people don't need to go to school, they can do jobs that don't require an education."

"Two people of different races can't provide a suitable family environment for a child."

"Allowing divorce will lessen the meaning of marriage."

"Women don't need to work when they get married, they have husbands who can work."

"We can't allow a woman to refuse to submit sexually to her husband, because it would redefine marriage."

"An unmarried woman can't provide a suitable family environment for a child, so we'll take the child away and put her to work in a laundry until a man claims her."

"We can't allow Catholics and Protestants to marry because it would redefine marriage."

"The Irish don't need a language of their own, they can use English."

"The Irish don't need to own their own land."

"The Irish don't need their own government."

If you've been settled on voting no, I ask you to think for a moment what it must be like to know that your entire nation is about to decide on something that will have no effect on the majority of them, but will be a clear indicator of how they view you, as a human being. 

If you vote no, regardless of your reason, the message you send is that you believe people deserve less freedom and less choice about how to live their life, based on something that will likely never affect you. 

If you abstain, you're saying that there is something you alone gain from not voting, that is more important than using this chance to improve the lives of 1 in 25 people. Maybe that number seems small, but with a population of over 6 million, that means a yes vote could, in one moment, improve the lives of over 240,000 people. Because even if none of the estimated 240,000 LGBTQ people in Ireland choose to marry, we'll have told them, as a nation, that we see them as equals, and welcome them, accept them, and love them. That's to say nothing of the impact on future generations. 

If any of my children, or grandchildren, or (if I get to live so long) great-grandchildren, come to me and say they're getting married to someone of the same gender, I want to be able to say I was part of that. More, I want to be able to say our country wanted them to be able to do that so much, that we became the first nation in the history of the world to declare same-sex marriage by popular vote.

This is history in the making. What way do you want to look back on the next several days?

Arrow needs a Birds of Prey spin-off (spoilers)

Those of you keeping up with CW's Arrow, you won't have to worry too much about spoilers, but if you haven't seen up to episode 22 of season 3, you might want to hold off reading this.

The time is ripe in Arrow for an all-female team. We've had Oliver, Roy, Diggle, Barry, and Ray all fighting the fight, leaving the Arrowverse heavily weighted towards male heroes. Over time, though, more and more women are coming to the fore, and I'd argue not only is having a female-led show a great idea, it's the decision which, right now, makes the most sense from a strong narrative point of view.

Spoilers after the cut...

Getting Feminism Wrong? (Spoilers for Age of Ultron)

My wife and I saw Age of Ultron at the weekend, in a rare cinema trip treat. We were, frankly, monstrously pleased with the movie. Action (gorgeous, gorgeous action), snappy dialogue, nice quiet scenes, and a roaring musical score. I couldn't ask for more from a superhero movie.

Now, not everyone feels the same, and as with any blockbuster movie, there are people voicing their varying opinions, and that's cool. Tastes differ. It's impossible to make any book or movie that will please everybody, especially with a property like the Marvel Cinematic Universe. 

But one thing caught my attention. 

Superheroes and female representation are pretty much THE hot topic right now. Anyone with any love for the MCU is crying out for a Black Widow movie, and we're hyped up about Captain Marvel. So it's probably not suprising to see some backlash against Josh Whedon for some of the creative decisions on Age of Ultron,

Spoilers follow.

Back Soon...

I've had a nice break from the rigors of blogging over April. It'll soon be time to strap in again, though, because I've got a lot coming up.

Here's a taste of what's to come...

• The release date for Red Skies, with promotions to entice new readers to the series
• Updates on my new role as a columnist for Writing.ie
• Finally some more details on Origin
• With First Ride, my latest manuscript, completed, I'll be talking about my experiences getting back into the world of traditional publishing
• The promised Hero's Journey posts will also be coming

It's set to be a great summer!

Taking a break

Tomorrow kicks off the A to Z Blogging Challenge, when the blogosphere explodes in people furiously keeping pace with the demands of writing one blog post a day (except for Sundays).

I know I promised I'd have some Hero's Journey posts ready for you guys but some new projects came my way and I've had to jump at the chance to go for them. This means I'll have to delay the Hero's Journey posts, unfortunately.

I figured, with the other work I have to do, and given that most people will be caught up in the A to Z  Challenge anyway, I may as well take a blogging break for April. Don't worry, I'll still be around, reading blogs and posting on Twitter and Facebook, and you should see some new things from me soon enough, as well. Aside from that, catch you guys in May!

Edit to add: I tell a lie. I will be posting here if anything newsworthy crops up that I feel the need to comment on, but I won't be specifically planning or scheduling posts.

This "Clean Reader" Business

You may have seen some articles on a new e-reader app called Clean Reader. It's showing up all over my social media feeds and well, authors and publishers are not impressed.

You see, this is the fine line between an editorial creative decision, and censorship. When a work of art is presented with certain content that others might find offensive, that's a consensual choice on the part of those who create it. When that work is crafted, and then the creators reconsider, deciding to remove certain content, or amend it, so that it might be less offensive, that's a consensual choice on the part of those who create it.

An outside party, removing or changing content against the wishes of the creator, to suit their own sensibilities, is censorship. And it is a dangerous thing.

Art should be uncomfortable - If the artist wants it to be.

Art should be easy - If the artist wants it to be.

Art should be challenging - If the artist wants it to be.

Art should suit the demands of the market - If the artist wants it to.

We should be able to write the books we want because we are willing to accept how those books will be regarded by our readers, not because we know that if they don't like something, they'll just download some app to remove the icky parts. 

Readers should be able to choose what to read because they want to be challenged, because they're willing to accept that some books will push boundaries. They should be able to decide what they don't want to read, as well. And those decisions should be made based on the material agreed on by the author and their publisher. Not sanitised by an unrelated third-party. 

If an author/publisher decides to release a less-profane version of their work, that's cool. There are plenty of examples of classic literature released in versions edited for younger readers. But that's the decision of the people who hold the rights to those books. 

Anyone have any thoughts on this?

Time to start new things

Today is a remarkably rare celestial event. We're experiencing a solar eclipse and a supermoon on the same day as the spring equinox.

The spring equinox is a time of new beginnings, when day finally becomes dominant over night. Here in the northern hemisphere, it is also World Storytelling Day, making it particularly significant for authors like myself.

An eclipse or a supermoon would, in and of themselves, make this day all the more auspicious. To have both, resulting in three celestial events coinciding at once, is a once in a lifetime occurrence. While all the universe moves along its course, right now, on our little world, our solar system has aligned in a unique way, one which none of us may see again.

The gods are watching.

This is a good day to start something new. To take on a task you've been putting off. To take a risk you've been afraid to face. I know what I'll be doing.

Let's see what greatness we can accomplish.

Parents

(Update: The feelings expressed in this post, while true at the time, were enmeshed in complicated issues which came to a head a couple of years later. I am no longer on positive terms with my family of origin.)

Today is my Dad's birthday, and this Sunday is Mother's Day, so I thought this would be a good time to pause for a moment and say how much I love my parents.

Sure we've had our disagreements, but they've always had my back, especially during particularly difficult and painful challenges I've faced. When it counted, they were there for me. And they've always been there for the small things, too. Whether it's putting up with a small child prattling on about He-Man and Transformers, or that day they realised their quiet, withdrawn teenage son actually wanted to spend his life writing stories and expecting people to pay him for the pleasure of reading them.

So, given the themes of parenthood present in Lady Raven, and the complex relationship Cora has with her mother, contrasted to that between Laden and his father (to say nothing of Idella's parent issues...), there was only one thing I could say in my dedication:

To my parents, who taught me to fly

My parents nurtured my every interest. From the toy crazes and hobbies that lasted maybe a month, to the long-term stuff like gaming, theatre, and writing. They put me through college. They gave Jen and I place to live when we came home from Manchester. They taught me to believe in myself and to never, ever stop fighting for the things I wanted.

Thank you, Mum and Dad. I wouldn't be the man I am today without you.

And, as it's Mother's Day this weekend, why not pick up a copy of Lady Raven for yours?

Teaser Tenth

Welcome to #TeaserTenth, a monthly chance for authors to share snippets of their work. It's organised by JA Belfield, and this is my first time taking part.

With the release of Red Skies coming up in a few months, I've decided to share an excerpt from Lady Raven:

She rose from the water, taking a deep breath as she climbed out of the bath. Standing once again before the mirror, she studied her reddened flesh, already fading to pale, milky white. She grimaced against the sudden cold and reached for the clothes she had picked out.

Black trousers, made for a young man; loose enough to move in. A white shirt which she buttoned up with mechanical repetition. Next a black waistcoat, then the long overcoat she’d taken from the White Raven. 

Finally, watching her face in the mirror, framed by short ebony hair, Cora took her grandmother’s black tricorne and placed it on her head. She nodded.

“It’s time to fly.”

April Hero's Journey Challenge

Those of you who've been following my blog for a while may remember that I did a Hero's Journey Challenge a while ago.

That was one of the most fun and challenging series of blog posts I've ever done, and I've decided I'd like to do it again. So, for the month of April, while the rest of the Internet goes crazy with the A to Z Challenge, I will take on different movies and show how the Hero's Journey fits into them. And, like last time, the challenge is up to you. From now until the end of March, I will take suggestions for movies to watch as part of this challenge.

So if there's a movie you've always wanted to see broken down into this universal story analysis, or you think you know of a movie that the Hero's Journey can't possibly apply to, send me the title.

The rules are as follows:

1: English-language movies only (or ones with very good subtitles)

2: Animation or live action are both acceptable

3: I reserve the right to turn down a challenge if it's something I haven't seen and I'm not able to buy or borrow a copy to watch.

Towards the end of March, in preparation, I will tackle Kung Fu Panda 2, to give you an idea of how the Hero's Journey works if you're not familiar with it.