Universal executives and Martin Scorsese considered their views to be tolerant an open-minded, even as religious conservatives claimed they were being blamed and victimized by the film. [however,] there is no apparent awareness on the part of the liberal progressive defenders of the film of any complicity in the victimization of religious conservatives. (4)
Riley seems to believe that both the Conservatives and the liberals--both the studio and non-film defenders--have complicity in the "scapegoating". This may be true--the Conservative attack on the film as purposefully drisive and inflammatory is blatant scapegoating, and there may have been some liberal retort ions of the same guise; namely, that the conservative "ignorance" and "Puritanism" is at the root of all social evils. However, I disagree that the blame is equal in this situation. Universal Studios made a film and tried to release it, and they had no direct action toward the Conservatices whatsoever. They tried to exert no power toward the group. No one forced conservatives to see the film, no one forced them to be affected or defamed by viewing the film. However, the conservative religious audience was (with no real basis in having viewed the film) trying to exert power over the studio and remove its free will to produce and show the film. The conservatives were the positive action group, not the other way around. No control would have existed toward them if they would have just gone home. However, if the studios stopped, it would be a direct exertion of the conservative will to hinder theirs. No, Riley, I don't think the blame is equal in this situation.