Precis: Does ScroogexMarley porn exist?

Edelman, in his essay on Sinthomosexuality, certainly brings up some interesting points about Dickens. Points that, while I'm not entirely sure I would want to concede to, at the very least raise some questions about the extent to which one can go for a metaphor. Edelman brings some much-needed sarcasm to the entire story of "A Christmas Carol," laying criticism upon criticism upon the sympathetic character of Tiny Tim. He even goes so far as to praise Ebenezer Scrooge's original nature, lauding him as a man of true personality. "...the pleasure Scrooge takes, what turns him on, comes in part from refusing to use his nuts to drop acorns from the family tree." Edelman sees something of himself, or, barring that, his sexual preference, in Scrooge, making particular note of his rejection of the typical lifestyle of raising a family and submitting to the wonder of the image of The Child. Scrooge, he argues, is the prime example of the sinthohomosexual, a man who definies himself by what he does not do with his genitals. He laments the loss of Scrooge as a miserly bastard and rages against his assumed role as a second father to Tiny Tim, who evidently represents everything that is wrong with the gay culture as a whole.

One could argue that this is a case of a cigar being, simply, a cigar. While Edelman takes special precaution to argue that Scrooge is not, in fact, bonertowns for his former business associate Jacob Marley, nor is Scrooge completely without merit as an asexual character. Edelman goes into such detail with every nuance of Scrooge's lifestyle that differs from, for example, his nephew's Fred (whose discussion of Christmas actually refers to Scrooge procreating, apparently), that his frantic display of correlations to his own theories seems almost forced. He gets to the point where he almost seems to be asking readers to consider Charles Dickens as a crusader for repressing the homosexual agenda.